Doom, Gloom, and The "Flight" From Fred's Campaign
By Erick Posted in 2008 — Comments (81) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
------
UPDATE: Let's not overlook another impressive hire while looking over those who have left.
------
In September 2003, despite facing a front loaded primary season, John Kerry publicly declared his candidacy for the Presidency of the United States. He went on to win the Democratic nomination despite the formidable campaign army and war chest amassed by Howard Dean.
In September 2007, Fred D. Thompson will announce his candidacy for the Presidency of the United States. Right now he's putting his campaign in place, finding the right people, settling on advisors, and raising enough money to float the ship, but not enough to set it sailing in violation of FEC rules.
All of a sudden, September just isn't good enough for the media. The Thompson ship is allegedly sinking in dry dock because he's moving staffers around, some people are leaving, and woe unto us, Thompson is not raising President candidate level money according to unnamed sources who are not connected to the campaign.
It was only a matter of time before the media went after Thompson. Arguably, even without entering the race, he has become the conservative standard bearer. Romney has been unable to gain traction with the Christian right. McCain committed hari kari on the floor of the Senate. And the more people watch YouTube clips of Rudy's NARAL speech, the less people really want to support him.
The media is not waiting for Fred to actually declare. They know he's running. We should all just admit that Fred is running. He just happens to be a little more clever than the media would like and he just happens to have figured out a way to delay beyond what some in the media and some would be supporters (including my wife) would like.
Let's consider a few issues . . .
First, we have Tom Collamore leaving. Call me crazy, but I had been under the impression the whole time that Collamore would not actually be staying on as the General of the campaign. He's a tobacco executive, a lobbyist, and hasn't really been a campaign General in a while.
People are paying attention to Collamore's departure without looking at Randy Enwright's hiring. That Thompson got Enwright when other candidates could not get him speaks volumes to me. Enwright knows Iowa and he knows Florida -- two states Fred will have to do well in. Enwright is also close to the guy all of us would like to see run, but who can't: Jeb.
Sam LeBlond left. Who? He's apparently a 23 or 24 year old advance guy. There's a dispute as to whether he was the lead advance guy or not. Let me just put some perspective on this -- you're about to run a major national political campaign with a very compressed primary schedule. Do you really want a 24 year old as your lead advance man? I don't know him. I expect he is totally competent. But it makes some sense that Enwright would get in and see, based on the strategy he's cooking up, that they needed someone with more of a background in Presidential campaigns.
Some oppo researcher left because he was thrown in without clear direction and couldn't figure it out himself. Yeah, that one is really bad. Folks, do I need to remind you that we're dealing with an entity here that is not a Presidential campaign, but will become a Presidential campaign, but due to a host of FEC rules the whole planning, coordination between arms, etc. must be a bit nebulous, lest they unknowing cross over from the nebulous testing the waters phase? Gimme a break. I know several people in the campaign proper and everyone is having to deal with some of these damnably frustrating issues. Blame John McCain -- it's his and Russ Feingold's fault.
Now, as to the announcement in September -- here's what I expect. Right now there are some very big players sitting it out. If they were to get in with gusto, they'd blow the campaign out of the testing the waters phase. So they are sitting back and waiting. The campaign was going to announce in August, but realized everyone is on vacation or coming home to get ready for school.
So, despite all the bad headlines now, they'll have a campaign ready to go in September, they'll announce and get lots of good press, and then when October rolls around, all of the heavy hitters will have dropped their first wad of cash and everyone will forget about the present headlines.
One last note on this campaign. A lot has been written in the past week about Jerri Thompson and how she is in charge and pushed out Tom Collamore. First, I unequivocally believe that to be false. Again, it had been my expectation all along that Collamore would not be the lead guy come the campaign. Two, even had Jerri pushed him out we need to keep in mind that Jerri Thompson is one hell of a Republican operative. She may be the spouse's wife, but let's not forget her former day job. She was a kick ass strategist and she knows the business better than a lot of the media guys who are keyboard quarterbacking. I'd venture to say Jerri Thompson is one of the best assets for the campaign because she knows strategy, she can spot the folks who are full of crap, and she knows when to not second guess the hired hands.
Put it to you this way, were I running for President, I'd want Jerri Thompson sitting next to me helping me navigate the political season.
So, there you have it. That's my take. I'm not worried in the least. I just think newspapers need headlines and this has been the "let's hit Fred" week. I don't really think they care because we all know the media is going to cover his announcement and the coming consolidation of candidates in a very big way.
« Dueling June Obama fundraising claims? — Comments (2) | Californication Conniptions Cloud Clinton Coronation — Comments (1) »
Doom, Gloom, and The "Flight" From Fred's Campaign 81 Comments (0 topical, 81 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
What he's saying is that Thompson is going to take up windsurfing, ride around on his bike in spandex and a goofy helmet and dress up as a teletubbie.
I'm not really sure how you make the leap you make there. How good a candidate is is not determined by how early he gets in. If that were the criteria, McCain would be about the best candidate of all time. He's been running since about 1998.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman
Is made by making him work, not hiding him under his handlers skirts so he can just survive to the end.
