They're doing their best to bury him in the media.
"You'll have to tell Hillary I can't take him yet, he's still placed 3rd nationally. You'll have to wait for the South Carolina primary"
Posted on 12/06/2007 1:46:45 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
It seems that we are still waiting for the central casting candidate. Republicans are unsure and Democrats are beginning to disbelieve the “inevitability” argument around Hillary Clinton. We are a society that loves to build them up to tear them down.
First, Fred Thompson was a buzz, and then we were waiting and waiting and waiting for him to get into the race. When he got in, we started thinking that he looked tired or was slow. We said he had a great website, but where was the meat? Now he has put the most detailed and most conservative solutions on his website and we are still tearing him down. Through all of this, he has been the most consistently conservative candidate throughout his career of any of the candidates in the race today.
Even Rush Limbaugh in the recapping of the CNN/”Youboob” Debate, had to say that he was the only conservative in the top 4 or 5 candidates. There are only 8 in the race -- so that is pretty much everybody -- he is the most conservative.
Now the predictions are that if Fred doesn’t make it in Iowa, he’s done. Fred Thompson may be the “Rodney Dangerfield” of candidates but he deserves respect and maybe the presidency -- here’s why.
In the long and winding road of disappointment in the domestic policy of the Bush Administration, Fred Thompson is leading the pack on policy “White Papers.” The two most important on the domestic side of things are regarding Social Security and Taxation. Had President Bush not squandered his majority, these problems should have been resolved so they “wouldn’t be left to the next president.” President Bush showed no conviction on making tax cuts permanent or on Social Security reform which were cornerstones of BOTH of his presidential campaigns.
Maybe I am just getting older, but I have no patience with the wink and a nod business as usual attitude in Washington. The American voter is not stupid and I think the mainstream media and some of the new media, of which I am a part, will be surprised when the caucus and primary votes are counted.
Let’s take the easy one first; Social Security has done a good job of reducing poverty rates among the elderly, reducing them from 35% in 1959 to 9.4% in 2006. However, with Baby Boomers beginning to retire, the current program is unsustainable. The annual reports from the Social Security Administration are nothing more than fire starter and give a false sense of security. Read them at best and burn them for fun. The Thompson White Paper predicts a 23% reduction in benefits but the GAO has predicted more in the neighborhood of 30% as we reduce the number of workers that support each retiree. Whether it is 2017 or 2041, it’s just around the corner in a very bad neighborhood. It will be untenable for Congress to raise taxes to make up the difference. Our children won’t be able to afford it. So what does Thompson propose? The pro-choice Democrats should love it, because it’s full of choice for the worker.
Thompson will achieve the goals of making Social Security solvent by allowing current or near retirement folks to keep the plan unchanged. Then would give the option for people to contribute to an “add-on” account. The Democrats will say that it is privatizing Social Security, but it is not. It is similar to the original Bush plan but much easier to understand and workable for workers of all income levels. The key to Social Security Reform is to allow low end to middle income workers to accumulate wealth and this plan does that. “We must protect current and near retirees' benefits and preserve the Social Security program for future generations. Current law promises future retirees more benefits than current retirees with the same real income even though they paid the same real amount in taxes. That promise is one the current system cannot keep. Instead, current law effectively requires a 23% across the board reduction in benefits when the Trust Fund runs out of money, an event currently projected to occur in 2041,” Fred Thompson White Paper. Taking no action is not an option. We’ve been doing that on domestic policy, with the exception of the tax cuts, for too long. Leveling the playing field for retirement is one thing that will unite Americans which is just what the Democrat class warfare specialists don’t want to do.
In my view, the second part to the domestic leveling of the playing field is in the area of making the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts permanent. The left is reveling in the possibility of a recession and the expiration of the tax cuts will be the thing that would bring a recession on. Thompson also addresses this issue on his website.
The bottom line here is don’t count Fred out. The pundits have been wrong more times than not and while this is not an endorsement, it cannot be denied that Fred Thompson is the only consistently conservative candidate with the best and most specific plans articulated to achieve his goals. Now, what the caucuses and primaries have to decide is if his goals are the goals of the Republican voter.
I think the critical state primary for Fred is South Carolina’s. He must win there, and I expect he will.
He has my vote-but then I’m one of the few non-Baptists down here.
Lets hope the Huckster doesn’t flim-flamm the faithful of SC.
Still,the Huckabee “Willie Horton” scandal certainly won’t help him in our solid “law and order” state.
They're doing their best to bury him in the media.
"You'll have to tell Hillary I can't take him yet, he's still placed 3rd nationally. You'll have to wait for the South Carolina primary"
This is interesting. Thank you for posting it.
