President Elect Thompson and Our Next Terrorist Attack

News By Us ^ | Apr 04, 07 | Bruce Walker

[Josh Painter]

Amyone really watching the development of politics in America today must see that Fred Thompson is really President-Elect Fred Thompson. I say that as someone who thinks Rudy Giuliani would make a great wartime president and who would also do many of the good things for America that he was able to do for New York.

The reality, however, is that even the shadow candidacy of Thompson is casting a huge shadow indeed. The online Sean Hannity poll showed Thompson getting, as an unannounced candidate, more votes that all other Republican candidates combined. Fred Thompson, as an unannounced candidate, is winning every straw poll in the South. Fred Thompson, who will soon be visiting with Republican members of Congress to discuss his possible candidacy, has been overwhelmed by senators and congressman who want to talk with him (probably because he is the best chance Republicans have of re-taking Congress.)

Will he win the general election? Fred Thompson is likeable, persuasive and savvy man. Thompson is a conservative on every major issue of the day. Democrats will nominate a Leftist, not a centrist, as their nominee. When is the last time a Leftist defeated a conservative in a presidential election? Try 1916, when Woodrow Wilson – using the Ku Klux Klan Leftist South eked by Charles Evans Hughes. That was not just the last time but the only time.

Why? The Battleground Poll, the most respected of all the polls, has consistently for many years shown that sixty percent of Americans consider themselves as “conservative” while only thirty-five percent of Americans consider themselves as “liberals” (those poll have the option of calling themselves a “moderate” or “don’t know” and choose “conservative” or “liberal” instead.)

...President Bush, at his best does not approach Fred Thompson at his worst as a communicator...

[stephenjohnbanker]

Nice dream

[Torie]

[FairOpinion]

“I watched the early voting numbers in my district closely and it broke almost exactly along those numbers ... and Nebraska is pretty red.”

Thanks for your feedback.

We need to face reality and plan a strategy taking into account the new landscape.

[stillonaroll]

Actually this is the WORST INDICTMENT of Fred Thompson, acknowledging that ALL HE CAN DO IS MAKE SPEECHES — if someone writes it out for him.

Wrong. FDT is a highly articulate attorney.

In wartime, a leader must communicate in a strong, firm and resolute manner. From what I've seen of FDT in real life--not in his acting roles--he can do that better than the rest of the R field.

[FairOpinion]

If making speeches would be the most important in the War on Terror, all terrorists would have rolled over dead during Bill Clinton’s administration, but guess what happened instead?

Do you think they’ll run in fear from FT’s speeches?

[The Pack Knight]

” I really think moderate Dems will vote for Fred. “ you mean Reagan Democrats ? is that correct ?

I personally know one lifelong liberal Democrat from New Jersey who has said he would rather vote for Rudy Giuliani or Fred Thompson before Hillary. This, of course, is anecdotal, but I don't think he's alone.

[stillonaroll]

If making speeches would be the most important in the War on Terror, all terrorists would have rolled over dead during Bill Clinton’s administration, but guess what happened instead?

Do you think they’ll run in fear from FT’s speeches?

Speeches are not just about scaring the enemy, it is about rousing the populace into supporting the war effort. Churchill and FDR did that masterfully, whereas Neville Chamberlain and LBJ did not. W has been a mixed bag.

[babygene]

“Clinton gave some great speeches”

From your vantage point perhaps...

[FairOpinion]

And you don’t know what he will actually do in the election booth.

Most Dems can’t bring themselves to vote for anyone other than a Dem — except very rarely. I doubt Thompson has the appeal — Giuliani does, because self preservation is a strong motivator.

[FairOpinion]

The point was not what I said, the point was that the author, who is clearly a great supporter of FT, and the best he could come up with in what FR would do in the War on Terror was his ability to make speeches. The author chose this topic and this is the best he could do.

It’s like you would start a poem “How do I love thee, let me count the ways” and say 1. Nice finger nail polish. (or nice cologne,whatever)
2. intenionally left blank
3. intenionally left blank
4. intenionally left blank
5. intenionally left blank

Would you be impressed?

[The Pack Knight]

Do you think they’ll run in fear from FT’s speeches?

You're RIGHT! What was I thinking, considering voting for this empty suit? Obviously all Fred Thompson knows how to do is make speeches. I'm sure he'll be an absolute pacifist when it comes to terrorists, and I'll just bet he's too stupid to nominate cabinet members who know anything about national security policy. We obviously need a candidate with some serious foreign policy and military experience. We obviously need Rudy Giu-.... wait a second. Rudy doesn't have foreign policy experience either! Running a city isn't the same thing as fighting a war. What exactly does Rudy have that the terrorists will run in fear from?