This is exactly why the Dems made a mistake with Kerry. He was hidden in the Umbra of "Dr. Scream" unitl the primaries. No one had him as the front runner, but the jolting fear of getting stuck with a mad-man had everyone convince themselves that Kerry had electability.
Is this what you and Erick want? You and Erick just want what's best for Fred. I want what's best for the nation first and secondedly, what's best for the party.
Having someone who has not otherwise proven himself to be Presidential stock sneak through the shaodws until he can declare at the very last practical moment is a HUGE MISTAKE in the making.
You and Erick just want what's best for Fred. I want what's best for the nation first and secondedly, what's best for the party.
That's just insulting and stupid. I'm not even committed to Fred. And even if I were, that's a pretty stupid line of attack. Why would I only want what's best for Fred (at the expense of the nation and the party, apparently)? Have I been programmed by his followers to do his bidding?
A good candidate is made by making him work, not hiding him under his handlers skirts so he can just survive to the end.
It seems to me he is working. I don't think he's just lazing around the house every day, hiding from voters and the media. And in any case, you might want to consult a calendar, because it is only July. Is any of this going to amount to anything in January? Nope... it will be totally irrelevant. I can't even remember exactly when Rudy finally announced, but he certainly wasn't the first, either. That won't factor into my decision.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman
if you want to hype someone into a front runner, than you better be willing to live with the consequences.
We all know his health is failing, and perhaps he needs the time in the shadows to build his health up for the rigors of the campsign. And the shorter season would help him last through it, but then they should have thought about it before playing the expectations game.
I would not fault him, if he said "I am going to test the waters, and let you know arounbd September". But that is not what his people let happen. By action or omission, allowed the expectation be for a July 4 announcement. This is their mistake, not the presses, not anyone elses.
Your next post will contain one or other of the following:
1). The number that I'm thinking of; or
2). A sincere apology to both zuiko and Erick for presuming to know what their real motivations for doing things are.
Moe
PS: You will notice that the words "explanation," "complaint," "excuse," or "justification" do not appear elsewhere in this post. Merely "apology".
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!
Sorry for the delay, I was just waiting for my family to finish breakfast, as I was on vacation in Florida this weekend.
Anyway, you are right; I am assigning motives to Erick and Zuiko. I take back that portion of my post. But I will say that there are a fair number, and a majority of people in politics who look to have "their guy" win above all else.
However, I do take notice that you did not bother making such a request when people were impinging on my motives for my dislike of Fred's announcement delays.
Fred is going to dump his current wife and look for a wealthy Condiment fortune widow to marry instead.
Makes about as much sense as some of the other comments.
_______________________________
None of the Above !
I think a 5th grader (at least a home-schooled or private-school 5th-grader, who we can assume can actually read) could read easily that the message of the "John Kerry" reference is that "Just because the media pukes are crying that September is too late to declare does not mean that September is, in fact, too late -- as witnessed by the fact that John Kerry declared in September and smoked several well-organized, well-financed candidates".
So to quote Andy Dufresne in Shawshank : How can you be so obtuse? Is it deliberate?
It's war -- so when can we start shooting back at the enemy Democrats?
Like I said above (I wish people would read an entire exchange before posting), Kerry was not a front runner, but was vaulted into the lead at the beiginning of the primaries when the Democrats woke up after a night of hard partying and found that they were in bed with Dean.
So, if Erick wants to use his flawed analogy, perhaps he should also point out that the candidate he was using as an example then went on to lose to one of the worst campaigners in history, by a larger margin than the even the driftwood known as "Gore" did.
Erick's reference to Kerry was SIMPLY in reference to September being too late. No more, no less.
YOU are the one who has broadened that very simple statement. And you seem to be saying that because Kerry lost in the general election, that therefore EVERYTHING AND ANYTHING Kerry EVER did was bad, and should not be followed.
Just a small educational tip here: Kerry did not lose in 04 because of anything to do with his campaign, his organization, or his strategy. He lost because he was a horse's rear who thought he was better than everybody else. He also lost because he was a liar and a traitor.
And your second paragraph is typical Bush-hating pap. The 2004 Bush campaign was no Slick-Willy affair, but it featured one of the all-time best ground-games EVER.
It's war -- so when can we start shooting back at the enemy Democrats?
Dougie, that's silly and disingenuous.
The point was that the media had no problems with Kerry entering in September, but are beside themselves with the idea that Thompson might not officially enter until September.
I get the strong sense that you were only a Thompson supporter so you could abandon him and assail him as a "former supporter who left him because he wouldn't announce when Mr. Fresh demanded he do so."
You know I posted a number of pro Fred comments on Peach Pundit. Eventually, I did ask people to refrain from overhyping him as a candidate, since he had not really started campaigning, and it could cause a bubble bursting effect, if he did not live up to the pumped up expectations.
