His mind is made up. He's in.
Right now he's planning, laying the groundwork, and forming his team. He's a sly ol Country boy, don't forget.
Don't fret, Fred's a one man Republican sleeper cell! :O)
P
Posted on 04/12/2007 9:47:39 PM PDT by STARWISE
Now, wouldn’t you think FNC would leave it on their site?
Jeesh.
Well, I found the transcript of the 2nd segment:
~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,265601,00.html
CAVUTO: You said you are doing this because just get it out there in case you do run for president. What would it take for you to run for president?
THOMPSON: It is a process, Neil. And it is an intensely personal thing for me. I have never really craved to be president. But I do have a desire to be able to do those things that only a president can do. And that is to have the opportunity to lead your country through perilous times. These are different times. These are perilous times.
I guess as I get a little older I’m different than I have been in times past, look at things differently, and I have always thought that the person and the times have to come together. The person and the country has to be in sync. You can’t manufacture these things, or force fit them or figure out what people want to hear. And it is a tactical matter to succeed in politics, to an extent, but when you are running for president it is more than that.
CAVUTO: Yes, but you and the times might be in sync. And you polled very well. Depending on the poll, you are up to second right now without announcing anything. So there is no doubt.
THOMPSON: I told someone the other day I can’t afford to announce, I’m doing too well.
CAVUTO: You are doing too well.
(LAUHGTER)
CAVUTO: Having said that, though, the one thing where you are not in sync is with the money. There is no Fred Thompson groundswell of money, so that puts you at a distinct disadvantage to the Mitt Romneys, to the Rudolph Giulianis, to the John McCains, right?
THOMPSON: Neil, I have never thought that you would engage in this old way of thinking.
(LAUGHTER)
THOMPSON: The fact of the matter is that the book has been you have got to get out and run for years and lay your financial framework and raise — in this case, in this year, the book was you have got raise $100 million. So many people got out and did that, followed the book and raised their money, spent most of it, and now here we are.
There is no question that if a person — in my case, if I decide to do this, that if I run and I am perceived by the people to be someone who can help this country in a time when it needs help, the money will be there. We are looking at it the wrong way. The money doesn’t come first; the money comes in response to the person.
CAVUTO: But money gives you a great head start, doesn’t it?
THOMPSON: Well, I have already got a good head start. I have been around, and when you consider Watergate and serving as counsel as a lawyer for a couple of committees and serving in the United States Senate, eight years in the United States Senate. I now serve as chairman of the International Security Advisory Board of the State Department, Condoleezza Rice asked me to head up. I have been around for a while and...
CAVUTO: You have got the name recognition. A certain show called “Law & Order” helps that, too. So you do have something that a lot of your potential competitors do not. But...
THOMPSON: We all have our assets and our liabilities, but it is just not — it is not like I’m having to come out of the blue. I’m pretty much of a known quantity.
CAVUTO: What would make you not run then? If you looked at the landscape and if it wasn’t money, which clearly doesn’t seem to impact you one way or the other, what would make Fred Thompson sit back and say, well, I’m not going to run?
THOMPSON: Well, you are probably getting a little bit into the weeds more than I would like to, and to ruminate about things like that. But clearly as the categories that I have talked about, I think the business/professional side can be worked out fine.
And we have had a lot of discussions and prayer about the personal side, and — but if it turned out that didn’t feel like I could do it without abandoning my family, and, you know, going on the road for months at a time, and for all practical purposes, just checking every once in a while. I wouldn’t do that.
Life is too short for that, under any circumstances. And I don’t think it has to be done that way. I know people will expect that of everyone to run frenetically around for years. And I don’t do frenetic very well.
But when I decide to run, you know, so far I have always won. I haven’t lost an election yet, and I’m not interested in winning — in losing another one. I would have to feel like that not only I could win, but I could win the general. The primary is one thing, and it is very important, but it is not the goal. I’m not interested in carrying the banner off a cliff.
CAVUTO: How about carrying the second half of the.
(CROSSTALK)
THOMPSON: I want to carry the banner up the hill to the top of the hill if I do it. And I have to — in my own mind, that has to fit. I have to be able to do that.
CAVUTO: How about the vice presidency?
THOMPSON: Not interested in that.