Your contention that Fred Thompson's ability to make speeches precludes his ability to do anything else only highlights the weakness of your position. Why not come back with some facts that support your position that Fred Thompson would be a weak wartime leader?

[Politicalmom]

I suppose Giuliani will don a flak jacket and lead the troops to battle himself?

You people are completely delusional. Giuliani hasn’t done anything against terrorism.

[FairOpinion]

RG cleaned up NYC, which people said it was impossible.

What leadership positions can FT point to, other than the ones he played on TV?

Heck, he can’t even make up his mind, whether he wants to run. Do you think a president should wait months or longer before he decides what he wants to do after a terror attack?

Thompson not new to speculation about running for office”

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1802908/posts

Thompson, a movie and television actor before and after serving as a Republican senator from Tennessee, was also linked to a potential run for the 2000 presidential nomination. He waited until March 1999 to declare that he would not run because of his heavy Senate workload.

Thompson said later that he had “never been on the verge” of running for president despite all the speculation, and that he was not interested in raising the millions of dollars necessary to be a legitimate contender.

Explaining in 1999 why he didn’t shut down speculation sooner, Thompson said, “I saw no reason to foreclose my options.”

Does this show a lot of respect for his supporters?

[The Pack Knight]

Most Dems can’t bring themselves to vote for anyone other than a Dem — except very rarely. I doubt Thompson has the appeal — Giuliani does, because self preservation is a strong motivator.

Self preservation as in protecting them from terrorists, or self preservation as in protecting their political priorities? The second, maybe, but the first? Unless that Democrat is pro-war, he might as easily believe Hillary will protect him better than Rudy. Most Democrats believe the war in Iraq has made us less safe. A vote for Rudy, who has been staunchly in favor of the war in Iraq, would make little sense for them. Why, then, would they believe Giuliani serves their self-preservation interests any better than Fred Thompson would?

[Politicalmom]

Well, Giuliani conquered all those scaaaaary squeegee guys, you know.

[papasmurf]

I understand the point you're making. But speaking, that is, the ability to communicate an idea/thought/policy and motivate the populace behind it, is extremely important. I call it connecting with the voters.

I'm one who believes that W is suffering not because he's a bad President, or has bad policy, but because, he failed to connect with us, the voters, on a regular basis.

I think a guy like Fred could take the same exact situation, do the same exact things that W did, and be much more successful than W, simply because he has the ability to connect.

When W speaks, I feel as if he's talking to someone else, not me. In fact, sometimes I feel as though he is lecturing, not presenting his positions.

When Clinton spoke, even though I detested the man, I felt he was speaking right to me. There was a connection. There were times when I felt this and thought, wtf am I crazy??? Then it dawned on me what was happening. It was almost the same feeling I had when Reagan spoke.

When the hildebeast speaks, I get goosebumps, my hair stands on end, and I reflexively cringe...as if a platoon of female hairdressers were scraping their collective fingernails on the world's largest chalkboard.

Fred Thompson, who has a very good track record, and is a mainstream conservative, OTOH, gives me the feeling that I am the target of his words, and it feels sincere.

And I like that. :)

May the best man for our Country win.

:O)

P

[FairOpinion]

“Self preservation as in protecting them from terrorists”

This is what I meant — and nobody in their right mind can possibly think Hillary will be better at this than Rudy, when she is busy getting us to surrender to the terrorists.

Fred Thompson is a folksy old guy, who can’t even make up his mind whether to run.

Rudy has the drive to want to destroy every single terrorist on earth and he won’t rest until he does, if he gets in that position and it shows. No smearing can take that away. That’s why he is beating Hillary in all the polls.

[FairOpinion]

“the ability to communicate an idea/thought/policy and motivate the populace behind it, is extremely important.”

I agree and also about Bush not working on getting his message across.

But that alone is NOT ENOUGH, not by a long shot. And even an ardent FT supporter knows that FT offers ONLY that and NOTHING more. You can’t talk the terrorists to death.

As I said somewhere, FT could be RG’s spokesperson — best use of his talent. FT in all his life, and he is now 64, held NO leadership position whatsoever. People who are leaders gravitate to leadership positions, and FT has NONE.

[The Pack Knight]

I'm sure Fred (if he runs) and Rudy will both have plenty of time to explain what they'll do about terrorism as President. Then we'll see. I don't doubt Rudy is serious about fighting terrorism. I want to hear specifics on how, though, before I'll even think of voting for him. The same, of course, goes for Fred. Both guys in my tagline have laid their cards down on this issue. That's why they're still there, as unlikely as their candidacies are.

And underestimate folksy old men at your peril.