I have even defended the delays in announcing, noting his new season run on Law and Order. Fred's people allowed the expectations of a July 4 announce date to run in the press. They could have very well came out and said that it was wrong, but they accepted it as a valid date in their lack of response (imagine doing this in responses to charges from a Democratic nominee).
Then it slipped to August, then September around Labor Day, which has become the second week. This makes him look incompetent or weak. Whether he is or not is not the issue, but how it is perceived by the public.
I talk with people every day about politics. About half the people I know were energized by a Thompson run, the rest were either Democrats or favoring Rudy. Of those that supported him, each one has lost his enthusiasm, and has been generally under-welmed by his appearances on television. Regardless of the fact that this is anecdotal, it should be something of a concern to people who are supporting him.
I want Fred Thompson to be who the more enthusiastic among us want him to be. It would be great for the country, the party and each of us individually. It just remains to be seen.
doesn't give a hoot about any of this right now. You, as a politics freak, do. The "public" thinks Fred is a TV lawyer and few know he even cares about who the president is, much less someone who's running for office.
To you, he looks "incompetent or weak". TO others, he looks like someone who's letting everyone else burn through cash in a campaign that is WAY too early to be screwing with. Let all the dwarfs beat on each other, let the MSM get their jollies by running hit pieces, and when HE is ready he will announce. Not when YOU or any of the rest of the faux Fred supporters think he should.
...when they see me they'll say, "There goes Loren Wallace,
the greatest thing to ever climb into a race car."
You might think that people are that ignorant of what is going on, but they are more knowledgeable than politicos give them credit for.
Perhaps this is why the Republican party is getting more and more out of touch and losing to the trainwreck that is the Democrats. People do pay attention. There is nothing out of the ordinary about my friends and family, except maybe they are smarter than average, but they are paying attention.
that there are lots of people with lots of commitments that needed to be resolved before anything was going to happen. He has used that "turning a battleship around" analogy many times.
He, himself, had to contractually satisfy an early departure from Law & Order, as well as finalizing the contractual obligations with ABC radio. The dear misguided media and GOP opponents of Fred would have us believe that he is going to assemble a WINNING campaign team out of thin air...none of whom THEMSELVES might have had contractual or business obligations that needed closure before they could commit the time, money, and effort to make SURE they assemble the team that WINS the election?
Puh-lease...let 'em wring their hands Erick-Fred knows absolutely exactly what needs doing to win...
haystack's 12th:
Conservatives (and Presidential Candidates especially) shall offer no aid and comfort to the opposition in times of legislative conflict (and ensuing political campaigns).
Should we expect him to have his cabinet in place by the mid-point of his second term, or a little later?
Then, he can focus on building his ajenda.
So, you think that putting together a winning Presidential campaign is a simple thing? I guess I am not seeing it that way....
This makes Fred look incompetent and sure not Presidential material. "I had to spend several months figuring out if I am going to run and now figuring out how to get a campaign running without an additional several months of planning and practice."
My fear when I originally backed Fred to enter was that you current crop of Fredbots would overhype him and when he failed to amaze everyone with his Ronald Reagan aura, he would crash and burn. Now, I guess the goal is to lower those expectations. Perhaps you are on to something.
"I had to spend several months figuring out if I am going to run and now figuring out how to get a campaign running without an additional several months of planning and practice."
Rudy took several month figuring out if he was going to run also. McCain is your guy if this is your criteria. He knew he was going to run before anybody else did.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman
Kudos for trying to spin the negative news cycle, Erick. I think this is about the best you can make of the situation.
Unfortunately, it's really hard to turn a blind eye to the multiple sources now that are saying Jeri was a large factor in Collamore's leaving (despite the official campaign stance that he was always destined to leave).
It's also hard to turn a blind eye to the $5 million fundraising expectation that the campaign barely met halfway and the fact that fundraising has dropped off "markedly" in July so far. It has nothing to do with not wanting to blow his campaign out of the "testing the waters" phase. He's just continuing to try to skirt the very campaign finance laws he helped put in place - and failing at his own game.
And if Jeri is such a great political operative (and I believe she probably is), then Fred ought to just hire her as the campaign manager -- not hire a campaign manager (or two, now), and then allow his wife to undermine their authority.
Thompson's campaign has pushed back his entry date five times now, and says October's not out of the question now either. Once is understandable. Twice is questionable. But five times??? That, to me, says one (or more) of the following three things:
1) He doesn't have the funds to be competitive in the race; or
2) he doesn't have the organization to be competitive in the race; or
3) he wants to skip campaigning (you know... "slogging around in the snow in IA and NH") as long as possible and avoid having to do things like debates that would put him next to the other candidates. Instead, he would like to continue taking the path of least resistance (and least work) and just post a couple times at a friendly place like RedState and do some more softball interviews with Sean Hannity. That way, nobody will recognize that the man doesn't live up to the legend.
By the way, a fourth member of Thompson's non-campaign campaign left today. Four people in four days - and his "campaign" hasn't even started yet. They've got some major kinks to work out.
