Fred Thompson Supporters: How is Fred Superior?

Electromneyin2008 ^ | 7/22/07 | Vic Lundquist

[pissant]

In the last six months or so, when my Democrat friends have engaged me in discussions about Hillary Clinton, at some point I usually ask them a simple question to gage their support, knowledge, and level of commitment to their candidate. The question is, “What has Senator Clinton accomplished in her life, in her career to qualify her to be President of the United States?”. And of course they know who I support and they generally know his amazing credentials and experience, so when I press them for answers to, “What has she actually done that sets her apart?”, I almost always get a totally blank stare, with no reply.

So I got to thinking about Fred Thompson. Many people are discussing Fred Thompson’s imminent entry into the Republican race for the nomination. More importantly, there are those who back him in that race. It is they to whom this blog post is directed; it is not directed to those visitors who are committed to Mitt Romney. I am only looking to the true Fred Thompson supporters for comments to be left on this post.

There are a number of questions that come to mind for any FT supporter to answer, such as:

– Why is Senator Thompson the superior candidate to be the Republican nominee in 2008? Specifics. – What specific leadership qualities make him superior to Mitt Romney? – What specific leadership experience qualifies Senator Thompson as superior to Mitt Romney? – We know the dozens of huge successes in Mitt’s career. What specific successes in Senator Thompson’s life or career are superior to those of Mitt Romney?

Please feel free to leave any comments you wish as long as they are specific. Your comments can be both objective (measurable) or subjective (qualitative).

To assist you in crafting your answers, here are some examples. An example of an objective answer to the above questions regarding Mitt Romney for instance is that “he has been an executive; a leader of large entities most of his career.” Another example of an objective answer is, “Thompson is an actor; Romney is not.” An example of a subjective answer, again referring to Mitt Romney, would be that “he is a better communicator than Senator Thompson”.

Poor or non-answers are things like, “Well, I just like him better!”. Though obviously subjective, that answer has no meaning except that “beauty is in the eye of the beholder.”

This is a perfect opportunity and forum for all FT supporters to show the rest of us why their candidate is the best. Here is a forum in which many who visit this site either support Mitt Romney for President, or the visitors here are considering Mitt Romney’s strengths and attributes in relation to the possibility he might be the be the best candidate. So here is a perfect place for all supporters of Senator Thompson to come on over and give us all the specific reasons FT is more qualified than Governor Romney to be the chief executive of the largest entity in the world and in world history.

All I ask is that in your comments, you be very specific and provide facts where possible. You have obviously chosen to back, support, and promote Senator Thompson for President. You obviously believe Fred Thompson is superior to Rudy Giuliani, John McCain, and Mitt Romney and should be our (Republicans’) choice to run against the Democrat challenger. As you present your arguments, answers, and comments, please qualify them by answering the “why” question.

Your comments should be completely positive. What do I mean here? Your answers are about Senator Thompson and his superiority; this is not a forum to tear down and to be negative. If you would rather tear down or criticize any other candidates, including Mitt Romney, please go to another site. If you choose to leave comments of a negative nature, we may delete them. Please leave all the positive comments you wish in favor of Fred Thompson, but again, please be very specific and be clear as to how they are in fact superior by comparison and contrast. This is very simple.

Fred Thompson supporters: This is your opportunity to show us all why Fred Thompson the man, the leader, is superior to Mitt Romney.

~ Vic

[ontap]

I support Fred (as my #2 right now), are his communication skills, and his conservatism as compared to Rudy.

Not exactly but pretty close to my #4 post.

[rob777]

The answer is quite simple really. The GOP has been drifting away from the principles of Goldwater/Reagan limited government conservatism since 1996. The culmination of this process was the election of George Bush as a “Compassionate Conservative”. Some of us desperately yearn for a leader who is going to steer the GOP back to those solid principles away from big government conservatism. Without Fred in the race, the only two candidates who have a consistent record on federalism and support for limited government are Ron Paul and Tom Tancredo. Ron is off target on the threat of Islamic fascism and Tom has no chance of winning and does not seem to have the ability communicate those principles effectively to the general public. Enter Fred Thompson, who has a a more solid record on federalism and limited government than all of the candidates except the two mentioned above. He also has the ability to communicate those principles to the general public without appearing to be foaming at the mouth.

In my mind it is more important that the candidate has a solid commitment to the right vision than he has tangible accomplishments. Bill Clinton was both a former Governor and a setting President in 1996. Does that mean we should have supported him? Given two candidates with the same vision and ability to communicate that vision to the general public, I would then look at such things as prior executive experience.

