Posted on 07/05/2007 10:52:26 AM PDT by rodomila
"Far more troubling are the fears among Republicans that there is less to Thompson than meets the eye. He could still seize the nomination and prove a disappointing candidate in the general election. In appearances across the country, from New Hampshire to South Carolina, his speeches have ranged from "pretty decent" to "quite underwhelming." He has not yet had the knock-out performance he will need in order to prove that he is worthy of frontrunner status." Robert Novak
Try as you might, you are never going to persuade me to support your Mitt by dismissing my candidate by labeling him as someone with a “drawl”.
You reveal far more about yourself with such a remark than you do about the candidate.
By the way, Fred Thompson does not speak with a “drawl”. If anything, he has a bit of Tennessee “twang”. That you would think this a liability shows that you have a real “tin ear” for politics.
By the way I HAVE heard enough of Mitt to draw a conclusion about his speech making. I find them (and him) entirely synthetic and lacking authenticity. If the Democrats nominate Hillary, and the Republicans do finally settle on Mitt, the election will be a contest to see which of these two manufactured personalities will disintegrates first.
With Fred, you have no such worries. Fred’s the effortless real thing.
What about SCOTUS appointments?
Second, romney, like arnold, is not GENUINELY conservative enough. otherwise, neither would've been able to get elected in two of the MOST liberal states (virtual "Peoples Republics") in the entire country.
I get the feeling that romney is TOO slick. Maybe not as bad as bill clinton, but not too far from him. He's disengenuious on his support of the 2nd Amendment, having shown nothing more than timely political expediency in joining the NRA shortly before/after beginning his campaign for president. He also said he was a lifelong hunter, but I read it came out that he's been hunting TWICE. THAT sounds like ultimate FAKE outdoor "sportsman" and gun guy, john f'ing kerry. If giuliani is the king of the RINOS, romney is, at least, RINO-lite.
So, if it comes down to picking someone that is 95% REAL CONSERVATIVE (even given that he supported mccain-feingold, he says that the main reason he voted for it was to get rid of the soft money donations, not to stifle political speech 30/60 days out from an election), OPENLY and GENUINELY supports our 2nd Amendment rights, etc., I don't give a shiite (and I would bet most conservatives don't either) if he has a Southern drawl (which he barely does anyway).
We need to strongly differentiate ourselves from the dems, NOT be dem-lite. Thompson is MOSTLY CONSERVATIVE, and he's about as far from PC as politicians come these days. We don't need another slick pretty boy, especially if he's a RINO. We need a tough, no nonsense conservative that tells it like it is, and backs up his word with action.
RINO-rudy doesn't fit that bill, and neither does RINO-romney. I believe Thompson can do the job as president, and scare the shiite out of our enemies, both foreign and domestic (dems and RINOs).
We need another Reagan or Teddy Roosevelt type at the helm, not a little Gestapo-like, Himmleresque rudy, or a GQ pretty BLUE-boy like romney.
Judicial appointments are a huge issue, I admit. But if Dubya's appointments can be challenged and delayed, so could Hillary's. I have no reason to think that Rudy would be better in that department, and Romney's demonstrated propensity for bigger government involvement in all aspects of life, from health insurance to environmentalism, doesn't bode well, either.
Given the current political environment, its better to go with newcomer Romney and his unknown upside, than a known conservative with a limited electoral appeal. If you're going to go down, go down swinging!
Well, as you know, we went through this same dilemma in CA with Arnold.
Some said it would’ve been better if Angelides had won.
I’m still glad we don’t allow driver’s licenses for illegals, or gay marriage, both of which would’ve been legalized in a heartbeat by the dems.
Arnold is a mess, though.
Not trying to stir up that hot debate again ~ I just can’t agree with you about allowing Hillary, or Bill, anywhere near the White House for even 5 minutes.
The damage they’ve done to our culture is already all but irreparable.
You’re right ~ the judicial appointments ARE a huge issue.
Let’s hope a CONSERVATIVE wins.
Dude, I spent the first 24 years of my life in Texas, I say “y’all” myself, and I’m still proud to call a Confederate state home. A drawl doesn’t bother me in the slightest. I have, however, also lived in the northeast, midwest, and southwest and I can tell you that the GOP’s increasing identification as the “Southern party” does not help us in those regions. Wouldn’t it be nice to have a candidate who could compete and win in places like Wisconsin, Michigan, Iowa, Pennsylvania, Minnesota etc.? There’s a lot of electoral votes in them thar hills.