Hey, if they get fooled by the "I'm one of you" argument, they deserve what they get. Cajuns in Louisiana voted overwhelmingly for Katherine "Babineaux" Blanco and against Bobby Jindal (in his first run for governor), because she "was one of them", and look at the result--can you say Katrina and Rita.
They appear to have learned their lesson in Jindal's SECOND run.
Yes, Fred is dead, but it's because very few voters actually want government limited and because that is the exact thing Fred is proposing.
Well, I am a Baptist and, like you, I am a Navy veteran and I consider Fred Thompson the only hope on the horizon. I watched the Charlie Rose interview on the web and I began to understand all the negative press, Fred simply scares the liberals so bad they are soiling their clothing.
Real Clear Politics poll average in South Carolina, as of today, FRed surges past Roody Doody to take 2'nd place.!
He is doing better in the polls. The main reason, though, I think is that Giuliani has taken a dive. It would be much better if he were going up on the strength of his own candidacy.
Fortunately, Hillary is in a similar predicament, but I still don’t think there is any real doubt that Hillary will beat Obama.
I just ordered a sweat shirt off of his website. Close to $40 bucks with Fedex shipping. It is my Christmas present to myself, not a winter holiday present. I am looking forward to wearing it to the several events of the holidays, in particular, some "family" events.
Good for you.Sounds like you want to stir up a little family cheer.Have fun.
LLS
I disagree. Blanco was a HUGE part of the problem. Read up on the different approaches of Blanco and Jindal when responding to the levee breaches. Blanco diddled and stewed. Jindal assumed authority to get things done. In one instance, a company with a flight of helicopters was trying to get permission to "go in" and start pulling people out. State gov't couldn't get its act together to say "yes". Jindal, when contacted simply said "go in". He probably didn't have the legal authority as a district congressman to say that---but it got done.
"Yes, Fred is dead, but it's because very few voters actually want government limited and because that is the exact thing Fred is proposing."
And THIS I disagree with completely. Fred seems to me to be doing quite well. Certainly the MSM is doing everything they can to tear him down.
so, how is this not a government failure again?
LLS
50 percent of voting Americans will vote for a Democrat. A large percentage of Republicans support someone like nanny~state Huckabee. So, you may disagree with me completely, but it doesn’t make you correct.
I like Fred, but will go with whoever wins the primary. That’s better than what they (dems) have to offer.
Not really. Ms. Zoller starts out talking about why we shouldn't count Fred out, and she ends that way ... but there's no sustained analysis of WHY we shouldn't count him out.
A rehearsal of the problems with Social Security is all very nice, but it doesn't explain the electoral dynamics that Ms. Zoller purports to be discussing. Why will this resonate with primary voters so that Fred gets nominated? That's the important question, and she dodges it.
This "analysis" is really nothing more than a campaign advocacy piece for Fred Thompson.
So, who are YOU carrying water for?
Excuse me, but your "logic" is specious. The "number of voting Americans" who will vote for a Democrat is irrelevant to the question because they don't vote in Republican primaries, which is the only place that currently matters as to whether Fred is "dead" or not.
And that number is wrong anyway. Of the total voting population, only about 1/3 are Democrats, about 1/3 are Republicans, and about 1/3 are independents (AKA "no party"). That 1/3 comprised of independents have proven in the past that they are NOT "tied" to the Democrats (witness Reagan, Bush I and Bush II), and that is precisely where I think Fred will do best (if he gets the nomination).
Nobody, actually. But as it happens, I lean strongly toward Fred Thompson, and think that he's going to be the eventual nominee.
My objection here is to the bad punditry, not to Mr. Thompson. I LOATHE bad punditry.
FWIW, the reason I think Fred Thompson will win is because of the "electoral dynamics" missing from Ms. Zoller's puff-piece. I think Thompson's electoral strength will be found among the normal people who will actually vote in the primaries, rather than the political operatives who have a financial and ego stake in pimping for "their boy."
Normal folks have probably only now begun -- barely -- paying attention to the never-ending nitwittery that passes for the 2008 presidential campaign. My guess is that Fred Thompson will resonate with normal folks precisely because he's not like the others; he seems more solid.
50 percent of voting Americans will vote for a Democrat. A large percentage of Republicans support someone like nanny~state Huckabee. So, you may disagree with me completely, but it doesn’t make you correct.
FRed Bump!
He must win there, and I expect he will.”
It’s going to be extremely difficult for Fred to capture SC, when he is not in the lead there, and he will likely come in 4th in Iowa and last in NH (or at least behind Ron Paul).
It “could” happen. But there is no evidence that it will. Generally downward momentum continues downward.