--------
After the 2006 elections, al Qaeda released a statement saying they were happy Democrats won. That should tell you all you need to know.
and I will say it to the day I die, it is a good thing that at this point in the nomination process there is not a dominant Republican front runner. It will eventually come down to that point, but having a person deemed as the inevitable nominee, like W in 1999, puts that person at a disadvantage in the general election should they actually become the nominee.
The media and Dems want a clear Republican front-runner right now so that they can kick the hell out of them for the next 15 or so months. It is not bad that they don’t have that opportunity right now. That means they have to kick the hell out of each other for a while. They are doing that right now and the Dems are having to pander to the likes of the Koskids, which is very good for us come September, October, November 2008.
Fred is doing fine and there is a lot of time between now and January. In the end, the horse race that the media likes to report on right now is meaningless. Unless there are real tactical mistakes, and there are none, the reporting on the FDT campaign up to now won’t amount to a fart in a whirl-wind.
Then I'm still feeling pretty good.
“Republicans believe every day is the Fourth of July, but the Democrats believe every day is April 15.”
-Ronald Reagan
I was hoping that you would actually dispel some of the rumors of dysfunction in Team Fred!. The mentioned items along with his inability to form any real policy, answer general abortion concerns, and the botched handling of the abortion lobbyist ordeal just screams "not ready for prime-time". I hope that this is just a bad first impression shaped by a biased media, but I'm still doubtful.
Also, if your blaming McCain and Feingold, then we might as well lump in Fred!. Don't whine about campaign finance laws that he helped to orchestrate.
"I think the fence is least effective. But I'll build the god--d fence if they want it."--McCain
"I would rather have a clean government than one where quote First Amendment rights are being respected" --McCain
Campaign staffers are not the end, but are the means in this game. Ultimately it is the candidate who wins the primary and the election. Staffers can make that easy or hard. The candidate in this case isn't a candidate. So the whole conversation is so moot it's silly. How can a candidacy be on the rocks when there is no candidacy?
And as for the comment about fundraising, I don't know about where he's going for money but he hasn't come to me. Once he starts a candidate's full appeal for support and he misses targets, maybe you can be concerned. See you in December.
As for me, I am very optimistic about Thompson but I am holding my checkbook until he 1) enters the race, 2) discusses his platform in earnest, 3) demonstrates that he would be the right person for the job.
Thanks to Erick for bringing this up! The media can't wait to weigh Thompson down. And like was said before, if this is the worst they can find, then Thompson's gonna go far.
Consensus doesn't prove anything, in science or anywhere else, except in democracy, maybe. - Reid Bryson, speaking on Global Warming
what about Spencer Abraham?
John
----------
Why would God invent something like whiskey? To keep the Irish from ruling the world of course
Though I don't always agree with you Erick, I'd always respected the integrity of your writing until this humdinger:
"[D]ue to a host of FEC rules the whole planning, coordination between arms, etc. must be a bit nebulous, lest they unknowing cross over from the nebulous testing the waters phase? Gimme a break. I know several people in the campaign proper and everyone is having to deal with some of these damnably frustrating issues. Blame John McCain -- it's his and Russ Feingold's fault."
It's also FRED's fault, a fact that you fail to mention in your post.
It's one thing to be for Fred, and quite another to be for a lofty notion of what you think Fred should be; the latter leads to posts like yours that overlook facts.
And next (I'm sure) a few words from the Fred apologists -- Frapologists?
www.mymanmitt.com
www.race42008.com
Member of Romney for President Faith and Values Steering Committee-an unpaid advisory position, that does not require an endorsement.
Consensus doesn't prove anything, in science or anywhere else, except in democracy, maybe. - Reid Bryson, speaking on Global Warming
jbonham
I read today about Romney putting some of that old fashion Democrat "walking around money" out on the street. Wonder if you got any of it?
_______________________________
None of the Above !
www.mymanmitt.com
www.race42008.com
Member of Romney for President Faith and Values Steering Committee-an unpaid advisory position, that does not require an endorsement.
bgonham
Given the latest news of Mitts spreading the wealth and giving out some "walking around" money to his supporters you can see the confusion, guess this is just for Iowa before the nation wide AstroTurf roll out.
"The payments start at $500 a month, the base rate for student leaders, many of whom are chairs in the "Iowa Students for Romney" campaign organization. At a higher level, Joe Earle, former director of the Iowa Christian Alliance (the successor to the Iowa Christian Coalition) gets $4,000 a month, and Gary Marx, a top-level member on the Romney for President National Faith And Values Steering Committee, gets $8,000 a month."
_______________________________
None of the Above !
What is your point?
Gary MArx is one of Mitt's top advisors and in charge of the National Grassroots coalition. Just as he did for Bush/Cheney and the Roberts and Alito confirmation. that would probably account for the paycheck.
Is it unheard of to pay student field workers?
Why the smear? No one is smearing you. Although your disposition and attacking manner does the smear on it's own. Really you just sound like a jerk half the time you post stuff about Romney.