She won't have to. Her minions in the MSM will see to it that any missteps she makes will be buried and never see the light of day.
Can you say YouTube?
I’m from the North, and Fred Thompson is playing very well in these parts, thanks.
Fred Thompson won’t have the slightest problem connecting with foks in Wisconsin, Michigan, Iowa, Pennsylvania, New York, Minnesota, North Dakota or Ohio. No problem at all.
“Novak is a Rudy guy. “
What is it about Rudy that journalists love so much?
He’s a mediocre candidate with great press.
As for Thompson ... “From New Hampshire to South Carolina, his speeches have ranged from “pretty decent” to “quite underwhelming.” He has not yet had the knock-out performance he will need in order to prove that he is worthy of frontrunner status.” Robert Novak”
I haven’t seen *ANY* candidate be a knock out yet, except Romney on a good night.
“The GOP needs an enthusiastic committed base from the start, to win in Nov. 2008. And right now? The only thing that would make them enthusiastic is the near guarentee conservatism won’t be shut out again.”
I agree, but only Rudy and McCain fall into the disqualified category. conservatives have to come together on one good strong candidate and make sure he will WIN.
It’s either Hunter, Romney, or Thompson.
You must be joking.
“Thompson’s the one, until Newt Gingrich enters the race in September....”
my worst fear: Gingrich jumps in, divides the conservative vote, so he and Thompson don’t gain traction; Romney almost makes it, but Rudy wins by taking the RINO vote as McCain’s candidacy crashes and burns, and Romney, Thompson and Gingrich divide the conservative vote (and Hunter et al stay in sub 3% range).
Consequently, although I once welcomed Gingrich’s entry, I now fear it. we need a strong consensus conservative candidate to ensure Rudy isnt nominated, and Newt aint it.
“By the way I HAVE heard enough of Mitt to draw a conclusion about his speech making. I find them (and him) entirely synthetic and lacking authenticity.”
LOL, Romney is the most geniune person (eg lives family values doesnt just talk it) with the most *non*political accomplishments of any of the candidates - in both parties.
And the biggest hyped-up faker in the whole race, Barack Obama, is wowing crowds with his ‘genuiness’. The world is upside down.
“Fred’s the effortless real thing.”
Fred, the actor, is the ‘real thing’? LOL.
I dont think its fair to assume Thompson is not electable vis a vis Romney.
You know what makes a candidate ‘electable’ - A GOOD CANDIDATE WHO RUNS A GOOD CAMPAIGN.
One reason I think even conservatives should consider Romney a top-choice is that (a) he is running the best campaign and (b) he is running as a Reagan-style conservative (the main hit on him is that it is purely opportunism, etc., but at least he is running as a fullbore conservative which is more than you got out of Dole, and are getting out of Mccain and Rudy).
Romney has so far earned status because of his good campaign.
As for Thompson, why wouldn’t he be as electable as any other? He has the right set of mainstream conservative positions to unite the party. The question is - CAN HE RUN A GOOD CAMPAIGN? the jury is out on that. I am wary that his late entry may hide potential weaknesses until its too late to course-correct to win a primary or general election. The sooner he is vetted in debates and in speaking venues, the better.
Rudy’s a liberal. Not just a Liberal, but he is not a social conservative. Romney has flip flopped a bit, but he did come out against the gay marriage ruling. Mccain attacked Christians in 2000 and put a wrench into confirming good judges, but lately he’s been trying to get back in Christian’s good graces and proudly proclaiming he’s pro-life.
I don’t think I’m exagerating when I say Rudy’s unapologetic social liberalism is his greatest draw to a guy like Novak, and to all of the elitists pushing him. It would even be a draw to liberatarians, most seem to have a prejudice against social conservatives as well, if not for the fact Rudy is not a small government low tax cut spending guy either.
The elites of both parties would love nothing more then to have no option for social conservatives in either party.
The part about no knock out performance directly conflicts with other accounts of people at these events. I suppose it comes down to a he said/he said argument except I discount Novak’s opinion.
