Posted on 09/04/2007 12:32:18 PM PDT by Reaganesque
ASHLAND, N.H., Sept. 3 -- Former senator Fred Thompson of Tennessee will grab most of the headlines this week as he enters the race for the White House, but Mitt Romney likes where he stands in the contest for the Republican nomination.
"When I started running seven months ago, I was at 5 percent in the national polls," the former Massachusetts governor said at a question-and-answer session here. "Now I won the Iowa straw poll; I'm ahead here in New Hampshire, ahead in Michigan, ahead in the Nevada."
The energetic Romney, who is shown jogging in a television ad that his campaign is running in the Granite State, put his energetic approach to work on Labor Day: two speeches, two town hall meetings, a parade and a breakfast stop to greet voters at a restaurant in Moultonborough. His exertions required several outfit changes, from tie but no jacket to jacket and tie and then, before the parade in 80-degree heat, khakis and a polo shirt. But Romney's manner never changed; whether describing his appreciation of the symbolic importance of the American flag or talking about issues such as illegal immigration, the ex-governor almost never stopped smiling.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
I agree. Those key words are incredibly childish.
You’re a smart guy, I read your posts, don’t you see through this?
He’s on record disavowing Reagan and his policies, and yet he calls his name to bolster his campaign?
On the one subject, I so strongly disagree with you, I’m going to leave it alone, as far as you’re concerned.
Good luck!
papa
>>>Which is why I’d like to see him run as VP and pitch Fred for Prez.<<<
Perhaps the single most important job of an executive is to act as a salesman. It’s been perhaps Bush’s biggest failing. The man simply cannot formulate his ideas before the American people. He ducks away from attacks again and again. He simply hasn’t allowed his vision to compete in the market of ideas.
A true exectuive has to take his ideas and formulate them in a way that both gathers public sentiment and influences the legislature. He needs to be able to unite his party around ideas and visions.
Why put the second string in the leadership position? When you have someone as talented as Romney and with his vision, why do you stick the big question mark that is Fred Thompson in that seat.
Tell you what. Go to YouTube and look for Mitt Romney speaking on tort reform. Then look at Fred Thompson speaking on tort reform. This should be Thompson’s domain, afterall—he was the lawyer. But you tell me who is the best at selling an idea.
Yes, a video of Romney stating the polar opposites of what he says now is clearly unfair.
>>>Romney is doing well in 4 or 5 states. It’s the other 45 where his problem is going to be.<<<<
It’s far more than 4 or 5 states. But those are just the ones that are being polled right now and are deemed important.
Romney has been climing nationally and is tied with Thompson in a most recent national poll. Expect this to continue.
As for Thompson, I’m not about to support a man who opposes tort reform, opposes a federal marriage amendment, and declares that he wouldn’t even consider running as vice president. Well, besides the fact that he essentially has no platform and has gone on Paul Harvey numerous times, only to fail to present any clear picture on where he stands on illegal immigration.
The man’s desire to serve at the behest of his country is questionable at the very least, especially given the fact that he has “never really wanted to be President.”
Apathy doesn’t sell. Nor does it produce results.
>>>For one to make a post such as yours, using a person’s Cancer against them, in a feeble attempt to raise the standing of the candidate they have chosen to support, is a testament to your own ill health.<<<
Please. You act as if that’s something new. Or even more implausibly deny its relevance. You think Samuel Alito and John Roberts were just nominated for Supreme Court Justice without a thorough medical examination? Yeah, freakin’ right.
And that’s really the best Thompson can do. Just hope that people aren’t too wary of an illness that will return when they step in the ballot box. Nobody is going to talk about it, of course. But it’s going to be in the back of people’s minds when they cast ballots in 2008. And Thompson’s cancer will in all likelihood return. It probably won’t be a big deal. It will probably go into remission again without chemo. But it would hurt him against a younger, more energetic Obama or Edwards. I don’t see how that’s even questionable. Probably wouldn’t hurt him against Hillary Clinton, though, is my guess.
And perhaps I’m more attuned to a man’s condition myself as a med student, but I hardly see it as irrelevant. Dick Cheney’s health was always a relevant issue, and it pretty much assured that he’d never run for President in 2008. It nearly kept him off the ticket in 2004, as well.
