The woman in the picture dresses like Patricia Heaton, of "Everybody Loves Raymond."
Posted on 04/03/2007 3:40:20 AM PDT by Josh Painter
For the past few weeks, ex-SEN Fred Thompson has publicly flirted with running for President... There is a yearning for a "new Reagan" to woo conservatives and moderates into a grand coalition willing to win the War and embrace market-friendly reforms to the ever growing government. But the surprisingly strong support for Fred Thompson is more than just a yearning for a "true conservative." Here are a couple reasons F. Thompson is gaining traction where others are not:
1) There is no MAJOR issue where he is at odds with any conservative wing of the party. And Thompson is not a recent convert for political reasons on any major issue.
2) Thompson was outside politics from 2002-2008 when Republican stock went downhill. As a corollary, Thompson is not tied to President Bush or the current Senate in any way.
3) Thompson's ability to communicate ideas clearly and earnestly makes many think of Reagan's ability to win over people to ideas that are not necessarily popular...
4) Most people like a person who is not a career politician but is an educated and active citizen to be President
5) Thompson is probably the most conservative electable candidate...
Fred Thompson would immediately jump onto my shortlist.
Support for Guiliani is wide and shallow. F. Thompson is a big threat tho Guiliani's lead. McCain' 20% is actually a pretty solid group that probably won't grow or shrink much over the next 6-9 months. F. Thompson could take much of the Gingrich/Brownback/Huckabee support and coalesce it around himself. F. Thompson would be the most conservative of a Guiliani-McCain-Thompson race, but he would be moderate enough and independent enough to win over voters in a general election...
My prediction is that F. Thompson will run and will be a top tier candidate.
(Excerpt) Read more at redstate.com ...
Except that he voted for McCain/Feingold and is open borders.
2) Thompson was outside politics from 2002-2008 when Republican stock went downhill. As a corollary, Thompson is not tied to President Bush or the current Senate in any way.
See, if Thompson had been there he would've single-handedly prevented the Republican party from becoming socialists and he would've done something about the border? Yeah, sure.
3) Thompson's ability to communicate ideas clearly and earnestly makes many think of Reagan's ability to win over people to ideas that are not necessarily popular...
He plays a conservative on TV...just like Reagan. That makes him...REAGAN!
4) Most people like a person who is not a career politician but is an educated and active citizen to be President...
...and Thompson has carefully remained aloof since the days of Watergate hearings to give just that impression.
5) Thompson is probably the most conservative electable candidate...
...who voted for McCain/Feingold and is open borders. He'll be no different than Bush.
Whew. I’m glad you pointed this out. Man I was going to back Fred on the issues. I didn’t realize that he had a hot wife and once took a bad pictures. He better find an ugly wife soon or I’m done with him. /S
Ah, the cut-and-run "conservative". No thanks.
I understand your dilemma. I choose to look at the entire campaign as the selection of someone who will keep us from being ruled by democrats (and "rule" is the exact word I choose to use).
It's all a matter of perspective, I suppose. I don't think any of the really conservative candidates is going to get traction, and if Thompson announces as a candidate I guarantee you that there will be things that surface that you won't like about him, either. The only reason we haven't seen hit pieces on him yet is that the press is holding their fire and using Thompson as a way to erode numbers for Romney and Guiliani. Should Thompson declare, I guarantee that you will suddenly see less than flattering articles about him, too.
After Bush, I’ll take anybody
WHo is that out of place person standing behind Thompson? PLease tell me it’s not his wife.
Hardly. The woman behind Thompson looks like a tramp in that picture. She needs a bra, a hairdo and less red lipstick.
Agreed. A large part of the problem is the MSM. In 2004 according to one poll 86% of the national media voted for Kerry. And they’re supposed to be our ‘neutral gatekeepers’; what a joke.
How many negative Hillary stories have there been on the MSM? How about NONE. This is a woman with, to say the least, a controversial past.
The Dem pimp media will do nothing but shill for her.
Boy, the guy hasn’t even officially announced his candidacy and he and his wife are already getting dumped on, even by fellow Republicans. Heaven help us. [I think the lady looks just fine.]
RON PAUL:
CUT the Federal Government [spending], and
RUN back to the Constitution! *
I would prefer that over a borrow-and-spend run-away-from-the-borders speech-suppressing liberal.
* Hat Tip: OrthodoxPresbyterian
Ron Paul? You got to be kidding. He voted with the Rat’s against the troops surge
The "Buchanan Brigades" have to follow some hopeless "Fortress America" icon since Pat isn't running this time.
The main reason so many FReepers badmouth Ron Paul is because their Constitutional comprehension is practically nonexistent.
(1) is pro-choice
Source? There are some old news stories that say this (without sourcing it), and a contemporaneous interview with the head of a national right-to-life organization contradicts those reports, saying Thompson is solidly pro-life. His Senate voting record on pro-life issues is 100%, minus some votes on campaign finance reform, which isn't technically a pro-life issue anyway.
(2) favors the McCain-Feingold bipartisan "Campaign Finance Reform" act
Use the correct tense -- he favored it at the time, but has gone on record admitting it was a mistake and that it should be tossed in favor of something better, potentially even going with "no limits, full and immediate disclosure", a very conservative concept.
3) supported keeping Bill Clinton in office after he was impeached
Thompson voted for conviction on the most serious charge against Clinton. He did not believe the lesser charges were sufficiently proven (more likely due to Frist's ineptitude at handling the whole situation than Thompson giving Clinton a "pass").
(4) supports affirmative action
This is the only potentially worrisome item on your list, and his record appears spotty. In some cases, he voted against creating "set-asides", but in others, he voted to continue existing ones. "Affirmative action" is also a loaded term, it can mean anything from making good faith efforts to hire based solely on qualifications ("color-blind") to quotas and set-asides.
You can fool yourself if you want to, but most Freepers know that Paul voted with the Dems against the troops. I don’t care what your view of the constitution is, you NEVER leave soldiers flapping in the wind and you NEVER vote with Rats against troops.
You can have him. (SPIT!)
And who taught you how to make such huge leaps in logic?
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.