Posted on 09/08/2007 3:35:13 PM PDT by Checkers
Now that Fred Thompson is officially in the race, it is appropriate to say that he is, on the face of it, by far the weakest potential president of the top tier Republicans.
Strongest is Giuliani who, alone of all the candidates in both parties, has done something. Two things—saved New York City; and led America for two days six years ago.
Mitt Romney has been governor of an important, largeish state; has run a business; and saved the Olympics at a dicey moment.
John McCain has spent his political career in the Senate, typically a graveyard of energy. And yet, as everyone acknowledges, he is a leader (even when he is leading in the wrong direction).
Fred Thompson came to the offices of National Review some years when he was still in the Senate. I liked him fine. He has done nothing, anywhere, ever. The Hubble Telescope could not find what he has done, because he has not done it.
It would be unwise to put such a man in the White House at this moment in history.
I think that he’s a bit “dimwhitted” too.
Yeah, a state that instituted "Romney-Care," a plan far to the Left of the old "HillaryCare" that we knew would bankrupt the nation.
LLS
He was a respected prosecutor, much like Rudy G, before he ever became an actor.
I think it’s a fair, factual analysis. I’m interested in Fred, but he doesn’t have executive experience. That worries me. Of course, everyone else he mentioned has their own issues...
So he is recommending that we vote for a liberal or a RINO rather than a consistent conservative.
Lets not forget Jimmy Carter had so called “experience”.
This guy is a maroon.
His descriptions of the Romney’s and Giuliani’s greatness bear an eerie resemblance to those in Thursday’s WSJ editorial.
Between the Nat’l Review and the WSJ, the Powers That Be have apparently already decided that we need a liberal, collectivist Republican candidate no matter what we traditional conservatives (translation: yahoos) might think or want.
Well I hope his writing and editing skills are stronger than his reasoning skills.
One thing that will be interesting to watch is how Fred runs his national campaign. Its like a mini-test what his executive abilities are.
Guiliani is the strongest, leading in the polls.. but his organization seems weaker then it should be so far to me. Think of these straw polls, where was Rudy’s organization getting supporters to the events and winning? Instead he was getting beat by second and third tier guys. Come primary days organization is going to really matter in getting people out to the voting stations. One big bright spot is his fundraising.. hes going to have lots of money to run a national ad campaign.
Mitt’s organization has been incredible, which his organizational abilities is his main argument for becoming President.
National Review is just pissed because Fred was drafted by a grassroots movement and not offered up to the public by themselves and their fellow RINO power-brokers. They are no longer in control of the process.
Sadly, I think you are 100% correct.
“The Hubble Telescope could not find what he has done, because he has not done it.”
That puts him on par with Hillary and Barak as I recall. Kerry did the same amount, but for a far greater amount of time.
I’m telling ya... given the historical record of Senators trying to be elected as POTUS, we’d be well-served to look elsewhere for a nominee.
I find Mr Bruckhiser’s opinions vastly different than my own. He uses information and analyses that do not stand up to reasonable scrutiny.
I would no doubt would be voting for a different candidate today than him.
Shallow article and shallow endorsement of Rudy.
How does Brookhiser just write off Fred’s 8 years in the Senate?
If Brookhiser is scared he should just say so....lol
Rudy, Romney & McCain have all DONE a lot - which is why I’m not happy with any of them. Rudy didn’t lead me after 9/11, and benefited from a lot of national trends while he was in NY - but he also ran up a record of liberal kow-towing on immigration, gay rights and gun-grabbing. Romney has a good record, but I don’t for the life of me know what he believes vs what he is willing to say to get elected. McCain - well, CFR, immigration and his hatred for social conservatives prevent me from voting for him as anything.
Thompson has certainly achieved more than Richard Brookhiser has in his life. But I don’t want a President who will DO lots of things. I’d be happy with one who would concentrate on a few things (war, immigration, judges) and explain WHY those are important.
I guess I’m fed up with a President who can’t explain drinking to a sailor, or who wants comprehensive reforms in education, immigration, etc.
And while I like NRO, I’m getting fed up with their “Fred is worthless” harping. Maybe he is, maybe not - we’re going to have plenty of chances to decide for ourselves in the next few months.
Giuliani was the 3rd ranking person at DOJ, as Associate Attorney General. I like Fred just fine, but Fred has a thin resume.
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.