I just like to help out a good cause and don't anticipate ever working for money. I am also honest about what I do.
www.mymanmitt.com
www.race42008.com
Member of Romney for President Faith and Values Steering Committee-an unpaid advisory position, that does not require an endorsement.
jbone
An apology is in order, you are up front on your allegiance to Romney. My snarks were a bit too much....sorry.
_______________________________
None of the Above !
You found the heart of the matter. The thing that really turned me off was that this has become about who Fred might be. he has become the Tooth Fairy, or Santa Claus. He is whatever people want him to be.
This is why I have been aching for him to enter, so he can tell us, and not build some silly Paul Bunyonesque mythology about how he can take on 10 Democrats with one finger. His slipping of his announcements and silly games have me concerned, and I cannot support a candidate that backs away from a fight.
Maybe he can wait 4-8 years and try back when he is ready.
haystack's 12th:
Conservatives (and Presidential Candidates especially) shall offer no aid and comfort to the opposition in times of legislative conflict (and ensuing political campaigns).
I would love Fred to turn out to be the candidate that I once thought he would be, and I would sing his praises as strongly as you guys. But, he is appearing more and more like a manufactured candidate, like George Bush was, and the last thing we need is a candidate that wilts under the pressure of a biased press corps and the full guns of the Democratic nominee.
However, until he actually answers a question in a debate and has a substance filled interview about what he is going to do as President, I will default to my best of the rest candidate.
I read your "bye bye" post...I saw the comments...I participated...I played nice, and kept it on a professionally-toned level...but you said yourself that as for "right now" you were at least "leaning" Rudy. I can go fish the EXACT quote if you like, but I am close...and I am fine with that.
You want Fred to be in the race, but you have nothing good to say about him, going so far as saying that until he is declared and in debates, there is no there there...all fine...but you clearly aren't PRO-Fred, or you wouldn't have spent all these hours telling us why you quit his bandwagon in the first place.
WHOEVER your candidate of choice is, or will be, my original point remains valid.
haystack's 12th:
Conservatives (and Presidential Candidates especially) shall offer no aid and comfort to the opposition in times of legislative conflict (and ensuing political campaigns).
You said he is "my guy". That implies more than I will reluctantly vote for him because there is not one better.
I am not like many here who distort facts to support pre-fabricated conclusions. It is for this reason, I will actually change my mind when confronted with something that challanges a held assumptions.
I wish more Republicans would do the same.
Let's recap:
You started this little dance 2 days ago when you told us:
However, I am switching my support from Fred to Rudy.
So, just put down the keyboard and take a deep breath, and stop getting all squirmy and aghast when I say:
AND...stay on one side of the coin-either you no longer support Thompson because he is undeclared, and evades debate, and hides under the skirts of his handlers, and has no policy position until he is asked in a detailed interview, OR, you WANT Fred to be President, and wish he would do these things(debate and interview)...and shut up about switching to Rudy-otherwise, your friendly reception here thus far is going to get a whole lot more unfriendly.
Tear down a candidate by propping up a better one...that is fair-eating up all this Redstate bandwidth just to play these little "yeah but" games with us, and we're going to stop caring what you have to say.
haystack's 12th:
Conservatives (and Presidential Candidates especially) shall offer no aid and comfort to the opposition in times of legislative conflict (and ensuing political campaigns).
If all we are allowed to offer is blind loyalty, then we are doomed as a party. That is what got us into trouble with Bush 43. There are still people who think he is one of the best presidents ever and will defend him violently.
When pro-Fred people, like the ones who posted on the earlier thread, start acting like Bushbots, it is a concern. All that I ask is that you as as tough on him as you are on the other candidates. If Rudy, Romney, McCain or a Democrat had been running his campaign like Fred has been, are you prepared to say that you would think it was just good strategy?
If all that matters is the name of the candidate then it is hypocrisy.
If all we are allowed to offer is blind loyalty, then we are doomed as a party.
Not sure what this has to do with anything... unless you think that because people don't bend in the breeze, easily convinced to support someone based on nothing at all, then drop that support a few months later based on nothing at all, that they are guilty of "blind loyalty" to a candidate.
There are still people who think he is one of the best presidents ever and will defend him violently.
I guess I've missed all the gun fights and stabbings that have started with someone dissing the great W in the presence of a "Bushbot."
When pro-Fred people, like the ones who posted on the earlier thread, start acting like Bushbots, it is a concern.
Didn't you just "apologize" for this kind of thing? I guess you no longer refer to the Bush/Fredbots by name, so it's OK.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman
You have little to nothing to contribute, so there is little point in "discussing" anything with you.
You mean take personal shots at everybody here then come up with an obviously insincere apology when it is demanded of you by a moderator, then take the same kind of shots that originally resulted in the demand for the apology in the first place, then yea... I guess I have nothing to "contribute."
You know, you already got the BDS "BushBot" stuff and the insults down pat. All that's missing from your comments is some 9/11 truther stuff and you'll be ready for the front page of dkos.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman
Again, you have nothing of substance to contribute, plus you are lying about why I gave an apology.
