Posted on 04/10/2007 5:00:14 PM PDT by SE Mom
Proof please.
“Fred Thompson has lymphoma....is in remission...will talk with Neil Cavuot today on FOX”
If this is the case, he should not run. He will not have the energy-level sufficient to pursue the presidency.
Can you name a single conservative candidate who can win a single blue state (which really amounts to a handful of blue cities)?
Or, explain why conservatives want to elect a liberal Republican just to block the election of a liberal Democrat?
Can you explain how this would be a “win” of any kind?
It’s called “vetting” the issues that will come up in the campaign, before someone else has a chance to frame the issue...
Well done Fred!
This is another tip of his hand...
Proof please. I see you have chosen to ignore answering this.
writeblock is ignoring all the obvious challenges to his/her remarks...
LOL
Yes, either a troll, a shill, or ignorant. I’ve this type before. All talk and no substance.
Just got a breaking news e-mail that said Fred Thompson is recovering from Lymphoma or is in remission from Lymphoma.
1. Rudy Giuliani is a conservative candidate with liberal proclivities on the social issues. But he is still a conservative. He backs the war on terror, he backs cutting taxes, he backs school vouchers, he backs capital punishment, he backs workfare programs, he backs shrinking government, he backs the military, he is strong on national defense. These are conservative issues. All this talk about how “liberal” he is is just that—talk. Even on backburner issues like abortion and gun-control he is less liberal than his Democratic counterparts.
2. The real enemy of conservative values is liberal socialism—which is the political philosophy of the Democratic Party. Therefore our primary goal should be to defeat the Democrats who are far better prepared to win the next election than we are. Not only is the country surfeited by Bush fatigue, but the Democrats have registered 15% more voters than the Republicans this time around, they have more money than we have, and they have the added advantage of changing migration patterns which are fast changing some of our red states into purple ones. No Republican candidate can win in the next election, therefore, unless he can pick up some of the bigger blue and purple states. That is simple a basic fact. So the outlook for us looks fairly grim unless we can nominate somebody with broad appeal across party lines and win some of these crucial states.
3, Given the above facts, you can forget about Hunter, Thompson, Romney, and Gingrich. You can probably also forget about McCain whose appeal is diminishing daily. Only Rudy shows solid blue and purple state appeal. Right now that means he would win PA, FL and NJ—which would easily hand him the WH. But more than this, he is not only competitive in CT, OH, and OR, but he would probably give any Democrat a serious run for the money in CA as well. Couple this with the mountain states and the South and you’re looking at a potential landslide victory—which would restore Congress to the GOP and sweep Pelosi and Reid out of office. THAT’S why you should be thinking about Rudy. Not because he shares your views on abortion or gun-control, but because he would be a big winner who would not only deal a great blow to social liberalism, but might very well also bring Boehner and McConnell into power. That’s the broader political picture we all should consider seriously rather than indulging in petty squabbles centered on one or two social issues.
I saw that too...the entire gist of it is he was diagnosed 3 years ago, and hasn’t had any issues. It’s not the bad kind and is treatable, with no ill effect on his day to day living.
“Proof please. I see you have chosen to ignore answering this.”
Why not examine the thread entitled: “Fred Thompson in 1994: LET THE WOMAN DECIDE”? This should answer your point. He’s not the confirmed conservative on social issues some of you think he is.
Maybe you should do just a little more research, solidify your position, bring articulation to the debate. I have time.
Oh, and his Pro-Life votes are proof of his stance on abortion.
“I saw that too...the entire gist of it is he was diagnosed 3 years ago, and hasn’t had any issues. It’s not the bad kind and is treatable, with no ill effect on his day to day living.”
Yes, it is treatable and he will probably live a normal life span. But it still takes a toll on a person’s energy levels. I very much doubt Thompson would be up to the kind of hard campaigning a presidential election would require. That’s just the way it is. I doubt now he will run.
Rudy is indeed the “purple” candidate, and you are clearly a “purple” voter, all of which is fine my friend.
However, “purple” is NOT conservative and this is exactly why “purple” will NOT get the conservative voter today, as you can see by reading all of the conservative posts on this thread and many others.
Rudy’s biggest problem is “timing”. Had he been able to run with his 9/11 hero status in 2000, before eight years of Bush “compassionate conservatism” “purple” leadership, he most likely could have won.
But in 2008, after eight years of “purple” leadership, the conservative base of the Republican Party has had it with “purple” RINO leaders and they are NOT going to support another RINO even more “purple” than Bush.
You don’t have to believe me, read all the posts on this thread and tell me what you see?
You explained the Rudy problem perfectly. You just failed to follow it all the way to its undeniable conclusion.
For Rudy or any of the other RINOs to win in ‘08, they will have to do it without the support of the conservative base of their party. This means, they can only win with “blue city” voters.
Who will “blue city” voters support in ‘08, Hillary, Obama or Rudy?
“bring articulation to the debate. I have time.”
So have I. And I’ve noted precious little “articulation” on your part explaining why anyone should back Thompson beyond the fact that he’s not Rudy. Sounds less than fully articulate to me. Meanwhile examine my above post in which I articulate fully why Rudy should be backed by all Republicans.
He actually has stated many times that it should be a “state issue”, not a womans right. He has correctly stated that it is NOT a womans constitutional right and that the faulty case law that made it so should be over-turned, returning the issue to the people at the state level.
That’s his formal position on abortion and always has been, so far as I know.
Your position above outlines many of Rudy's problems. Abortion, gun-control are certainly not 'back-burner' issues as you suggest. They are some of the core values of conservatives. Unfortunately, Rudy has not shown himself to be the candidate that fits the role that most of the Republican party is made up of, social conservatives.
His views on the singular issues of abortion and gun-control will not carry very many, if any, of the southern states or the west. His abilities to 'fire back' at the media also show a preclivity to argument instead of negotiation, something a chief executive HAS to have to survive in Washington.
Rudy is not entirely conservative and not entirely liberal, but his propensity for liberalism and his apparent inability to stand firm in one place on issues such as gay-rights, gun-control, and abortion have a lot of the conservatine/Republican party waiting for something better.
Rudy doesn't fit the bill, Thompson does.
Oh, and one more thing, now that I think about it. ALL the candidates are strong on the WoT. They all have different perspectives on how to conduct it. Iraq is the contentious issue. Some say we shouldn’t be there, mostly the Defeatocrats, they don’t realize Iraq is part of a global war.
Most of them (The anti-Rudys) were absolutely certain that when Thompson appeared on the scene, Rudy would crash and burn (Their exact sentiments) but all Thompson managed to do was end all chances for Hunter, Brownback, Romney and McCain.
Thompson will not be able to handle the stress of a Presidency and not have his cancer reoccur (like Tony Snow) and he knows full and well what it means. It is all but obvious in Fred’s body language but his hopeful supporters who revere him as their savior, refuse to accept reality.
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.