President Fred Thompson In Retrospect

I thought I was responding to djm. The artical contains this passage:

“I must apologize to Fred Thompson for doubting his campaign strategy. It would seem he’s on track and doesn’t seem to be all that concerned about winning Iowa. Fred Thompson realizes Iowa is only one state out of 50.”

I said I was sorry for the confusion. Grow up.

All these declarations are only YOUR perception. It seems to be constantly negative. The glass is always 1/2 empty.

It is his own fault. He let it happen. He made it easy for them. He didn’t define himself. He let their stereotypes stand uncontested, and then he played into them. He had no media management. Snip more BLAH BLAH BLAH.

So you are off your old 'he doesn't trumpet his foreign policy experience' bandwagon to the above.

Please quit wasting time on FR, and go work for YOUR candidate if Fred Thompson and his campaign are not to your liking.

No, that was a metaphor. In truth I think it’s several weeks if not months too late. He never did present his resume to the American people when they were listening. Now he’s already defined. And he’s been defined as slow, lazy, uninspiring, lackluster, arrogant, absent, and uninterested — but conservative(!) — instead of as a foreign policy expert, legal scholar, and steady hand in uncertain times.

And he was "defined" by people just like you. Thompson has been ahead of everyone in positing his detailed positions to the public, did you listen to or read them. Thompson has had numerous TV and Radio interviews, did you watch or listen? Thompson has been one of the top candidates as far as making campaign appearances, have you gone to any?

No, you just come onto a conservative forum and bitch and whine using the discredited talking points of the liberal media. You are the lazy one! You are the one with no fire in your belly to get a conservative elected as president. You, if you even are conservative, will be the failure if a liberal Democrat or Republican gets elected as our next president.

You've already shown an inability to lead or even follow. Please, just get out of the way.

Darkwolf377 wrote: "...I think we need to stop comparing everything and everyone to Reagan..."

True, expecting another Reagan is a bit much to realistically expect. I doubt if I will see another candidate who can fully measure up to the lofty mark left by Reagan in my lifetime. But I do (subconsciously or otherwise) tend to stand a given candidate against the Reagan "yardstick" to see how they measure up.

With the current crop of candidates, Thompson is the clearest choice for me and most everyone I know (except for the two Huckabee supporters I know who seem to want a national Pastor, rather than a POTUS). To be sure, I am not claiming that Thompson is the next "Reagan", just that he is our obvious choice given what we like in a candidate.

Among the other candidates, we see:
Romney as an oily "Kerry" type poseur wearing a GOP hat.
Huckabee as a tiger attempting to change his stripes and trying to hide behind his religion.
Giuliani as having SCOTUS nominee and 2nd Amendment "issues".
McCain as personably likeable, but sadly misguided.
The rest, though likeable in some cases (ie. Hunter), just don't seem electable this go round.

It has been mentioned by some that Thompson should be doing far more to gain media attention. I can understand that point of view because we feel (and this is a *very* sad reality) the media's influence on voters can be disregarded only at a candidate's peril.

On the other side of that coin, we can also take note of the MSM's penchant for biased coverage. I don't think it's too hard to guess which party the majority of the MSM would prefer to gain the Presidency, so we keep their bias in mind when considering any of their political coverage (or lack thereof).

Speaking of which, I have never been contacted by the MSM or any polling entity regarding my preferences. Neither has anyone else that I know of. Frankly, we are tired of pundits, journalists and faceless polling firms presuming to tell us how we should vote. I so dearly hope that would become a common sentiment across our country.

Finally, Fred Thompson is the first candidate in a loooong time that has motivated us to personally ante up some cash -each month- to a campaign. Ya'll surely don't know me (or my close circle of friends) from Adam. But if you did, that last statement would speak volumes.

But ultimately, we will support the GOP candidate in the primary. We just *really* hope it's Thompson!

And he was "defined" by people just like you. Thompson has been ahead of everyone in positing his detailed positions to the public, did you listen to or read them. Thompson has had numerous TV and Radio interviews, did you watch or listen? Thompson has been one of the top candidates as far as making campaign appearances, have you gone to any?

No, you just come onto a conservative forum and bitch and whine using the discredited talking points of the liberal media. You are the lazy one! You are the one with no fire in your belly to get a conservative elected as president. You, if you even are conservative, will be the failure if a liberal Democrat or Republican gets elected as our next president.

You've already shown an inability to lead or even follow. Please, just get out of the way.

I don't have the power to get Fred Thompson elected, only he does. Does it matter if I've tracked down his position papers or scoured the internet for his interviews? Is that going to make other people vote for him any more?

The problem isn't with what I know or thing about him, the problem is with his effectiveness in educating the public about himself and his own qualifications, and the his problem has been with his message itself. He's spent the last several months downplaying his own experience and playing up his folksy conservatism. That's a recipe for disaster against Giuliani and McCain in a post-9/11 GOP primary. If I didn't know about his experience then I wouldn't be nearly as angry about the fact that he hasn't bothered to promote it much. Thompson has been defined by what he has chosen to highlight about himself. And that's why he's not considered the foreign policy or national security heavy weight in the GOP field when he should be. He needs to be running as that, not as the "true conservative".

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.