Someone asked, and I complied because I admit when I am wrong. I participated in a method of debate that I personally find undesirable, and that was impugn motives of another person as if I knew that person's mind on the issue.
This is precisely what you are doing and continue to do. You are acting the part of a hypocrite and bully with flawless detail, and congratulate you on that.
What was it about Fred that had you on the bandwagon in the first place? It is a little contradictory saying you need substance before supporting someone but then you were behind Fred and abandoned him for his lack of substance.
Ask not what you can do for your country, ask what your country can do for you. Washington Elected Elite
the beauty of preemption on your part here is that anyone who comes in now to respond to you, or explain anything to you is immediately discounted as "only" being an apologist, and therefore not to be taken seriously.
Well, Fred didn't craft MF-he voted in the affirmative. So, anyone who voted in the affirmative for a bad piece of legislation can never mention that this bad legislation is having a negative effect on them?
Wow-talk about tipping the field in your favor and preventing debate...
Ever looked at the voting records of YOUR candidate of choice? Sheesh-Thompson was on campaign finance reform committees in his day...he went with the "best" that was going to be offered to a vote. Play this game with any number of issues-say...immigration, for example. The morons on the hill that supported that mess up until the bitter end said "it's not perfect, but it's the best chance of getting SOMETHING going to address this issue for a very long time to come."
Cut those guys slack, and not Fred on MF, and you're just piling on against the candidate you obviously don't want to see prevail...
haystack's 12th:
Conservatives (and Presidential Candidates especially) shall offer no aid and comfort to the opposition in times of legislative conflict (and ensuing political campaigns).
the beauty of preemption on your part here is that anyone who comes in now to respond to you, or explain anything to you is immediately discounted as "only" being an apologist, and therefore not to be taken seriously.
...To the world of the Romneybots. I think this is the tactic editors and regulars at this site have used against us. The quality of arguments of those who support a candidate tend to be contingent on readers point of view.
I really see no difference between your arguments for Fred than anyone other candidates supporters, but that is a two edged sword depending on you paradigm.
www.mymanmitt.com
www.race42008.com
Member of Romney for President Faith and Values Steering Committee-an unpaid advisory position, that does not require an endorsement.
haystack's 12th:
Conservatives (and Presidential Candidates especially) shall offer no aid and comfort to the opposition in times of legislative conflict (and ensuing political campaigns).
http://fredfile.imwithfred.com/2007/hazelton-immigraton-decision/
I like. Would it be lame to start calling him "the Frederalist?"
haystack's 12th:
Conservatives (and Presidential Candidates especially) shall offer no aid and comfort to the opposition in times of legislative conflict (and ensuing political campaigns).
"All of a sudden, September just isn't good enough for the media."
No, I won't blame THE MEDIA for this one. I'll take the blame and share it with every other impatient amateur political pundit and fellow citizen.
I don't blame the media when it pretty well reflects what many here and elsewhere are thinking.
Fred still has time, ofcourse. But he needs to be clear that he has already decided.
It's a tough balance for Fred. We're happy that he is carefully considering this run but then again, No One wants a president who is slow in his decisionmaking.
he already told the Hannity listening world that he HAS made his decision...he just isn't announcing anything til he damn well feels like it...and, as an avowed FredHead, that's fine with me.
haystack's 12th:
Conservatives (and Presidential Candidates especially) shall offer no aid and comfort to the opposition in times of legislative conflict (and ensuing political campaigns).
I would support him if he said, "I have decided to enter the race, and will meet with my advisors to plan and coordinate a campaign that will begin in earnest in September". I would applaud him loudly.
He HAS decided, and acting like he hasn't just destroys his credibility. This race is not about beating the other candidates, or electing Fred, it's about electing the best candidate, whether it is Fred, or one of the other 10.
I know and understand the desire by some to wait for the traditional Labor Day entry, but I don't think this would work for anyone but Newt, (who now looks like won't run).
This is for the simple reason that everybody knows where Newt stands. I really don't know anything about Fred Thompson other than that I like what his character on Law & Order has to say.
Now, maybe Fred had some input into all that- it always seemed a better defense of conservative ideals than any of those typical Hollywood versions of "conservatism", but I am not going to support a candidate based on what his fictional TV persona says.
Please understand, I am interested in Fred, I'm excited to have him join the race. I got good feelings about him, and from the little that I have been able to find he appears to be a good conservative.
I just want him in the race, getting out his message, so that I KNOW what he's going to run on, instead of having to guess. Not only so I can decide if I agree with it, but also so I can assess whether it has a chance in the general.
Compare this to Mitt Romney. His talk about the 3 legged stool tells me what he's going to run on. I agree with his general positions, even if I don't agree with all his specific positions. Furthermore, I think it's something we can persuade the general electorate to support.
Brownback on the other hand says plenty that I agree with, but his phrasing and focus makes me skeptical he could persuade people to support him in the general.