CAVUTO: Not interested. So if any one of those candidates say, you know, Fred, you are just the guy I need, the Republican lock on the South isn’t such a lock?
(LAUGHTER)
THOMPSON: Nothing is a lock anymore, and the Republicans have their challenges, shall we say. You know, some people think that we are starting out, you know, kind of waist deep in a ditch, and we are going to have to dig out of it; and we are not on equal footing at all.
Some of our — most of our people match up pretty good on the other side, but generically, as far as the party is concerned, we have fallen way behind. We have got to do some things differently, and we have got to do some things better than we have ever done before if we are going to be successful. All of that goes into it.
And all of it is — it is not a pretty picture. There is going to have to be a different way of looking at doing things by the party, and a different attitude, in some respects, by the American people, in terms of responding to a call for sacrifice when it is called for.
CAVUTO: And you don’t think that we have?
THOMPSON: I don’t think that we have been called on enough with regard to enough things. I think that we could have done a lot better in a lot of different areas. There are problems out there that need to be solved.
We argue about little budgetary matters. Just one example, budgetary matters and the deficit and so forth, and that is important. But it is minuscule compared to the avalanche of debt we are going to be facing with the retirement of the Baby Boomers and our entitlement programs. And people think nobody is willing to touch that. It is dangerous to deal with that.
CAVUTO: Well, the president tried, right? I mean, he was burnt badly on the third rail.
THOMPSON: With regard to Social Security, he tried, to his everlasting credit.
CAVUTO: How would a President Thompson change that?
THOMPSON: …it was DOA. Well, there are a lot of parts to that. You have to ultimately have the support of the American people. It is not a matter of kumbaya-ing over at — with Congress; it is having the support of the American people. That is where the power is in a democracy, and in a republic such as ours as a people.
If you have their support, then you can reach some bipartisan consensus. The other side is not going to reach consensus with you because you have coffee with them on a regular basis. They are going to look and see what kind of support you have got with the American people. If you can communicate...
(CROSSTALK)
CAVUTO: So you would be the kind of guy to go over Congress’ head and talk to the American people and kind of say, hey, here is the deal, this is what we are going to.
THOMPSON: I don’t know whether it is over or under or around.
(LAUGHTER)
THOMPSON: But I would speak plainly and truthfully to the American people, and if they responded to the message I think the way — if they understood the necessity to do things that need to be done, you would have the support there and you would have a basis for reaching a consensus in — with Congress.
CAVUTO: All right. We have other future interviews to delve more into issues. I do want to get back to the lymphoma and gauge what will be the reaction over the next few days. Obviously you are here with me now, announcing this on the Internet today, to gauge reaction.
Now what if in the next few days and weeks the American people who, by and large, kind of like Fred Thompson, say, we are worried about Fred, we are worried about his health, we would rather he’d not run for president? Does Fred Thompson then not run for president?
THOMPSON: In all probability, that would be the result. If I feel that the people out there — the average people who have called me and written me and e-mailed me and sent their comments in on the blogs and so forth, if I felt like they were seriously concerned about this, that would weigh very heavily with me.
That would be a piano on my back that a person doesn’t need when they go through this. And I would say, thank you very much for the consideration. It is clearly not the time and the place for me to do this, and I respect that and I will just go back to helping out however other way that I can.
CAVUTO: So you have got a timeframe in your head I imagine, right?
THOMPSON: Yes.
CAVUTO: So, at by which time, yea or nay, do you say to the White House, I’m going for it?
THOMPSON: Well, I said I had one in my head, I didn’t say I was going to tell you.
(LAUGHTER)
CAVUTO: Well, why did I have the feeling you would say that? So, is it fair to say, Senator, weeks, months before...
THOMPSON: I don’t want to get into a timeframe, you know, we will know it when it comes, and, you know, frankly, I don’t expect that. I mean, if I expected that, I wouldn’t be, you know, going public with it in this broad way.
I mean, it is a private thing. People know about it, fine, but going public in this way is really primarily because I want, you know, to shoot straight with the American people and see what their reaction is to it.
CAVUTO: So you don’t see any danger in the longer you put this off, the more under the gun politically you might be because all of your opponents will have been to Iowa and New Hampshire, a gazillion...
