Posted on 09/09/2007 1:30:59 PM PDT by Mr. Silverback
Prominent evangelical leaders who spent the summer hoping Fred Thompson would emerge as their favored Republican presidential contender are having doubts as he begins his long-teased campaign.
For social conservatives dissatisfied with other GOP choices, the "Law & Order" actor and former Tennessee senator represents a Ronald Reagan-like figure, someone they hope will agree with them on issues and stands a chance of winning.
But Thompson's less-than-clear stance on a federal gay marriage amendment and his delay in entering the race are partly responsible for a sudden shyness among leading evangelicals.
"A month or two ago, I sensed there was some urgency for people to make a move and find a candidate," said Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, a Washington-based conservative Christian group. "Right now, I think people are stepping back a little and watching. The field is still very fluid."
A loose network of influential evangelical leaders known as the Arlington Group met privately Wednesday and Thursday in Washington to discuss presidential politics and other issues, participants said.
Although the group does not endorse candidates, individual members have done so in the past, and one of the organization's founding principles is to get the movement's leaders on the same page when possible.
Some in the meeting shared their presidential leanings, but the consensus was that more time is needed to gauge Thompson's performance, according to a participant.
A clearer picture may develop Oct. 19-21 during a "Values Voter Summit" in Washington that will include a presidential straw poll.
In June, Thompson met privately with several Arlington Group members, many of whom are uncomfortable with the GOP top tier for various reasons: Arizona Sen. John McCain for championing campaign-finance overhaul and labeling some evangelical figures "agents of intolerance"; former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani for backing abortion rights and gay rights; and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney for his social-issue policy reversals and — for some members — his Mormon faith.
With the post-Labor Day primary push under way, the 65-year-old Thompson faces a crucial month to prove he is the best alternative for a key GOP constituency.
"He's got a real opportunity to be the most credible conservative candidate across the board," said Gary Bauer, a one-time presidential aspirant who heads the advocacy group American Values. "Whether he can put it all together remains to be seen. But he's got a real chance to emerge as the major conservative alternative to Giuliani."
Others are skeptical about whether Thompson can fill that role.
Rick Scarborough, a Southern Baptist preacher and president of Texas-based Vision America, said that while he is encouraged by Thompson's strong voting record in the Senate against abortion, he questioned the candidate's commitment to social issues.
"The problem I'm having is that I don't see any blood trail," Scarborough said. "When you really take a stand on issues dear to the heart of social conservatives, you're going to shed some blood in the process. And so far, Fred Thompson's political career has been wrinkle-free."
Thompson's long-delayed entry is another concern, Scarborough said. "The hesitancy has made us wonder whether he has the stomach for what it's going to take," he said.
Earlier this summer, doubts crept in following reports on Thompson's role in crafting campaign finance reform and stories that he lobbied for an abortion rights group.
More recently, Thompson has come under scrutiny for his position on a constitutional amendment on gay marriage, a defining issue for the Christian right.
Thompson told CNN in August that he supports an amendment that would prohibit states from imposing their gay marriage laws on other states. That falls well short of what evangelical leaders want: an amendment that would bar gay marriage nationwide.
Thompson's position surprised evangelical leaders who say they met with him in June and came away thinking he shared their desire for a more sweeping constitutional change. Now, they wonder if he is flip-flopping.
One person in attendance — Mathew Staver of the Liberty Counsel, a Florida-based conservative legal group — said Thompson described going back and forth about the merits of an amendment prohibiting gay marriage nationwide.
"At one time, he said he was against it," Staver said. "Then he said in June he was for it. So if now he's saying he's against it, to me that's a double-minded person. And that would be a real concern for religious conservatives."
Messages left with Thompson campaign were not returned.
Several Christian right leaders said opposition to a broad amendment would hurt Thompson with evangelicals, but not necessarily cause irreparable harm. Others played down the issue, pointing out that their favored approach was politically impossible anyway because Democrats control the House and Senate.
Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, said Thompson's position is consistent with the former senator's support for limited federal government and giving power to the states.
Land said it is healthy that expectations for Thompson have diminished from unrealistic levels and he does not think evangelical excitement has dimmed for a man he described as a "masterful retail politician."
Many evangelical leaders said one of Thompson's biggest draws is his perceived electability. Some are watching whether former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, a former Baptist minister, can build on his second place finish last month in the Iowa straw poll.
Tim Wildmon, president of the Tupelo, Miss.-based American Family Association, said that while he likes Huckabee, Thompson's better name recognition and fundraising potential is a strong draw for evangelicals.
"This is a dilemma a lot of people have," Wildmon said. "They want to support the candidate that most reflects their values. "But at the same time, you have to balance that against finding someone who can actually win."
I would love to have Hunter and still hope he can get somewhere (Clinton was at less than 3% at this point in 1991), but if we're going to end up with someone who is now a frontrunner Fred is clearly the guy. Beware of pressmonkeys throwing crap and trying to convince us we should be electing the Bible Thumper-in-Chief instead of the Commander-in-Chief.
...have dictated, even. And IMO, most of the same special interest gangs would control Giuliani or Thompson. Support a conservative like Duncan Hunter, and I’ll vote for him. Run a campaign to make Hunter look like Ron Paul, and I’ll not bother showing up at the polls.
I would love to have Brownback because of his strong pro-life stance.