Truthfully, I’m so cynical about all of the presidential contenders i would declare no one to have had an amazing performance on either side yet. For that to happen, I’d have to believe they were telling me the truth and I’ve been too burned to easily bestow that kind of faith yet. The only guys I give that type of warm applause to these days are Sessions and DeMint. Hunter, too, but that brings us to the third point.
I like Hunter, I believe him, but his I.D. is so low he’s unlikely to win. He is my choice, though, win or no win until Thompson convinces me he’s the genuine article. I don’t want another Bush and while I’m leaning to Thompson, it’s by no means a done deal.
I do think Romney will probably be the default candidate if Thompson proves a fraud for conservatives But I don’t believe he’ll win, and I don’t believe enough conservatives will jump on board just to beat Hill. Myself included. I just don’t believe in his conservative evolution. If he had waited ten years to run and gotten heavily involved in the conservative movement like Reagan, it would be different.
You think Fred Thompson is an ACTOR? Now that has ME rolling around laughing. Have you actually seen him act? He's a worse actor than John Wayne!
Thank goodness he never gave up his day job - politics.
“Rudy’s a liberal. Not just a Liberal, but he is not a social conservative. “
Agreed. it’s nto just his admanant pro-NARAL speeches and pro-gay-rights kneejerk views; he was against the 1996 welfare bill that the Newt Gingrich GOP Congress passed; he was a ‘sanctuary cities’ mayor; gun control issues; former mcgovern supporter who is tough on crime but liberal in many other respects. So he is not acceaptable and yet the DC and NYC ‘conservative’ press (George Will, Deroy Murdock, Novak, NY Sun, etc.) are in the tank for him. I’d add the Weekly Standard but Kristol’s been a McCain fan for far too long.
The only options for conservatives now that I see are
Romney and Thompson. Hunter too if you are willing to support a great man who will not get the nomination.
“I like Hunter, I believe him, but his I.D. is so low he’s unlikely to win.”
Agreed.
“I do think Romney will probably be the default candidate if Thompson proves a fraud for conservatives But I don’t believe he’ll win, and I don’t believe enough conservatives will jump on board just to beat Hill. Myself included.”
More’s the pity, because Romney has imho the potential to be a FAR BETTER PRESIDENT FOR CONSERVATIVES than EITHER BUSH.
I wont do a Reagan comparison, but know at least this much: It’s clear that Romney knows business and finance better than the Bush’s and a real fiscal conservative. He will keep the budgets down. He’s lines up the right kinds of economic and foreign policy wonk advisors. As for values, his lifestyle confirms the kind of pro-family pro-traditional-marriage statements he’s made. Romney won’t be a movement conservative but he will be a good right-of-center leader.
“I just don’t believe in his [Romney’s] conservative evolution.” — I studied the matter close enough to understand that Romney will be a mainstream conservative president, and a very effective executive to boot; he is someone who admires Eisenhower.
“If he had waited ten years to run and gotten heavily involved in the conservative movement like Reagan, it would be different.”
Good point. That lack of faith in Romney may be his achilles heel. I believe Romney, but the lack of faith from our own current elites in DC makes it a hard sell. Leads us back to Thompson ... who we both agree may be a good conservative candidate but who needs to prove himself.
“Truthfully, I’m so cynical about all of the presidential contenders i would declare no one to have had an amazing performance on either side yet. For that to happen, I’d have to believe they were telling me the truth and I’ve been too burned to easily bestow that kind of faith yet.”
Fair enough ...
“He [Hunter] is my choice, though, win or no win until Thompson convinces me he’s the genuine article. I don’t want another Bush and while I’m leaning to Thompson, it’s by no means a done deal.”
Sounds like a rational conclusion. For now.
I do think it is important for conservatives to keep our heads on our shoulders here, and not to let the elites or liberals stampede us into a choice that gives the liberals a win.
I won’t be unhappy with any of Romney, Thompson or Hunter, but that is not enough for 2008. We need to be both united and excited for the candidate who emerges to carry the Republican banner and has a fighting chance to defeat the Democrats. Without a doubt, the Dems will have the better terrain in 2008. That candidate will have to be “right” on immigration, spending, the GWOT, and social issues - all the issues where the elites have been at war with the people over. And beyodn being right, he has to charismatic and energetic enough, connecting with people well enough to *win* the voters over.
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.