"The Fred Has Landed!"
According to the Politico, He's In.
By Hunter Baker Posted in 2008 — Comments (57) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Read about it here.
Here's a clip:
Fred Dalton Thompson is planning to enter the presidential race over the Fourth of July holiday, announcing that week that he has already raised several million dollars and is being backed by insiders from the past three Republican administrations, Thompson advisers told The Politico.
UPDATE: Jeff reminds us that he called it earlier and therefore must have been in the know!
END.
« Dueling June Obama fundraising claims? — Comments (2) | John McCain Executes A Reverse Chickenhawk — Comments (75) »
"The Fred Has Landed!" 57 Comments (0 topical, 57 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
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).
Let me preface this comment with a disclaimer. I like Fred and Romney. Fred mostly because I believe that he is more electable, and is solidly conservative. Romney because he is really espousing conservative principles now, and he is very impressive - probably the most impressive candidate out there right now. I'm just a little unsure of Romney's electability. Am I wrong? Who in our current field (throw Fred in there too) is the most ELECTABLE?
“.....women and minorities hardest hit”
Fred Thompson is the more electable consistently conservative candidate in the current line-up ... and that is if he actually does decide to jump in. He unites the base a lot better than any other (I personally fear a McCain Presidency would wreck the GOP on the shoals of his "maverick"-ness a lot more than Guiliani's social liberalism) and he has the requisite ability to communicate that Bush so unfortunately lacks.
Romney also has the requisite ability to communicate (and a great deal of onstage charisma), but he lacks the trust of the base. He really should have gone for Governor of New Hampshire or Michigan. Either way, I am probably the only one among the editors who is more positive than negative on Mitt Romney and personally, I think the major issue is that he needs a great deal more time to prove his conservative bona fides. 4 (if Fred decides to serve just one term) or 8 (if he decides to serve two) years as Vice President is more than enough.
The only question is if he (Mitt) would agree to play second fiddle to Fred, being that he would be 64 in 2012 and 68 in 2016 - not exactly a spring chicken. Again, not many think he would. But if he would agree (and it would make much of the Right warm up to him considerably), I think Thompson/Romney would be our strongest ticket. The media would not be able to exploit the daylight between Thompson and Guiliani on social issues if Rudy were the VP nominee.
And as for his supposed myriad of flip-flops ... the thing I want as a close second to the ability to communicate in the next GOP President is aggression. Romney is suitably aggressive enough to make the Press a little nervous about probing too deep for fear that he would make his switch from pro-choice to pro-life sound like something good and reasonable. Thompson, well, his response to Michael Moore doesn't leave much to be desired.
Anyway I think that'll be our strongest ticket. Fred Dalton Thompson for President and Willard Mitt Romney for Vice President. Heck, even the ticket's name sounds nice; Thompson & Romney - like a staid old investment brokerage firm.
George W. Bush: He's A Folder ... Not A Fighter.
A much stronger ticket would be Thompson/JC Watts. but that is my opinion.
"Wubbies World" - MSgt, U.S. Air Force (Retired): "Call to Me and I will answer you, and I will tell you great and mighty things, which you do not know." -Jer 33:3-
I don't know what the fuss is about. I posted about this last night. LOL
Seriously, this is big & great news for conservatives. This essentially makes it a Giuliani vs. Thompson race. No disrespect to Mr. Romney but he's got too much many dubious statements to overcome. Fred doesn't.
A chance? A hope? 2008, might not be 100% lost, afterall.
I am a Thompson supporter because I believe that he is the most conservative candidate in the race AND because I think he is the most electable. He has the ability to distill issues down to their essence and speaks frankly concerning those issues. He also claims true conservative principles as his own guiding principles. In that, and his ability to connect with people on a personal level, he is similar to Reagan. I think people will respond to that again.
We'll find out soon how a declared Fred run affects the numbers. I suspect he polls low because many people simply will not name someone not officially running.
I've been riding in the 'Run Fred Run' wagon for awhile now, and to tell the truth, I watch polls with a great deal of suspicion (except Rasmussen, who I think plays it straight even when it hurts).
Ultimately, screw the polls, we are the GOP and it is up to US, not the polls, to pick who we want, when we want, and how we want. I think a brokered convention would be the coolest thing since Cirque de Soleil was invented. As long as Fred comes out the winner.
It's war -- so when can we start shooting back at the enemy Democrats?
for those who want an "electable" candidate I suggest they look no farther than the Dems in 2004 to see what that gets you.
For my money, Thompson has solid conservative credentials, he has enough of an outsider patina that he will appeal to many who profess to be tired of "politics as usual", he has enough name recognition to be a familiar candidate to most voters, and, his TV/movie personae have created an image of him that his opponents will have to spend a lot of time and money to overcome.
In any field, Thompson would be a great candidate. In 2008 he is a superb candidate.