THOMPSON: No, no. I think the danger — I don’t consider it a danger, but just a fact of life. The longer you don’t have your machinery in place, the more they are going engage in, what I refer to as ankle- biting and sniping and whispering and calling out anonymously on the talk shows and things like that, you know.
CAVUTO: Who has been doing that?
THOMPSON: . which is kind of aggravating. Well, there have been rumors to that effect, you know.
CAVUTO: OK.
THOMPSON: And I consider it a compliment at this stage of the game when they do it.
CAVUTO: Republicans — Democrats, or more Republicans?
THOMPSON: So you have got — I don’t know, it is no big deal. But you do, after a while — you know, you are sitting out there and everybody is nibbling. And so, you know, you need to be able to deal that on a level basis.
But in terms of the people, there are an awful lot of people out there who are uncommitted. An awful lot of people out there who have voluntarily called me and told me they are going to keep their powder dry until I decide what I’m doing.
So, that is good enough for me. I don’t have to have a lock or a cinch or a bid, ahead in the polls in order to make a decision to do this. All I need is a fair shot. And if this works out, and these other boxes are successfully checked off with my family and — you know, these other problems are not going to deter me. They are very, very small compared to the opportunities that are out there for the country and for a person to lead the country.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
~~~~~~~~
I wish I could hear it again. I could listen to him for hours.
I agree with you 100%. One of my issues is that the candidate must be a great communicator. It’s a real shame that so many opportunities have been lost because W. didn’t communicate effectively.
But aren’t we setting ourselves up for another loss on principle if we nominate someone that people from many different GOP constituencies say outright they can’t support? Set aside for a moment whether you agree with voting third party or sitting it out based on principle: if significant numbers of both social conservatives and libertarian-type republicans can’t vote for Rudy in the general, where does he get the votes he’ll need to make up the difference, plus more to put him over the top?
I think both Thompson and Romney would turn out to be more electable than Rudy — most here say that they could at least hold their noses and vote for Mitt.
She’s waaay too shrill and way too impersonable. Her leads are crumbling, and the moonbat hoards are not happy with her.
I peronsally think Romney, Thompson, or Giuliani could beat her. Of those, I’d go with:
Thompason>Romney>>>Giuliani>>>>>>>>>Hillary or any other Rat.
Time will tell on Hillary. We are told Edwards is "surging" and Obama is too but the Clinton's have a way of getting their competition out of the way either through unfortunate "accidents" or last minute dirt-digging. We Republicans will need all the help we can get to win.
“not a bomb thrower”
Shoot... Sometimes we need bomb throwers.
Run, Fred, your country needs you
How about electability?
I certainly appreciate your support of Thompson, but on the above, you are full of it...
1. Bush has been a disaster
2. Hilary doesn’t have any core beliefs... She would govern by sticking her finger in the air. And as far as the Commander and Chief part, She would be out to prove that she can be more hawkish and has more balls than any man...
I emphatically disagree with ALL your Pres. Bush and Shrillery statements.
I don’t know if Thompson is electable or not... He will certainly get my vote.
However, Rudy is not electable, in my opinion. And Hilary may be better than Rudy, since the republicans would fight her but not him...
That’s OK... as long as we both keep supporting Fred!
Unless you get offensive again and tell me “you are full of it.”
Very electable. McCain's bout with cancer should be much more of a concern to his supporters but it's never mentioned.
Like it or not, a large percentage of Americans don’t like “hard core” anything. Mushy moderates, I call them.
Any candidate is going to need to be attractive to them in order to win the election or primary for that matter.
You know this of course, but since you grabbed the one quote from the article that can be used as “ammo” against Thompson, at least here on FR, I thought I’d counter with the voice of reason.
“not a bomb thrower”
Shoot... Sometimes we need bomb throwers.”
If Wamp doesn’t call what he has said in recent interviews, and Redstate/Paul Harvey comentary bomb throwing, then I don’t know what does?
Conservative issues continue to be election winners. The problem is that those principles are based on empowering the people at the expense of the government, and the people who are attracted to work in government have to go against their interest to support them.
We’re asking the mice to guard the cheese, but only if they promise to leave it alone.
I'm certain they eventually will - right after you admit to being on the payroll of the Giuliani campaign.
LOL...
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.