Fredipedia: The Definitive Fred Thompson Reference
WARNING: If you wish to join, be aware that this ping list is EXTREMELY active.
Posted on 01/05/2008 7:22:48 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Quin Hillyer is a conservative, but not a Fred Thompson lackey. His observations?
I am firmly convinced that Fred Thompson still has a real shot at the nomination...I watched him with Wolf Blitzer just an hour or so ago and he came across very very well indeed. He really is hitting on ALMOST all cylinders now, more so every day since beginning to really engage about December 1.
...it is also worth noting that the utterly scurrilous Politico story yesterday almost certainly depressed Thompson's vote in Iowa. As I said on Fox News yesterday, for a news outlet to publish a story with UNNAMED sources that is clearly damaging to a particular campaign, on the very day of (or eve of) an election, is just unethical journalism. This is the same organization that many many months ago reported that John Edwards was dropping out of the race. Yeah, right.
Hillyer also opines that the Thompson campaign has little imagination (true.)
BUMP!
Fred had better get HOT!
I want to vote for him .... but I need more face time to make sure and convince others to vote for him.
Fred Thompson and Duncan Hunter are the only two conservatives on the republican ticket at this point.
The problem is Duncan is not going anywhere ... Only Fred has a real chance at running the drive by gauntlet. If Conservatives would coalesce behind Fred it would be better for all.
The media now uses the blogs as cover to put out harmful rumors on candidates they don’t like. Politico has proven it is nothing but a stooge for McCain.
Good quote on the blog page, I would extend it to lying SOS journalists too.
Heh, you sound like you’re from New Hampshire.
Fred Thompson a candidate not SEEKING the office, but a candidate who WILL SERVE. Sounds GOOD!!!!!
Mason Dixon
Back in the early days of the 2000 presidential campaign, right after John McCain beat George W. Bush in the New Hampshire primary, there were many dire media predictions along the lines of, “If Bush doesn’t turn things around quickly it could turn into a McCain rout.” I thought: what in heaven’s name is going on here?
Unfortunately for the media, the answer was no. Despite their best efforts, Bush regained his momentum in South Carolina — which, of course, prompted charges of dirty dealings — and went on to easily capture the nomination.
This time around, the nagging questions have returned. Before a vote had been cast or a caucus convened, pundits of all stripes were touting a two-candidate race between former governors Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney, virtually ignoring worthies like Duncan Hunter (who is not campaigning in Iowa) and especially the eminently electable Fred Thompson. It’s enough to make one wonder, that if a conservative makes a point and it’s not acknowledged by the media, does he make a sound?
While this type of treatment from the liberal media is expected, it is profoundly disturbing to see ‘conservative’ pundits ignore or dismiss Thompson’s candidacy so lightly. Typical of this non-coverage for the true conservatives in the race is a piece in the Wall Street Journal which states: “None of the Republican presidential candidates have captured all three wings of the party’s base: defense hawks, economic conservatives and social conservatives.“ I’m not sure anymore what the Journal considers ‘conservative,’ but they might want to check out Thompson’s latest video message to Iowa voters for a clue.
Fredipedia: The Definitive Fred Thompson Reference
WARNING: If you wish to join, be aware that this ping list is EXTREMELY active.
If you can, donate today-I did! :)
The WSJ has its agenda, too.
Unless every talk radio show gets behind Fred...united in conservatism...he’ll remain a long shot...
Speculate a bit with me...
Rumors fly that Romney actually commissioned the “push-poll” which was negative about Mormons, so that he could play the Victim Card and make The Speech (which he really wanted to make despite the denials...)
So Romney’s campaign is (at least by rumor) the ‘dirty tricks’ campaign so far.
If Fred is surging in Iowa (which he was,) and Rudy!! is a non-factor, as is McCain, who eschewed ethanol subsidies, and Romney cannot stop Huckabee, then Romney benefits from a squash of Fred in Iowa.
After all, it’s possible (we’ll never know) that Fred could have come in SECOND, making Romney into yesterday’s newspaper.
Hmmmmmm?
It’s become clear that the evangelicals have an advantage in Iowa, with Robertson carrying it in ‘88 and now Huckabee.
I wonder if it takes a religious cynic like me to note that “caucusing” involves going somewhere and sitting around for a few hours, and that evangelicals may be more used to that than non churchgoers?
Fred’s a candidate who’s quite acceptable to them but they are not passionate about him...until the alternative is a Dim.
-Eric
-Eric
Senator Bob Dole won the Iowa GOP caucus in 1988, not Pat Robertson.
1988- Bob Dole (37%), Pat Robertson (25%), George H. W. Bush (19%), Jack Kemp (11%), and Pete DuPont (7%)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iowa_caucus
The fact that the eventual president took third in Iowa twenty years ago gives me hope (Fred Thompson took third this time).
|
|
|||||||
|
One thing that really stands out during this election is the blatant immorality of the Politico’s action against Fred Thompson. To the Politico staff, I advise: you need to rethink your war against honesty.
Allowing the Politico to have credibility in politics is like making OJ Simpson a marriage counselor.
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.