"A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition." -- Rudyard Kipling
In 1980, Ronald Reagan was considered the most unelectable major candidate in the primaries. He was the man the Carter Team wanted to face. Right up until he won a landslide victory.
Fortuna Favet Fortibus
My preferences now run like this:
Thompson --> Romney --> Giuliani ----------> (Pause for effect) ----------> McCain.
Does he have a website up yet ?
Any word if he will be in the next round of debates ?
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
Here is the link to FredThompson.com but the page is not up. It just has a banner and then links to his Wikipedia page.
"Wubbies World" - MSgt, U.S. Air Force (Retired): "Call to Me and I will answer you, and I will tell you great and mighty things, which you do not know." -Jer 33:3-
Here's an article by Robert Novak regarding the probable candidacy of Fred Thompson. Very interesting.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/05/why_fred_thompson.html
I don't know if he has a website with all his positions spelled out in a tidy list, but I stumbled upon a fairly new page of Fred Thompson's podcasts called "The Fred Thompson Report." Of course, that isn't the web address, and I'm not sure how to make those nifty links. Just Google "Fred Thompson Report" to find it.
...if you Google "Fred Thompson Report" to find his podcasts, the first link is correct. It reads, "ABC Radio Networks."
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
..three days ago. It makes for some very good listening. He is very clear on where he stands with issues.
"Wubbies World" - MSgt, U.S. Air Force (Retired): "Call to Me and I will answer you, and I will tell you great and mighty things, which you do not know." -Jer 33:3-
Jim Geraghty, over at National Review's "Hillary Spot" blog, says that there will be no July 4th announcement for Fred, afterall.
Darn it.
Jeff has been saying July 4 for nearly a month. And the Politico story claims a source just as Geraghty does. No reason to assume Geraghty is right about this.
Though, I think there's a slight difference. This source is not just making a blind claim, but specifically _countering_ the July 4th one that's being put out there. When Jeff's and Mike Allen's sources come out and challenge Geraghty's, I suppose they would all then be on equal footing, believability-wise.
Folks, Fred Thompson and John McCain are cut from the same cloth in terms of politics and issue positions. It's important to note that John McCain is the LEADING candidate for President and the candidate that can WIN.
Just look at Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina. According to the most recent polls (American Research Group), McCain leads in Iowa as follows: McCain 25%, Giuliani 23%, Romney 16%. Fred Thompson was included too and he polled at 6%. In New Hampshire, McCain leads as follows: McCain 30%, Romney 23%, Giuliani 21%. Again, Fred Thompson was included here too and he polls in at 3%, just behind Newt Gingrich. And finally, in South Carolina, McCain leads as follows: McCain 32%, Giuliani 23%, Thompson 13%, Romney 10%.
If you're going to call Thompson a conservative, then you must also acknowledge John McCain as a conservative. You couldn't pass a sheet of paper between the two they are so similar in policy positions.
They may have similar policy views, but Thompson has not been sticking his thumb into the nose of the GOP base for seven years, as McCain has. He did co-sponsor McCain-Feingold but has since recognized its flaws. I also do not think he would have been part of the Gang of 14. And they do differ on the immigration bill. I suspect FDT would be willing to accept some form of legalization, but he also (unlike McCain) recognizes that the American people (not just the GOP base) has absolutely no faith that the government will actually secure the borders as part of this, much less doing it before any final legalization kicks in. He knows, and has stated several times, that any talk of legalization has to wait until the borders are secure, or at least great progress has been made.
McCain is supporting the current immigration bill, and with it the destruction of the Republican party and the conservative movement in America. Fred has trashed this bill as well he should have. Immigration could very well be McCain's death knell.
“.....women and minorities hardest hit”
He hasn't declared yet but he already has a Mcainiac ready to shout him down.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
I'm a McCain supporter, which is why I don't talk politics much on RedState, but I have to say that part of what is appealing about McCain is his ability to be a conservative and a realist, while pursuing policies that he feels are right for America. It's the sign of an incredibly strong man. I frankly see some of that in Fred.
I'm just worried about Fred's Iraq stance. If it is anything like McCain's, I'm feeling much better.
My support from McCain is 60% about Iraq, and 25% about his railing on the GOP for the past seven years. I'm sorry, but with the tremendous incompetence and corruption, they deserved it. I can only wonder what the world would be like if McCain had managed to win in 2000.
Other than both voting for BCRA ("McCain-Feingold"), elements of which Fred has since said he would change after seeing them in action, what are these identical positions?
One of the major reasons that I like Thompson over McCain (there are several for the record) is that Thompson seems to understand federalism and that the federal government shouldn't have jurisdiction over all issues.
That is the primary differentiator for me.
I was actually just starting to look at McCain again when this **** immigration issue came back up. It's too much.
Fred is not perfect. He has also violated Fedralism principles. But he has said he shouldn't have.
