Thompson Hits Bump on the Stump

Wall Street Journal ^ | October 4, 2008 | Amy Schatz

[Plutarch]

The reviews are in from Iowa, and it isn’t pretty.

After taking two weeks off to raise money, Fred Thompson returned to the world of grip-and-grin campaigning this week in Iowa without the big luxury bus but with a rejiggered stump speech that was supposed to focus attention on his “common sense conservative” values. But Thompson’s laid-back style isn’t exactly wowing all of the locals and certainly didn’t impress the New York Times’ Adam Nagourney, who offered a scathing review this morning...

------------------------snip-----------------------

An event on Monday evening at the University of Northern Iowa in Cedar Falls promised to be one of the liveliest Thompson rallies yet. Several hundred people packed into a hall, where a local state representative warmed up the crowd by moving himself to tears talking about an injured Iraq war veteran he’d met. Country star John Rich of the duo Big & Rich, and a friend of Thompson’s, had the crowd stomping and singing along with his hit “Save a Horse, Ride a Cowboy,” and some Johnny Cash covers.

Thompson took the stage to wild applause. Within minutes, however, the crowd had quieted considerably and only broke into applause a few times during the 20-minute speech. Afterwards, Kevin Patterson, a 36-year-old stock broker from Waterloo, said he’d made up his mind about who he’d likely vote for: “Mitt Romney.”

“I like everything he said…maybe it’s his presentation. He’s a little laid back for me,” Patterson said. “Maybe he appeals more to older voters.”

[yellowhammer]

"If Thompson's effect upon a previously electrified crowd is as soporofic as this..."

I had to drag out the dictionary for that one.

[pogo101]

Pietro, it gives him an excuse to post the same down-on-FDT material twice. ;] Just bear in mind that a huge proportion of Plutarch's posts are of the "Look, Here's A Negative Take On Fred Thompson" variety.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/user-posts?id=33679

I'm certainly open to criticism about any candidate, and it's possible Fred is "overbought." But when a poster shows this consistent agenda, well, consider the source.

[elizabetty]

It is amazing how many stories there are like this every single day. The man is an actor for goodness sake, why doesn't he just act like he is running for President?

[kevkrom]

He only had to run once for Senate, and that of course was in a relatively conservative state.

Twice, in a state that went for Clinton twice, including Thompson's re-election year.

[rightinthemiddle]

We criticize the MSM for selective reporting all the time...because they have an agenda.

Same standards for us?

[Petronski]

The WSJ (yes, their news pages are as liberal as any) reports on the NYT and AP and you're dazzled!

Tearing down Fred is not going to endear your boy Willard with actual conservatives. Perhaps if Willard would stop being an idiot (lying about Reagan's pro-life beliefs, throwing Rush Limbaugh under the bus), he could help himself.

[Aria]

WHAT? He isn’t promising free everything and to solve every problem I ever will have? All the while laughing like a nut case? Well that cliches it...can’t vote for him!

[TalonDJ]

The only question is, did Thompson walk into a crowd of excited people, and turn them into couch potatoes over a period of 20 minutes?

Let me set the stage for you since I was at one of the talks. He was 30-40 minutes late because of seriously heavy rains here. The crowd was on average fairly old. Lots of gray hair and retirees, only a handful of twenty-somethings. It was not a super big gathering and it was a mature group, so less wild applause and more a group of earnest folks wanting to hear what he had to say. He talked in a way that was conversational and genuine. So no, we were not 'fired up' but it was not that sort of an atmosphere. Judging from the we saw going into the Obama rally that was next door I am sure there was more screaming and shouting that went on there. The GOP base, on a Tuesday night, just was not in that mood and there is nothing wrong with that. He was well received by the crowd and we like what we heard. With a crowd that probably averaged in the 50's there was not going to be a lot of folks jumping up and down and screaming.

[pogo101]

You’re right: I was thinking his initial arrival in the Senate was by gubernatorial appointment, but it was by special election.

[HHFi]

I've got nothing against Fred, and I'll certainly vote for him if he's the nominee, but I tried to gently warn the Fredheads before he got in that they were investing a lot of "perfect candidate" fantasies in a guy who was NOT the second coming of Reagan, and they would hear none of it. One of them just flatly told me, "You're wrong." Well, that settled it, didn't it? Guess the fact that I work in the media and had followed him for years and my brother worked at the RNC and knew both him and his wife gave me no more insights than people who'd seen him on "Law & Order" and thought he looked really presidential.

