Why Fred Thompson Will Win

American Thinker ^ | October 1, 2007 | Peter Mulhern

[RWR8189]

Conventional wisdom is hardening around the proposition that Fred Dalton Thompson is too lazy, ill-prepared, tired, old, lackluster, inexperienced, inconsistent and bald to make a successful run for President.

Of course, conventional wisdom rarely gets anything right. When it does, it's only by accident.

In this case conventional wisdom is not just wrong but comically so. Thompson will win the Republican nomination for two reasons. First, he's a very impressive candidate. Second, there's no realistic alternative. He will win the general election for the same two reasons.

Let's start by considering Thompson's Republican competition.

John McCain's candidacy may not be dead, but then again, neither is Ariel Sharon. McCain has been at war with the Republican Party for a decade. The idea that he could win the GOP's presidential nomination was never more than a fantasy. His presence in the race will soon become an embarrassment, if it isn't one already.

Mitt Romney oscillates between the low teens and single digits in national polls. He does better in Iowa and New Hampshire where he has spent a great deal of time and money in the hope that he can ride a wave of early momentum to victory. It won't happen.

[RedBloodedPatriot]

The article is spot on about at least one thing - McCain is wasting his time. McCain has disrespected the President on so many issues, I don’t see why the GOP would feel obligated to support him. On the other hand, Fred has a clean record. That’s why I think he has the best chance.

[Eastbound]

Latest odds.

[2ndDivisionVet]

You forgot the “s” and “h” in front of the “it”.

[Caipirabob]

Thanks.

Significant numbers are:

Hildebeast 2-1

Giuliani 3-1

Thompson 4-1

[hershey]

Bingo! Thanks for pointing out that Peter Mulhern is Peter the Lawyer on Rush. I knew there was a connection, but couldn’t quite remember. Thanks again!

[elk]

Well. when Huckabee said he'd support a nationwide ban on smoking, along w/ Shrill Hill, that was it for me. And I don't even smoke.

Nanny state, anyone? Not federal business? I guess if the fed (us) is going to be paying the healthcare bill for everyone, then they can tell us what we can or cannot do with our bodies.

[AmericanMade1776]

Conventional wisdom is hardening around the proposition that Fred Dalton Thompson is too lazy, ill-prepared, tired, old, lackluster, inexperienced, inconsistent and bald to make a successful run for President.

Yes....Conventional Wisdom can not predict an outcome like these two debating for President of the United States

[AFreeBird]

As of this time, The Beast at 2-1 and Fred at 4-1

[isrul]

I keep getting this recurrent feeling that Hilary wouldn't be running unless it was guaranteed she would win. So it probably doesn't matter what Republicans do.

[airborne]

Thompson will win the Republican nomination for two reasons. First, he's a very impressive candidate. Second, there's no realistic alternative. He will win the general election for the same two reasons.

I had high hopes that we conservatives could find and promote a conservative Republican. One who would be what we had hoped Bush would be.

It is becoming apparent (sadly) that we're going to take what we can get. Again.

If Fred gets the nomination, I'll vote for him, but don't expect me to be excited about him, and don't be surprised when it turns out that he isn't what everyone says he is.

[srmorton]

It WAS guaranteed that she would win the nomination, but there is no way that the Dems can cheat their way into the WH if the majority of Americans do not like her (which they don’t). I think just the thought of having to listen to that horrible cackle for even four years will send the Republicans and Independents out in droves to vote against her, especially if the alternative is someone as likable as Fred Thompson. I may be wrong, but this is what my gut feeling is. To be elected POTUS, the candidate MUST be likable.

[Huck]

First, he's a very impressive candidate. Second, there's no realistic alternative

I'll buy reason number 2, but not reason number one. He's a known tv actor, fine, but he had an unimpressive political career, with no executive office, he's been in none of the debates, and when he speaks, he says "uh" more than he says actual words. GOPers better kick the tires on this guy before signing the deal.

[longtermmemmory]

Newsflash to naysayers: most of us do not care about how many times a candidate has been married OR the age of his wife.

We can and should look at the current marriage and wife.

For example, the Clinton’s show marriage of political convenience.

I agree we don’t need a mindless cheerleader, we need a sincere leader who can speak TO the voters not AT the voters.

[webstersII]

bump

[BreezyDog]

WOW, you quit easy...

[Yomin Postelnik]

I pulled up the article. I’m very against his Iran comment but it seems that the rest was a criticize of the way the Administration explains the war, not against policy. The reporter covering the story twisted it to be anti-war. We do need better PR. The case for the war is simple and straightforward. We gave Saddam 12 years, Pres. Bush himself gave 18 months of constant warning and Saddam kept rebuffing, evading inspectors, etc. We had to act against a maniac who had used gas weapons in the past. By trying to off a former President he showed that he had no fear of starting with America and needed to be handled. He could have caused plenty of problems without nukes. I wish Huckabee wouldn’t have said what he said but it does seem the article took a criticism on communication and twisted it (the stupid Iran comment notwithstanding). If he does more of this I’ll indeed switch. Right now we need someone who’s at least conservative - Huckabee largely fits this bill and is a good communicator. Rudy and Mitt don’t and I don’t see Fred advancing.

[Politicalmom]

You owe me a keyboard. :)

[isrul]

Who said anything about quitting?

[BreezyDog]

I just got that impression because of your “feeling” of a guaranteed Hildabeast win. And the defeatist attitude of “doesn’t matter what Republicans do”.

Feelings are for liberals ;-)