Posted on 08/17/2007 9:47:53 AM PDT by SmithL
IN JUST two weeks, Fred Thompson will finally announce his formal entry into the 2008 presidential race and instantly become the biggest Republican threat to Rudy Giuliani.
The long-anticipated move by the former "Law and Order" star begins today with his arrival at the Iowa State Fair, where he will face his first real test before actual voters. Giuliani still holds a 10-point advantage over him in national polls, according to RealClearPolitics, but Thompson has seen his own support steadily grow while Giuliani's slowly erodes, from a high of nearly 40 percent earlier this year to below 30 percent now.
The biggest question for Republicans frustrated with the field is whether Thompson has waited so long to enter the race that he's blown any chance of capturing the nomination.
In the months since he began openly flirting with the idea, Thompson's fund-raising has disappointed supporters, he's burned through staff, and a negative story line about his wife, Jeri, meddling with the staff has begun to dog the campaign.
Yet he remains in the strongest position to pick off Giuliani, and hopes to become the real straight talker with big, gutsy ideas whose conservative credentials are beyond reproach.
Thompson's biggest gift over the last few months has been the collapse of Arizona Sen. John McCain's campaign. Once the presumed favorite, McCain is skidding barely above single digits in national polls.
Traditional political observers, of course, go berserk if you consider national polls.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Is Fred a member of the Council on Foreign Relations? Will I get banned for asking the question?
I wonder if Romney would take a VP slot?
Well, don’t get me wrong here, I’m not intending to start a flame war like the one that started here yesterday.
My original point was that Fred Thompson is taking an unusually long time to announce compared to other candidates and that it’s entirely possible that 1) he doesn’t run, and 2) if he does, and waits much longer, it may be too late. I also believe that this may be a reflection on his leadership qualities, which many on here have disputed.
My mistakes here were responding to a select few of the most obnoxious posters on this thread thus provoking them into more obnoxious posts and also announcing to them that I filed the abuse report (it just became flame bait, although I guess it helped prove my point). It made for good entertainment to be sure, but did little to nothing to foster discussion.
I can see that...
The attention he is getting from folks like us, who really see the deep convictions, conservative ideals and principles both Thompson and Hunter possess...
Both will be going far in the future...
As for the Rudy-bots, and Mitt-ens groupies...Yeah guys and gals...You do have a very tough road to hoe ahead when Fred officially announces...No doubt about it...
There is just this little thing called grass-roots that are not going to be fooled by campaign rhetoric and steering to the center (from either direction) this time...
I have nothing personal against either Rudy or Mitt at all...They are stand up guys, but their record and opinions on some key issues in the past are not selling very well...
And thats what is going to moderate them in the field once Mr. Thompson gets into it...
And that is what has the Republican party leadership, and a few other boosters nervous...And thats their problem...Not mine...
I guess you finally regained consciousness enough for another at-bat.
Guess what? The other candidates jumped in way earlier than past campaigns. And it's hurt them. Polls clearly show that a majority of voters are already sick of all the blabbering.
George Bush declared in June of 1999. John Kerry declared in September 2003. Fred declaring in September is well in line with history.
Stee-rike SEVEN! Any more nonsense you wish to add to this debate?
This nonsense has gone long enough.
Here I am, trying to settle things down and wrap things up, and there you go again trying to stir up the pot again.
Unlike some people I actually have a job, and can’t sit around all day tossing around baseball insults.
The fact of the matter is, the race is on whether we like it or not. There is already a full slate of candidates before us at this time unlike years past. You make the mistake of comparing this election, where there is no incumbent President or Vice President, with elections past. I don’t care whether or not people are sick of it— the primaries are earlier this year (no thanks to Florida). Just because people are sick of the campaigns doesn’t give a late enterer any sort of advantage— in fact, people are probably turned off at this point and if Thompson does announce, very few except the diehards would notice, which would actually put him at a disadvantage.
If you stop making nonsensical posts (such as claiming Tennesee was a safe GOP state when Fred was elected twice), I'll quit calling you on your nonsense. But if you insist on posting falsehoods and/or lame analysis, I'll keeping calling strikes on such.