Hunter is my #1. He’s clear-minded, and he’s tough enough to take the pounding.
But if Thompson is the eventual nominee, I’ll be more than pleased. The idea that evangelicals are “worried” about Thompson is part of the continuing effort by Dems and press monkeys to choose our candidate for us. When we let our enemies define us we lose every time.
I will quibble about one thing. During the primary I will support the man who best reflects my views. Thats Hunter, with Thompson as a close second. If you want a conservative, you have to vote for a conservative, and Hunter is “the” conservative in this race.
But Thompson is a close second, as I say, and I would be proud to vote for him, I have every confidence he would make a good president. I have to say, with a couple of exceptions, we have a very good slate of candidates, good decent men with clear principles almost all of them. Almost any of them stand head and shoulders above anything the Dems have fielded in a generation.
I’ve got news for you. Most conservatives see Fred Thompson as one of us, a fellow conservative. Giuliani is the liberal. Linking the two together is downright ignorant.
Like Fred, Duncan Hunter is a good conservative just a poor presidential candidate. Republicans can’t afford to split their votes too much otherwise Rooty will win. That means America is assured a liberal will be sitting in the WH come January 2009. And I don’t mean Rooty either.
The Secretary of State's International Security Advisory Board (formerly called the Arms Control and Nonproliferation Advisory Board (ACNAB)) provides the Department with independent insight and advice on all aspects of arms control, disarmament, international security, and related aspects of public diplomacy. The ISAB is sponsored and overseen by the Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security. The Board provides its recommendations directly to the Secretary of State. The Board currently has 18 members and is chartered to have up to 25. Board members are national security experts with scientific, military, diplomatic, and political backgrounds. The Board meets in a plenary session on a quarterly basis.
Updated: August 13, 2007
Former Board Members
* Mr. Stephen Kappes, Member, September 2005 -- December 2006
* Dr. Amy Sands, Member, September 2005 -- June 2007
* Sen. Fred D. Thompson, Chairman, September 2005 -- July 2007
Sorry, but that's paranoia. If that were true Reagan would never have been nominated, back in the days when there was no talk radio, no Internet, no alternative media of any kind and four TV networks all run by libs. Hunter has failed to gain traction because he has not set up the kind of campaign that will overcome his lack of name recognition. We'll see in the next couple of months if he has simply been holding his fire or if he just has no clue how to run nationally.
Also, I'd love to hear your reasoning on why Thompson is someone progressives would be happy to have around.
With the choices dictated to us by the bandwagon approach and other filthy propaganda, you'll get a write-in for Hunter or a no-vote from me. And yes, the other lefty gang might win once.
It doesn't matter who you vote for, it matters who takes office. The next President will certainly appoint two Supremes in his or her first term. If you want Hillary or Obama picking two people who will serve on the court for 30 years or so, you go ahead and write Hunter's name in on Election Day in 2008.
Nobody is going to do that. What you don't get is that if he doesn't go somewhere quick, he's never going to come under attack because no one will talk about him.
And IMO, most of the same special interest gangs would control Giuliani or Thompson.
1. Please provide examples of Thompson being under the control of special interests.
2. Please tell me how "control" by "special interests" would cause Thompson to pick two SCOTUS nominees who would be worse than Hillary's picks. Heck, make that anything but hugely better than Hillary's picks!
3. I'm saying this because it will be said by his opponents, so you'd better be ready to handle it: You mean, special interests like the defense contractors?
Yes, your head has been exploding since Fred announced that he was going to test the waters in April or so. You trolled the Fred threads consistently early on, but I haven’t noticed you in a while.
I guess you are back.
Admittedly, even Giuliani. Compare him to other mayors of Major cities. The Dems pick some real scum.
OK, I'll give this to you free of charge:
I want a Commander-in-Chief who can beat Hillary or Obama in the general election, because I don't want a Commander-in-Chief that will lose the war.
Now, just so we're clear on what I just gave you, here's the product label:
Offering up an abundance of off the wall rhetoric serves no good purpose. IOW, your mini temper tandrums spotlight a lack of rational thinking on your part.
Whether you like it or not, its Rooty versus FredT. We conservatives asked for a viable conservative alternative to the three top tier candidates and FredT stepped forward. And lets not forget, FReepers have chosen Fred over Hunter.
You can be as irrational, desperate and as angry as you like. In politics that prescription results in failure.
...bandwagon approach propaganda.
...insult for appearance of tough persona and shutting down opposing arguments.
I think we have proof right there that you're not here to be reasonable.
Fred's actual record is more like that of Giuliani
Yeah, that's why he won Tennesee with 61% of the vote, they're all commies down there. Two words: Prove it.
Whenever I want to know what is going on in the minds of conservative, evangelical christians, the religion reporter for AP/Yahoo would certainly be the go-to guy on my list. He just DRIPS credibility....
If Duncan Hunter wins the nomination and takes office, who will appoint the next two Supremes?
If Fred Thompson wins the nomination and takes office, who will appoint the next two Supremes?
If Rudy Giuliani wins the nomination and takes office, who will appoint the next two Supremes?
If Hillary Clinton wins the Dem nomination and takes office, who will appoint the next two Supremes?
If Barack Obama wins the Demnomination and takes office, who will appoint the next two Supremes?
Yep. Still neeeds to be countered, however, because he goes to some folks that evangelicals listen to.
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.