The two most important skills any leader can have are a solid vision and the ability to sell people on that vision so they will follow. A visionary leader who can get people to follow can always delegate managerial tasks to a subordinate. On the other hand, one can never be a leader if one can not convince people to follow.

[NathanR]

I read somewhere that he campaigned for Arnold.

If he was actually serious, he should have run for governor during the recall. That way, he would have at least gained some name recognition.

[pissant]

*applause*

Best answer so far.

[Politicalmom]

PING!!

Fredipedia: The Definitive Fred Thompson Reference

WARNING: If you wish to join, please be aware that this ping list is EXTREMELY active.

[NathanR]

Fred is not “tap dancing”, he is sitting on his front porch sharpening his quill. (er, sitting in his office typing on his laptop.) He is running a clever “Front Porch” campaign, and not using up energy at all.

That is a lot better than Duncan Hunter who has been running in tight circles, getting nowhere at all. Fred is more visible sitting at home, than Duncan on the campaign trail.

[pissant]

Hunter has to do this the old fashioned way. A celebrity he is not. If not for L&O, fred would be still stalking the corridors of congress in his tassled loafers to lobby for some important client.

[Oztrich Boy]

He’s a small government conservative, without being nuts.

[#1CTYankee]

How about this, GHWB was probably the best qualified man to ever run for President.

We all know how that tuned out.

[pissant]

I’d take issue with that, only because he was not a conservative. Had GHWB had Reagan’s well honed passion for the conservative cause, he might well have been. Alas, he was a moderate, not qualified for leadership.

[codercpc]

In 2000 there is no way in H*LL I would have supported Rudy, and to tell the truth, it surprises me every single day that I do.

On paper, Fred, or Duncan should be my candidates. It is just a gut feeling that I have about Rudy. It isn't something totally tangible that I can always put into words, but I just feel safe when I see him. I disagree with alot about him, gun control, and abortion are primary, yet I feel like I can trust him (as much as you can trust any politician).

Safety and leadership are my main concerns for 2008, and I see the #1 problem facing our country is the War on Terror. I have heard the same arguments over and over (especially from my husband HA HA) about abortion, homosexuality, gun control etc. but my feeling is if the Islamic fascists take over this country (like they are in Europe) these concerns will not be a blip on my radar. If, someday abortion is illegal, or any of the other social concerns that I have go my way, I want to be able to Thank God, and not Praise Allah.

As I have said, I am keeping an open mind, but as of today Rudy gives me leadership that I just don't feel in Fred.

As an aside, Freds health scares me also, but that seems to be a forbidden subject on this forum, so I will save that for another time. But as I have said, and you can save this thread to remind me if you must, I commit to supporting Fred if he is the nominee, in fact I will probably be his biggest cheerleader.

[xcamel]

...just another nobody from nowhere....

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

Why is Senator Thompson the superior candidate to be the Republican nominee in 2008?

He knows Washington, he knows what the system is like. For a change, we need an insider to run for President, not an outsider who'll promise the same old "I'll clean up Washington!" BS but won't do a thing (See Bush's "uniter not a divider and New Tone as shining examples).

Romney is nothing more than a moral Bill Clinton.

[pissant]

Hey, not bad. See Rob777’s post above too.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

Fred was one of those who helped Bill Clinton get off the hook during impeachment.

You do realize it's against the Forum rules to lie about a candidate's record, right?

[HoustonTech]

Pissant is really a shill for Giuliani. He thinks if he can bring Romney and Thompson down, Giuliani will be in better shape to win the nomination. His support for Hunter is just a front for winning support for Rudy.

No other explanation can explain his efforts on FR.

/sarc

[stephenjohnbanker]

“His responses thus far to Michael Moore, the Clintons, and the media; his writings on a wide variety of topics — all this show his willingness to fight, his ability to make the left look daft, and his ease in entertaining his suppporters simultaneously by articulating his (our) positions in a “boy, are you a buncha dumb bums” kind of way.

He is a confidence builder, he loves his country, and he can unite a wide swath of the electorate. He will literally and figuratively tower over whatever dingbat the Rats end up nominating.”

I completely agree with every word!!
Thompson exudes warmth and confidence more than any other candidate. In this respect, Thompson is Reaganesque.

[Squidpup]

Like I have said - you hire administrators, you elect leaders.

[#1CTYankee]

"Alas, he was a moderate, not qualified for leadership."

That and he cost us the next election, read my lips! ;-D

[AnnaZ]

Thank you three for supporting your candidate with such vigor, as opposed to others on this thread. You are all good reflections of the true grass root support Fred has attained.

Awww...

*bats eyelashes*

LOL.


Thanks.