You make the mistake of comparing this election, where there is no incumbent President or Vice President, with elections past
And like I said, polling shows voters are already tired of the campaigning. It was a calculated risk for candidates to enter so early, and it appears to have backfired. Rudy has spent months twisting in knots trying to deal with his liberal past. Mitt has made some headway, but still trails Fred, who hasn't even entered the race. Duncan Hunter has gone nowhere. So much for the effectiveness of early entry.
I don’t care whether or not people are sick of it—
You do show a tendency to not let the facts get in the way of your opinions.
the primaries are earlier this year (no thanks to Florida).
Florida was moved up in May - well after candidates jumped in early, so it played no role in their decision to do such. Another factual detail that you got wrong.
Re: above statement—
Please scratch the “There is already a full slate of candidates before us at this time unlike years past. “ statement. I can’t quite prove it. The rest of the argument stands as is.
Too funny. You struck YOURSELF out this time.
Are you going to address the main point?
Just because people are sick of the campaigns doesn’t give a late enterer any sort of advantage— in fact, people are probably turned off at this point, which would put a late enterer like Fred at a disadvantage.
Or is that just a straw man?
I did. In detail. It apparently went right over your head.
Just because people are sick of the campaigns doesn’t give a late enterer any sort of advantage
Where did I claim late entry was an advantage? To the contrary, YOU are the one claiming it to be a disadvantage. I was simply countering your false claim with historical examples. I see Fred's entry in September as neutral - it is up to him to make it work, but the entry in September does not in and of itself present an issue to winning the nomination, as Kerry showed in 2003-2004.
So yet again, you cannot follow a coherent line of debate.
Or is that just a straw man?
Next time you throw a grenade, pull the pin first.
When you said this:
It was a calculated risk for candidates to enter so early, and it appears to have backfired. Rudy has spent months twisting in knots trying to deal with his liberal past. Mitt has made some headway, but still trails Fred, who hasn't even entered the race. Duncan Hunter has gone nowhere. So much for the effectiveness of early entry.
In other words, "early entry" backfired and was a disadvantage, thus making late entry by default an advantage.
And for the record, Mitt does not trail Fred in Iowa, where Fred's behind by a 2-1 margin, or in New Hampshire (same margin). The two are in a statistical dead heat in Florida, both well behind Giuliani. The Republican primaries/caucuses are not run nationwide, making national polls meaningless. Once he does get into the race, he will have some significant ground to make up.
More false logic on your part. I was showing that the early entry has NOT gained an advantage for the candidates. I never said Fred entering in September gains him an advantage.
So, I guess its on to the next logical fallacy for you.
for the record, Mitt does not trail Fred in Iowa,
Mitt trails Fred in all national polls by a fair distance.
The Republican primaries/caucuses are not run nationwide, making national polls meaningless.
Howard Dean was 20 points ahead of John Kerry in NH polls in December of 2003 - which shows state polls are meaningless.
National polls give a good indication of the overall strength of a candidate's base of support and help with fundraising.
Strike ten.
Fredheads should avoid the word "charisma" at all costs. Where charisma is concerned, Fred is a black hole.
You're a joke, and a lame one at that. Fred has more charisma than the other candidates combined. Including Mitt. Mitt comes off as too slick.
Pretty strong response to someone who merely disagrees with your adoration of Fred.
That must be why they call you "dirtboy."
Again, you are comparing this election to elections past.
Howard Dean was also a frontrunner in those same national polls at the same time. He fell right before Iowa when they saw that he was trailing Bush heavily in head-to-head polling.
It's one thing to disagree.
It's another to make a patently absurd and false statement about Fred's charisma.
That must be why they call you "dirtboy."
Yeah, someone else picked my screen name for me. Your intellectual powers are overwhelming.
Gawd, IMAGINE THAT. Looking to past elections for clues as to how this election might go down. Silly me.
You are welcome to stay here and continue to make a fool of yourself. I gotta go paint some cabinets. Adios.
And I must go to work as well. Arrivederci.
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.