Guiliani is probably able to win a general election, but he's not in line with my political views. He's not conservative enough for me.
Now I look at those choices, and I'm leaning towards Romney. I want someone who both supports conservative policies, and can win the election.
I'm interested in Fred Thompson because I see him as probably another candidate who I can both agree with, and see winning the general election. That would be a good thing, as it would provide me with more viable choices. However, I need him to come out and start talking so I can start making up my mind who to support.
I still think we should be less committed to a single candidate, and instead desire the strongest field of primary candidates we can have.
I'm disappointed in Fred's decision, because it makes me wonder if he's just going to try to surf on this Republican angst and desire for a Savior. I'm not saying that is what he's going to do, I figure I'll just have to wait and see what he says in September.
Fred Thompson is no Reagan. Reagan had been around the conservative movement for a long time before he ran for President. His conservative views were well known. This doesn't mean that Fred Thompson, or Mitt Romney, or even one of the other candidates couldn't become a Reagan-like President, it just means that I want to give them a much closer look over in the primary than I would Reagan.
To sum up: Republican candidates have got to prove to me why I should give them my vote. Delaying your candidacy announcement to September may be clever, and doesn't preclude you winning my vote, but it doesn't help either.
I've been leaning Fred D. Thompson's way based largely on his positions as defined by his writings and radio work. And I believe the hide-and-seek campaigning is mostly meaningless at this stage - it will pass and be forgotten by December. However, I find his recent hiring of Spencer Abraham very problematic. I don't believe this reflects good judgment on Mr. Thompson's part and I believe it will create a serious credibility and consistency problem for Mr. Thompson on the topics of border security and prosecution of the war on terror. Why isn't this getting more attention here (or anywhere for that matter)?
border security and prosecution of the war on terror. There is no difference between Spencer Abraham's beliefs and any Democrat candidate's beliefs on these issues. How is Fred going to show his campaign manager has it all wrong, without making his hiring the guy look like the same thing people blame Pres Bush for- Hiring the wrong people? What issues is he going to say are important to him, that would cause an independent or a Democrat to vote for him?
I posted a blog Here
The facts have not changed, they have not been refuted. Fred Thompson has lost the two most important issues in the campaign.
If you care to read what Fred says about prosecuting the war on terror then go see my RS blog here
"We should scrap this “comprehensive” immigration bill and the whole debate until the government can show the American people that we have secured the borders -- or at least made great headway."
Fred Thompson
First, keep in mind that Abraham lost his Senate seat in the 2000 election. That means that his whole voting record was before 9/11. Is there any indication of his views since that big even that changed many a person's thinking? I don't have any proof one way or another.
Second, Abraham was Michigan Party chair from 1983 to 1990. He was co-chair of the National Republican Congressional Committee from 1991 to 1993. He only left to run for the Senate. Bottom line is that this guy has political organizational skills. He is probably being hired for these skills, not necessarily for advice on issues.
c'mon now ;-)
Since there is no campaign yet, Abraham can't actually be managing it, now can he?
And, last I checked, Thompson picks his policy positions...but what do I know?
Further, Randy Enwright is the top guy in this gig-Abraham's role is to help assemble and strategerize how they are going to actually RUN, when the intention to be the next Prez is officially (and legally) announced...
Please stop trying to make sense to those hell-bent on seeing Thompson fail before he even tries...
haystack's 12th:
Conservatives (and Presidential Candidates especially) shall offer no aid and comfort to the opposition in times of legislative conflict (and ensuing political campaigns).
and Here
We're losing people that should be supporting Republicans and are going to lose a lot more if our candidate does not support border control and the GWOT. Fred Thompson has a campaign manager that does not support these two issues. How long does any one think it is going to be before the Democrats make that known to the voters.
Enwright is the top guy, and Fred doesn't HAVE a campaign yet to have a manager FOR...
If he DID have a campaign, and he DID have a manager, it would be Enwright (as of this point in time) Abraham offers a good amount of skill and experience in organizing support...not in MANAGING...especially when there is no announced (and therefore bound by law) campaign.
haystack's 12th:
Conservatives (and Presidential Candidates especially) shall offer no aid and comfort to the opposition in times of legislative conflict (and ensuing political campaigns).
people just going nuts before he even announces! Pure entertainment....Hey MBeck...everywhere I go on RS there are fresh dougies...are you not cleaning up after The Prince?
" in the end, it's not the years in your life that count. It's the life in your years."
Abe Lincoln
from this Article
" Abraham served in the Bush administration after losing re-election in 2000 to Democratic Sen. Debbie Stabenow; in 2006, he joined a French-owned nuclear company, Areva Inc., as chairman of its board of directors.
To this Article
"Sarkozy: Trust Arabs with Nukes
Wow. Just ... wow. Nicolas Sarkozy is indeed very different from Jacques Chirac — he’s even worse. He’s made a nuclear deal with Libya, and apparently intends to do the same with other Arab countries. Sarkozy: Trust Arabs with nukes."
" The reactor might be supplied by French atomic energy firm Areva.