I do hope that Fred Thompson wins the nomination, and believe he has a great chance in doing so. I also just finished hearing Mitt Romney give an excellent speech, and he would be my second choice among the top-tier candidates. Mitt Romney is more conservative than Rudy Guiliani or Mike Huckabee and a Thompson/Romney ticket would be fine with me. GO FRED! :)
I don't think either of them would be well-suited for the VP slot: their two strong personalities would not fit comfortably on the same stage.
Flying under the radar and letting Rudy McRombee squabble will only benefit Fred. Fred will win South Carolina.
Let me apologize for my negative reaction. I hope you are right. I know a lot of normal people, even nominal Democrats who want to vote for Fred.
But people are discouraged by the fact that he fell in the polls and hasn’t recovered. I hope that the Thompson people have had a good look at the internals of these polls and have been able to pinpoint the problem.
I think that all the people who were favorably disposed to him early on are still there for him, but they’ve been convinced that Fred won’t win, so they’ve migrated to someone they might not like as well, but who they think can complete the course.
I think this will all change as the field thins out.
That's the difference between polls and elections....
I would love a Thompson/Romney ticket.
But, that said, I am extremely frustrated with candidate Thompson and I think he is going down fast in flames.
I think most likely the ticket will actually be Giuliani/Huckabee. Given that the other ticket will be you know who and someone else, I suspect conservatives will strongly support that ticket, though neither Giuliani nor Huck is a true conservative. The two of them together gives some credence to “most” conservative issues, though, in one form or the other, in one of them. Except the border obviously.
Times are not great for conservatives. But they aren’t all that bad for the GOP.
As much as I like Duncan Hunter, his candidacy has gained no traction whatsoever. It would be great if he'd face the music, pack it in now, and encourage people to get behind Fred!
Ucckk...of all the possible current-candidate combo's, that one might be the least palatable of all.
Nominating a RINO at this crucial time in history would be a squandered opportunity with unimaginably bad consequences.
Real voters in real voting booths will vote for Fred, because that is when they will pay attention. Further more, again as I have said, Fred has pulled back from the fray, except for a little prodding, for the exact reason that he is the conservative and the adult in the room.
Polls track peoples attention to bright shiny objects up until just a few days out, and even then are still worthless, especially when it comes to Fred Thompson....
Ask Senator Jim Cooper...
Huck has been a God send to Fred.
LOL...the writer must have copied my tagline.
Because the real conservative, Duncan Hunter, isn't in the top 4-5. Which begs the question: are Republicans really interested in electing a conservative in the Reagan mode, because if they truly were, they would be getting behind the only true conservative in the race; someone who has integrity, statesmanship, morals, leadership qualities, intellegence, courage, and unwavering conservative values. Duncan Hunter would do a magnificent job of guiding the country through the morass which is the world today.
Can't be repeated enough. Fred is the real deal, a genuine conservative and the best man for the job.
Well said, and more accurate than many around here are willing to admit.
Guiliani and Huckabee might not get people excited on FR, but they'd do far better in the general election than Clinton and ... uh.. I dunno. Whatever dry, charisma-free VP candidate they dig up that won't upstage Hillary!. Rudy and Chuck, politics notwithstanding, are genuinely interesting people to the average American Idol watching Joe.
Er, Rudy and HUCK, that is. (I just saw the Chuck Norris/Mike Huckabee video, and it’s robbed me of my senses)
Just a misunderstanding.
LLS
FRED THOMPSON - FEDERALIST - SCARES THE CRAP OUT OF THE MSM - PING!
Fred has not only received the endorsement from the National Right to Life Committee but he is now starting to receive endorsements from the individual state NRL’s as well. He received endorsements from South Carolina Citizens for Life and The Wisconsin Right to Life PAC in the last 2 days.
Immigration isn't a domestic issue?
Well said. You should have written the article. :)
Reagan was bigger than life. (I saw him speak once -- I was very close to the podium. He had a commanding presence that made him the center of attention. Reagan's conservatism was palatable precisely because he was bigger than life.
Duncan Hunter is no doubt a very good man, but he is not bigger than life. In fact, he has labored in near-complete obscurity in the House for 25 years. Hunter's problem is that he is missing that bit of "whatever" that sets him apart.
Reagan had it; Hunter does not.
I think any objective analysis would find that the race is wide open right now.
Good article.
Maybe too late.Huckabee signs are already showing up within a few miles of every Baptist church in my part of SC—and I expect the same is true everywhere in the state.
Baptists (especially the Southern species) are pretty much monolithic in matters of morality and faith.If Pastor Huck hits their pulpits it’s gonna be hard for them to resist him.
I believe they will but a good sermon from a good preacher tends to put everything in flux—especially with a church steeped in forgiveness and redemption.
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.