Posted on 05/31/2007 8:38:45 AM PDT by Politicalmom
The days of landslide wins are over why? Because of the 2000 and 2004 electoral map? Sure, the map looks like that when a large portion of the electorate is voting just to vote against the other guy. When you have a candidate that people want to vote for, a landslide is most definitely possible. Turning NY and CA red? Okay, that's as close to impossible as you can get, but an electoral victory by a large margin is not out of the question for the right candidate.
That brings us to the question of what the right kind of candidate is. The right kind of candidate is not divisive. Bush is divisive. Lots of folks that would gladly consider voting Republican absolutely HATE Bush. I've never quite understood why, (I have my ideas, but they get on the nerves of some Bush fans, so I'll leave it alone) but there is something about the man that just rubs some people the wrong way.
The right kind of candidate has the ability to get the Republican base actually excited about him. When the Republican base is excited about something, they talk about it. When they talk, they make sense and fencesitters listen to sense. That goes a long way to bringing them on board. That's how we lost the 2006 election. It wasn't over Iraq. It was because we were all so disillusioned with the Republicans that we couldn't even give anyone a good reason why they were better. All we could say was 'Speaker Pelosi'. We all know how that turned out. The same thing will happen if all we say is 'President Hillary'.
The right kind of candidate can also communicate in a straightforward manner, making the issues of the day simple and understandable to the average voter. This is something that has been sorely lacking in the White House for the past 6 years. Communication isn't only about being able to deliver a great speech. Communication is about having a command of the issues, not being afraid to say what you mean, and not having to triangulate every issue to death. Good communication comes from people knowing that you are grounded in your knowledge and principles and have the ability to express them without reservation.
From reading your posts, the first thing is popping into your head is probably, something along the lines of points one and two canceling each other out. How can we have a guy that gets the Republican base excited without him being divisive? Well, if you do some investigating into Fred, particularly watching some of his speeches and interviews, you'll see that he manages to do just that. He's not speaking about right and left. He's speaking about common sense. Most conservatism IS merely common sense.
Taking the above as a given, let's see how the other candidates measure up:
1) Rudy Giuliani
Divisiveness -- BIGTIME. But not among the electorate at large. He's more divisive among Republicans and conservatives. This isn't only to do with abortion and gay rights issues, as many would have it painted. Looking into Rudy's record shows a guy that has been liberal on most things and rabidly so. He's gone against the party on so many things in the past, that it is not unreasonable to assume that promises made to conservatives will be broken once he is in office. For these reasons (and many more), Rudy is mistrusted by a large part of the conservative base. They don't hate him. They just don't trust him.
Excitability -- Very little, due to the divisiveness problem. Also, he's shown a tin ear when it comes to issues that might make people come over to him and actually hold their nose on other things and support him. Most of the support that Rudy has comes from people convinced that we need to basically run a Dem to beat a Dem. People that are literally so afraid of Hillary that they can't see that they'd be completely giving in on the entire Republican party platform to win one single election. That's winning a battle and losing a war. A lot of us see it that way and especially after 8 years of Bush ruining the party, we can't imagine 4-8 years of Rudy continuing to pound nails in the coffin of the conservative movement.
Communication -- Here, Rudy is okay. He can give a good speech. He's quick on his feet sometimes. Not all the time, but sometimes. But he's always triangulating. He's always moderating his language so that what he is saying means nothing. Check out his statement on the day that the immigration bill was announced. What a bunch of gobbledygook. It meant nothing. Again, it is in this area that he shows a tin ear to what conservatives really want. Whenever he seems to have a chance to bring us to his side, he flounders. Something tells me that's because he doesn't want us on his side and there's a reason for that.
2) Mitt Romney
Divisiveness -- Not much. But there isn't much really to this guy to be upsetting anyone except conservatives that look at his past record of liberalism in Mass. He says the right things now though. Mitt's not divisive. He's just blah.