Does anyone think having your campaign manager or whatever as the Chairman of the Board of a Company planning to build a nuclear reactor in Libya, is going to win a lot of votes from Americans?
The second article comes from a Little Green Football blog (some people consider them to be pro conservative) post on Fred Thompson - Spencer Abraham. There were 454 comments. A lot of which simply said - No to Fred Thompson because of Spencer Abraham.
Guiliani is no Howard Dean and thus unlike Kerry it would be very nearly impossible to catch up with Guiliani at this stage of the contest. Guiliani has weathered the debates and much of the msm, has spoke to scores of interest gropus, has lots of cash, has clearly articulated his platform including his choice of judges, will force HRC to spend big money defending major red states like NY and California, and is now galloping ahead in the polls. Fred T is still in the paddocks. I was strongly hoping Fred will declare by now but his time has now come and gone.
so the propaganda campaign against him is working.
Thanks, Erick, for some reassurances. I pray you are right!
You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you.
don't base your opinion on the shrillness from the two or three people on RS. This forum is NOT indicative of the real world outside. The average voter doesn't have a clue of about 90% of what's happening with any of the candidates. The campaign won't start to heat up until about a month before the first primary. Until then, it's just a bunch of blather between politics junkies.
...when they see me they'll say, "There goes Loren Wallace,
the greatest thing to ever climb into a race car."
At least one of those "two or three" people were strong on him entering the race. Ignoring the fact that his "wait and see" approach" damages his credibility does not help him.
Wasn't Jerri Thompson a Senate intern for most of her life? So the spin now is that she is the new Karl Rove? Wow!
I guess it must be all part of her Masterplan that the campaign's fundraising is under performing, that senior staff is leaving, that Fred is getting trashed by the MSM without fighting back... and let's not forget the hiring of the islamist sympathizer Spence Abraham in the middle of a war against the islamists. I believe we stand in the presence of genius. Fred is the next Reagan.
Yes, he is not a muslim. But he did work against just about every anti terrorist measure that targeted arabs including:
"profiling of Arabs, the use of secret evidence against Muslims (at the behest of Muslim groups), attempting to repeal the Clinton counterterrorism package, refusing to fund computer tracking of student and other foreign aliens, giving millions in our tax money right to Hezbollah, and putting CAIR on the map on Capitol Hill (taking the group's officials around to meet other Senators and Members of Congress). He took campaign contributions from the relatives of Hezbollah-backed top Lebanese officials after he got the group millions in our tax money."
Another gem from his record:
"Spence was one of only two Senators in the entire U.S. Senate who refused to sign a letter calling on President Clinton to condemn Palestinian terrorism and Yasser Arafat. This was at the height of a series of homicide bombings in Israel in 1999 and 2000."
http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/2007/07/jihad_fred_fred.html
and has aligned himself and his party with a group that is non-christian muslim terrorists, Hezbollah. So I don't think the fact that one is a Christian Arab, always shows who they align with politically.
"Geagea's Lebanese Forces, now a political party, has one minister in Prime Minister Fouad Siniora's Western-backed cabinet, which is resisting demands from Hezbollah and its main Christian ally Michel Aoun for a national unity government.
Complete article Here
A new low for even you.
___________________________________
The CIA has better politicians than it has spies - Fred Thompson
There are a number of ways to draw attention to his record without resorting to using the term "Islamist sympathizer."
___________________________________
The CIA has better politicians than it has spies - Fred Thompson
I'm starting to think that Fred Thompson will officially announce his candidacy for President in September of ....2008.
"Enwright knows Iowa and he knows Florida -- two states Fred will have to do well in. Enwright is also close to the guy all of us would like to see run, but who can't: Jeb."
Definitely speaking for yourself. The last time I saw Jeb, a few weeks back, he was making a statement about the critical need to pass comprehensive immigration reform. The last thing we need is another president trying to pass amnesty for illegals with mostly Democrat support, while insulting the folks who actually elect Republican presidents, and congressman and senators.
I hope I never see another Bush or Clinton in the White House. And as for Jeb and his, I can't get the words of the Reverend out of my head: "Stay out da Bushes." Surprising as it might seem, I think that is some of the best advice the Republican party could follow for the next several decades.
None other than a Bush family member, so it's not just some guy... He's our President's nephew.
Sam LeBlond, who had been hired to help coordinate Thompson's political events on the road, has departed, said one adviser, who did not want to be named discussing personnel matters. Another senior adviser said the campaign has not been able to reach LeBlond Thursday to confirm his departure.
LeBlond, who is the nephew of President George W. Bush, did not return calls left as his Bethesda home Thursday.
Bush Nephew Walks Away From Thompson
While it does not reflect on his abilities to perform as part of the Thompson team, his family connection far outshines anything else.
Well done is better than well said. —Benjamin Franklin
It is your supposition that Fred will be equally as good as John Kerry? This is endorsement in the highest.
Kerry and Bush were both bad candidates, so I do not think your comparison is a positive one.