I don’t take anything off the table, and I’ll shoot straight. If that damages your sensibilities, so be it. I’ve seen more than enough hate posts directed at Romney. A little thick skin never hurt anyone.
Thompson can of course make this a point of strength in his campaign. He overcame a tough illness, and he’ll do it again. It’s up to him. But it won’t be irrelevant. You’re just kidding yourself if you think otherwise.
Fred will mop up both Romney and Rudy in the south. Romney and Rudy will battle over the northeastern states. IMHO, this will go to the convention undecided.
And I’ll also note that McCain was attacked for his age back when he was high in the polls, as well.
I don’t think it stuck, as well, though, because he didn’t act or look 72. At least not in my eyes.
I love your tagline....:)
ROFL.
>>>Fred will mop up both Romney and Rudy in the south. Romney and Rudy will battle over the northeastern states. IMHO, this will go to the convention undecided.<<<
I don’t doubt you here. I think Romney or Giuliani could take Florida, however. And perhaps Georgia might be up for grabs. Other than that, Thompson probably has a firm grip on the south. And probably parts of the midwest, too.
Giuliani will do well in the northeast. I have a feeling, however, that Romney will do well on the west coast and the mountain west.
California may well decide this whole race. Which may give Thompson an advantage given his acting credentials and charisma. Or it may give Giuliani an edge given the pass he may be more apt to receive on social issues. Or perhaps to Romney because of his stance on immigration and pro-business attitude.
It’s pretty up for grabs, methinks.
I’m lucky enough to live in Salt Lake City, where I can see the Christus any time I want. It is always a great experience whenever I go. Have a good day. :)
LOL on your tagline. :)
And the funny thing is, all this states rushing in to be first, when it may be the last states that decide it and really get a lot of attention.
Romney makes Fred look like he is asleep. Fred needs a major energy burst. Lackadaisical doesn’t do it!
If vigilance in the WOT is an issue of importance, Fred’s lazy image is a problem. You’d have to rank Mitt, Rudy AND Hillary over Fred when it comes to “Who has the most energy to combat terrorism?” (get in the race and prove me wrong, Fred). The question is, “Who’s going to work hardest to defend this country?”.
Two whole sentences from 13 years ago. As repudiations go, that's pretty weak. Now, perhaps if he had actually said "Reagan's policies were wrong and bad for the country" and repeated it often, then maybe you might have a point. But two decade-and-a-half-old sentences in a single debate negate everything positive he has said/done, says/does now or will say/do in the future about Ronald Reagan? Those two sentences also erases the fact that Nancy Reagan bestowed upon Mitt the Ronald Reagan Medal of Freedom? Come on, is that a reasonable position to take? How many people, let alone politicians, could live up to that standard? Heck, could you?
Look, I worked on that '94 campaign. I've known the man most of my life. He has, for as long as I have known him, always held Ronald Reagan in the highest esteem and his words and actions over the years, taken in totality, show this to be true. That, in my opinion, is the only fair way to judge anyone.
Thompson joined with McCain to repeal the First Amendment. And Thompson's abortion record is suspect (lobbied for an anti-life group). That eliminates those two from my consideration. Ghouliani is wrong on so many issues that he gets eliminated also. Huckabee, Hunter, and the others just don't have the money or support needed to win.
Romney is the man.
I am sick of your dishonest bullshit.
When did Jorge ever talk of Federalism?
He ran as a liberal Republican, and we all naively assumed he was lying to the Democrats, when he was honest, and deceiving us.
Talking like George W. Bush = similar accent. Similar swagger.
We’re far better off as a party nominating someone who doesn’t at all even remotely resemble Bush in the upcoming election. I think that goes without saying.
That said, Thompson can deliver a good speech on a far more regular basis than Bush, who really left us all biting nails (though he would rise to the occasion on an important one). He’s obviously his own man.
And actually, Bush did speak on federalism and addressed it on rare (too rare) occasions.
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=45885
The compassionate conservativism will hopefully die this election. I don’t see anyone endorsing save perhaps Huckabee and Hunter.
An interesting read on W and federsalism, if you’re interested and into tracking down journal articles:
http://publius.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/37/3/478?...dh6qZsA4T5Ymm=&keytype=ref
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.