My biggest problem with Fred is that I think he's more image than substance, sort of an armchair conservative who's about 85% hat and 15% cowboy. He'll talk a good conservative line, but when the going gets tough, I'm afraid he won't stand up, articulate the conservative side, and fight for it. I've had enough of that from Bush, who I also knew (he's our former governor) and tried to warn people was also not the spawn of Reagan. He's the spawn of George Bush, and it shows.

[Plutarch]

Who do you support for President?

I support Romney.

[capt. norm]

it's the more "likeable" candidate who usually wins the race and Thompson is off the charts in likeability.

Never thought of it that way but history proves it to be true.

Reagan went off the scale in likability. It has also worked for the dems with Carter and Clinton.

[PBRSTREETGANG]

If only Fred had let out a “Dean Scream” then he’d get a little more love from the NY Times.

[perfect_rovian_storm]

I’m sorry I missed the Hannity interview. I’d like to judge for myself. Everything I’ve seen of him, including the Tonight Show announcement, I liked.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_WctSoLi1k

Aren't the times we live in wonderful? :)

[traditional1]

"Thompson Hits Bump on the Stump"

imagine that headline, substituting "Bill Clinton" for "Thompson".

What country are YOU living in?

In THIS Country, "Clinton" is synonomous with "God", according to Hollywood and the MSM.....

[ontap]

Fair enough! Now tell us which of the other candidates are going to do a better job than Fred.

[Sans-Culotte]

I’ve watched a few Thompson speeches. Some excite me, some bore me. I’ve watched a few Romney speeches, NONE have bored me yet, most have truly impressed me — not EXCITED me, but impressed me, with the depth of knowledge and the ability to bring it to the conversation.

A while back, the MSM was telling us America wants a new "plain-speaking Harry Truman". Ever see Truman make a speech? He did not come off like James Whitmore in "Give 'Em Hell, Harry!". He came off like an accountant. Yet, people supposedly admire his blunt and direct comments and responses.

Thompson could be a Harry Truman type IMO, but he has more personality than Harry. Every time I see him interviewed, I am always impressed by the fact that he does not try the typical politician's dodge of changing the subject and not answering questions. When he was asked in one interview if he agreed with the Scooter Libbly sentence commutation, he said "heck, yeah, the president did the right thing. He shoulda pardoned him". When the same question was asked during a pubbie debate, some time elapsed before Guiliani finally said he agreed with it. Fred is up-front on these issues, as he was last night with his comments about the Rush Limbaugh BS scandal.

I guess I did find Thompson's interview on Hannity "scintillating". He gave the (IMO) right answers to some tough questions, which shows he has the courage to lead. I value a performance like that over rhetorical brilliance any day. Besides, the only presidents I've seen that truly impressed me with their oratory were FDR, JFK and Reagan. Churchill was impressive, too, mainly due to his choice of words. I almost never watch Bush make a speech. These guys don't write their speeches, anyway, and if their delivery is not that great, I don't bother. I just catch the "talking points" versions later.

If we can see Fred make some strong and courageous stands, while a Hillary or Obama responds with the typical lame "I'll have to wait until I can appraise the situation", or "we really need to talk about healthcare"; I think we will see the difference beween a leader and a power-hungry would-be demagogue.

[traditional1]

Yes, it's always a "negative" when a crowd exhibits civility and caution.

We need the in-your-face screamers and BDS-placard loonies to be called "enthusiastic" or "ecstatic".

(The kinds you don't want standing behind you in the poll booth if you drop a stylus).....

[prairiebreeze]

What's funny is that on one hand, if Thompson doesn't run around acting like his hair is on fire, the media taunts about that. Then, if his audiences supposedly don't behave as if their hair was on fire, they taunt about that too.

People who WERE ACTUALLY THERE had a quite different opinion than NY Slimes/ Washington Post/ WSJ. We don't rely on these publications for overall fair reporting on any other given topic, why would we assume that's what we'd receive from them regarding an up and coming conservative POTUS candidate?

Additionally I personally know and have spoken to somebody who saw Thompson this week and thought he was super! Focused, excited and exciting.

Gee, who to believe, my politically astute friend and fellow first-hand freepers or the dinosaur media?

Decisions, decisions....

[bperiwinkle7]

“we could see from last night’s Hannity interview that Thompson could hardly be described as scintillating.”

Why does this have to be relevant?

I answer myself.

We live in a totally non-thinking society that is guided solely by impressions and emotions.....