Federalism is the core of liberty.
Folks, Fred Thompson and John McCain are cut from the same cloth in terms of politics and issue positions. It's important to note that John McCain is the LEADING candidate for President and the candidate that can WIN.
can't... breathe... laughing... too... hard...
The only place McCain truly leads is in his cranky, arrogant own mind. Oh, and the terms "McCain" and "Conservative" don't belong in the same sentence without the words "is not a" in between them.
McCain is done, regardless of what some early polls from states he's been campaigning heavily in suggest. He couldn't beat Bush in 2000, and he can't beat Thompson in 2008- we already have a capitulating pro-amnesty "moderate" in the White House; we don't need another who's anti-gun as well.
Don't worry though- I'm sure he could convice Hillary to be her VP running mate though, so at least you have that.
I read Geraghty's post. He source says that there will not be a July 4 announcement, but Geraghty believes ("gut feeling") that there will be an announcement in July. I suspect it will be in the first 7-10 days of July, just not on Independence Day itself. No secret info, just my own gut feeling.
What I said almost a month ago, and what the Politico is (I believe) saying, is that the announcement will come 4th of July weekend. I've got a 3-day window there :-)
...a Wednesday and the 1st of July is a Sunday. I think it is plausible he would announce the weekend right before and make a big splash over the holiday.
Either way I really don't care, just so long as he runs!
"Wubbies World" - MSgt, U.S. Air Force (Retired): "Call to Me and I will answer you, and I will tell you great and mighty things, which you do not know." -Jer 33:3-
What are Fred's positions on the war? I've been waiting and searching for some substantial policy with regards to WoT and haven't found anything. I know it's early for him, but I think this is his big challenge initially.
I've got to see it first to really believe it: Fred Thompson is officially running for the '08 Presidency! Fred needs to truly not be a "lazy" politician during his run, and he also needs to now be 100% against the present "campaign finance reform" system which he originally voted for while he was a U.S. Senator. Fred Thompson also needs to do what he can to help create some decent "political coattails" that will help to elect some other decent conservative politicians into office at every political level on November 4, 2008! I also hope that a possible Fred Thompson administration is one that would include somewhere in it Duncan Hunter, J.C. Watts, Michael Steele, Tom Tancredo, Mitt Romney, Pat Toomey, Tom McClintock, Rick Santorum, Diana Irey, and Herman Cain among many other decent people.
How much of this "Lazy" Fred Thompson is a media meme and how much is truth? I'm not an insider so I wouldn't know. Do you have any idea?
You know that the MSM will probably call Fred Thompson "lazy" over and over, and they will also frequently attack Fred Thompson for being a smoker. The MSM will say and do anything to help Hillary Clinton win the '08 Presidency. Also, if "More Amnesty for Illegal Immigrants" is officially signed into law by President Bush, then how will this action also not cause the interest in the entire Republican Party to profoundly wane, which would also affect Fred Thompson's chances of winning the '08 Presidency?
Of course they are going to attack him in any way possible, that is even a bigger reason why you need not just a warm moral man that is like Reagan, but a "Great Communicator" like Reagan. Reagans greatest art wast that it didn't matter what the media said he would go over top of them and destroy them in the argument. All their attacks, all their insults never got through to the American people because they new the truth when they heard it. Reagan had ways of making issues very clear to people, the media only tried to confuse the public with "nuance", "extenuating cirumstances" and "grey areas". I'm just saying if Fred can't make issues CLEAR to the public he will never be close to another Reagan.
A Thompson aid wrote a puff piece on him just recently and among the possible drawbacks he listed being a close aid to him, was that he had an, "aversion to hard work". This is actually my big question mark I have on Thompson because I have noticed it myself. You see I believe what seperates good conservatives with Great conservaties is communication. Your ability to craft arguments that make things very clear to the American people. That skill is determined on having the work ethic and passion to really learn an issue and the best way to communicate it. I have questions on whether Thompson is capable of doing that. Its just a constructive criticism, I'm not trying to dog the man.
Now, we have someone to vote for as opposed to some we vote against. At least, that is how I feel. Up until this immigration thing, I had resigned myself to vote for McCain. After McCain et al decided to ram immigration down out throats, I decided to look toward Romney, but as a Red-Stater I didn't feel real comfortable with a Northeast Liberal in sheep's clothing. Let's face it Romney has flipped/flopped. None-the-less, I would have voted for him if he had received the nomination because the Democrates are worse. Well, now I have someone to vote for and not just a Republican that is the lesser of two evils.
A REAL CONSERVATIVE at last!
http://osi-speaks.blogspot.com/2007/05/real-conservatives-cheer-as-fred....
With malice towards none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see right.
This is about all I have found with regards to Thompson and the WoT: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Fred_Thompson#War_on...
Which is to say I have found nothing.