Excitability -- Next to none. I wish I could understand what Mitt's rabit supporters see in him that makes them so sure he's the guy. Most people I know, both here on FR and in the real world, say they COULD vote for Mitt, but aren't really motivated about it. He's just blah.
Communication -- Gives a great speech, no doubt about that. But one gets the feeling that the words are empty. Everything is so rehearsed and so polished. So triangulated and designed for certain affects at a certain time. He's like RoboCandidate.
3) John McCain
Is finished, so let's not bother...fingers need a rest.
4) Newt Gingrich
Divisiveness -- WHOA!!! THis dude is the Gingrich that stole Christmas? Need I say more?
Excitability -- Not seeing any. We all like the guy, but I haven't heard one person tell me that they're excited about him running for president.
Communication -- Excellent. One of the best, both at speeches, and at meaning what he says. He definitely fits the communication bill. If only it wasn't for all that pesky other stuff...
So, how do I know that Fred Thompson is the right candidate? It isn't because I just love the guy and want to see him win. It's because he logically fits the bill in every way.
If I may illustrate:
To illustrate how divisive Fred Thompson is, we'll need to hold our noses and visit a nasty site called demorcrats.org. Put your hip boots on prior to entry:
http://www.democrats.org/a/2007/05/the_fred_thomps.php
Check the comments there. Keep in mind that this is a hit piece on Fred Thompson on a Democrat website. Check the moonbat response and see how many of them agree with Fred. That is an example of the crossover appeal of Fred Thompson as a candidate. There are other examples, even threads at DU that go to show that they just can't hate this guy no matter how hard they try. Now, if the hardcore nutroots have this kind of feeling about the guy, think about what kind of affect he'll have on the average Dem.
I don't think we need to illustrate how excited the base is, since it is evident on this site. But if you think it's limited to this site, you're mistaken. I'm having difficulty finding a link to it, but Rush Limbaugh gave a performance about a month ago. He said "I want to test something." He then, said the words "Fred Thompson" and stepped away from the mic. The crowd literally erupted into a screaming roar at the very mention of his name. The base loves this guy.
I did find a link, however of a great explanation of Fred's popularity from a blogger named Josh Allem:
http://joshallem.blogspot.com/2007/04/whats-so-special-about-fred.html
That brings us to communication.
Here is an excellent example of Fred at his very best. This particular clip comes from BEFORE 9/11. It shows an example, not only of a guy with fantastic communications skills, but of a guy who definitely 'gets it'. Even when 'getting it' wasn't all that popular.
Here's a bit from his speech in Connecticut last week that deals with immigration:
Here's the entire speech in CT:
http://www.latestpolitics.com/blog/2007/05/fred-thompson-in-ct-the-full-video.html
Here's the Thompson interview that Josh Allem is talking about in his monalogue:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Snw7_6mJf5c
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cN3z4mqRn7I
Here is Fred's speech at the Lincoln Club last month, which some folks, (mostly Robert Novak) were not very impressed with. I enjoyed the speech. Admittedly, it wasn't Fred's best speech ever, but I still thought it was quite good. This is in 4 parts:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cN3z4mqRn7I
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MhJ5dy_MTxY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6th2VJDWO0Q
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8rwX_mzvQQ
Fred Thompson also has another quality that none of the other candidates have. He has an ability to manipulate the media and ideas that involve using the internet in new ways during the course of his campaign. A little taste of this can be had by looking into the now famous sparring that Fred had with Michael Moore several weeks ago.
That incident started with This idiotic challenge from Michael Moore.
This was Fred's response:
http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/message/index.php?id=208
I hope this clears up why some of us support Fred and where our thinking is on why Fred is the guy that can not only win, but just maybe turn conventional wisdom on it's ear.
Doubt that. Having two former/current senators on the ticket really brings nothing for a mix.
Now if I can just get the image of Fred as a LEADER, I am there. Again Thanks A Lot
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.