Does anyone have an inkling of substance with regards to Fred's positions on the Iraq War? Perhaps I'm alone in this, but I find it deeply troubling that this guy seems to garner a ton of support and so far has said absolutely nil on the greatest challenge in our world today.
Until he does say something, I find all of these discussions about him a rather moot point.
While Fred! is pretty much my first, second and third choice right now, you're right that he hasn't said much about Iraq and it is a legitimate cause for concern. I'd guess that since he's a "late entry" into the race, he's allowing more time for things to progress in Iraq before making a firm stand.
That sounds cynical, but why lock yourself into a position when events on the ground totally outside his control or influence could change significantly? I'd like to see him speak more forcefully concerning Iraq too, but I can also understand why politically it might be better to base your position on events as they happen closer to the election.
I haven't seen or heard any of his commentaries that directly addressed the GWOT, but I haven't seen or heard them all. I have heard him comment in some interviews and I think you will be reassured. FDT has said that the GWOT is the defining issue of the 21st century and must be faced head on. He is concerned that the entire Mideast will go nuclear if Iran is able to develop nukes, and believes that any and all options must be available to the President. He also stated on at least one occasion that what Iran is doing to support Shia militias in Iraq meets the definition of an act of war, but feels that the military is too strained at present to really deal with it right now.
...as i understand it, is about the same as George W Bush and John McCain. I can't recall where it was but I remember him giving a speech where that was the same positions he took. I'd have to do some looking though to find it specifically.
"Wubbies World" - MSgt, U.S. Air Force (Retired): "Call to Me and I will answer you, and I will tell you great and mighty things, which you do not know." -Jer 33:3-
This is an issue he has discussed before in his speech in CA, and in most of his interviews. I'll check for links where this is specifically addressed.
He seems to me to be solidly conservative, with none of the obvious shortcomings of any of the Big Three contenders.
He has the ability to articulate conservatism in clear, straightforward language - which, in combination with the first point, makes him unique in the Republican Presidential field.
Electability - he has a familiar voice and visage, both of which were a big help to Ronald Reagan in 1980.
Firm low tax, low spend philosophy (part of first point, but worth its own item).
I trust him more on judicial nominations than any of the Big Three.
He is thus, my formula for supporting a presidential candidate, the most conservative candidate with a legitimate chance to win.
Go Fred Go!!!!
I'll be spending some money here - ya I will.
http://www.officialthompsonstore.com/officialthompsonstore/
"Wubbies World" - MSgt, U.S. Air Force (Retired): "Call to Me and I will answer you, and I will tell you great and mighty things, which you do not know." -Jer 33:3-
..will be available on 1 July!!!
I'd pre-order if I could!
"Wubbies World" - MSgt, U.S. Air Force (Retired): "Call to Me and I will answer you, and I will tell you great and mighty things, which you do not know." -Jer 33:3-
Flipping through the TV channels the other night, I paused on "Real Time with Bill Maher" because I knew PJ O'Rourke would be on this week. Bill interviewed Michael Moore (his first interview in a year and half) before his panelists came out and my jaw dropped when Bill asked Michael who he thought would make the best president: (to paraphrase) "The man who isn't in the race yet -- Fred Thompson. He's been right on everything up to this point, says exactly what he believes," etc. He seemed totally devoted to FDT.
Now, if Fred can win over one of the most outspoken leftwingers of all time before even getting into the race, his crossover appeal has to be enormous!
And, what an "authoritative" plug for Fred to all those democrats out there who will now seriously look at FTD as an option, just because Michael Moore publicly endorsed him. His electability looks better and better all the time. Go Fred!!!
that I have given up on the Republican party, but will vote for Fred Thompson with the hope of saving the party. If this does not occur, I will never vote again. Both parties are so corrupt that it just doesn't matter anymore...
Oh, and by the way, with all the corporate control on this board, Mr. BLAM can take me off the comment list - please. I do not want to have to say something I regret.
Formally known as Deagle... "Golf is a way of life..."
Some have said that Giuliani is the moderate, and the rest are grouped into one big conservative lump that should be cursing this day; but the reality is another one:
Conservatives favor Giuliani right now. Even among White Evangelicals, according to polls, Giuliani does better than the rest.
So stop perpetuating the myth that somehow Giuliani's lead will remain static because only moderates vote for him and conservatives favor the others.
Giuliani is NOT a moderate, he is a liberal Republican. Christian conservatives currently favor Romney but will flock to Thompson by the droves when he enters officially.
Giuliani is only popular for his anti-terrorist viewpoint, ie. his defense policy - that is all! If any actual conservative enters (Romney is a semi-conservative), he will draw votes by the droves. As a White Conservative, I disagree with your viewpoint Emphatically! Enter Fred Thompson....!!
Formally known as Deagle... "Golf is a way of life..."
Where do I sign up? I've been waiting for this for months.