Fredipedia: The Definitive Fred Thompson Quick Reference
Posted on 10/20/2007 10:18:32 AM PDT by Josh Painter
Edited on 10/20/2007 2:17:48 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
I hope we finally see the turn that many have predicted. It is unfathomable to me that a pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, anti-gun candidate would ever appeal to the Republican party. I have thought once the electorate finds his actual positions they would drift away.
Just like the Governator of California. And Arnold just signed into law the far reaching anti free speech, pro gay legislation in the entire country. Previews of coming attractions if Gulliani is elected.
I watched Fred's speech last night, as well as speeches by Duncan Hunter, Tom Tancredo, John McCain, and Sam Brownback. I just could not sit through Ron Paul...turned the channel. McCain read his entire speech...good, but no mention of the immigration issue. The MSM still thinks its about the war. It was immigration that put the final nail in the coffin for McCain. Duncan Hunter was very good; however, like all of you, that are following his numbers, they are just not moving. Good VP candidate for Thompson. Tom Tancredo...good speech...again, his numbers show no support.
Fred Thompson will be our 2008 Republican candidate...no doubt in my mind! Thompson will be the WE THE PEOPLE candidate. We placed the call for his run, and he stepped up to the plate. We need his strength and resolve, slow and decisive thought. His young family gives his the fire in the belly…listen to his words. We are quite fortunate that he did step to the plate.
In other words, evangelicals think for themselves and don't give rat's ass about Dobson's opinion on the matter.
“Duncan Hunter was very good; however, like all of you, that are following his numbers, they are just not moving. Good VP candidate for Thompson.”
I like that combo. I just do.
Yes , but Romney is making a major push for them as well.
Let’s hope that enough of them will go to Thompson to negate Romney’s pandering , or they will split the Conservative vote and allow Rudy to slither onto the nomination .
Romney’s historical record will doom him, both on Abortion and Guns.
It’s a sharp reversal for Giuliani. The putative GOP front-runner had been winning social conservative backing despite his history of support for abortion rights and gay rights.
Thompson has changed that.
They just needed to see a conservative in the race that looked like he COULD WIN and they would back him. This is why I believe that as the (even more) conservative “bottom tier” candidates begin to drop out, their supporters will have to choose between Trudy, Mitt or Fred.
There is ONLY one of those three that can rightly claim the mantle of “consistent” conservative. That man is Fred Thompson. He is conservative (enough) and his electability is in a near tie with Trudy. The scary part is that I haven’t found an issue that he currently holds that I disagree with.
I am an Evangelical that is planning to vote for Hunter in the primary, but should he drop out or remain no threat to Trudy, I could do a heck of a lot worse for a second choice than Fred Thompson.
what differences exist between Thompson and Reagon regarding their relationship with Christians, their church attendance, their Christian foundational beliefs, etc.??
I haven’t really done any analysis (lazy, I guess) but have a feeling they are much the same.
Romney’s been trying for awhile, social conservatives haven’t warmed to him because they think he is not genuine.
That’s the difference between he and Rudy. They thought him genuine at least, and unlike Mccain not conversationally adversarial towards them. Actually, imo, Rudy going into a big speech about how he prays and believes in God and so forth could stand to alienate them more because they won’t believe him. Nothing irritates me more then when someone to pretends to be what they are not.
Two moments during the Clinton presidency that bothered me most. His finger wag because he was lying to my face. And his carrying that Bible every Sunday as a prop. I found that offensive, just as I find Rudy’s speech at the conference mildly offensive for the same reason.
Well, we’ll see what happens. Some people are trying to steer the “flock” to Romney or huckabee. My suspicion is because both of them kiss butt, to be blunt. :-) If the “flock refuses to follow, and sticks with thompson, then we’ll see everyone unite around thompson just because their congragations and paying dues members will leave them behind otherwise. how can they have a seat at the table if they have no power to lead a movement after all?
The other scenario is that the vote further splinters and Rudy wins the nomination among a divided caucus. And despite all the lovely fairytales being spun on some blogs out there, everyone is not going to unite around getting Rudy to the w.H. maybe certain “leaders”, but the millions at home? If they wouldn’t unite around 41 in ‘92, around Dole, if millions stayed home in 2000 when an actual social conservative was on the top of the ticket, and they let the GOP majority fall in ‘06...yeah, good luck with that.
I agree with you on all of those points .
Yeah , Rudy will not be able to bring the whole party to the voting booth and that will not be offset by the so-called moderates ..... Hillary would win that scenario .
Dobson said Thompson is not a Christian. I didn’t think that was a prerequisite for evangelical support - it’s just one piece of useful information to factor into the decision. I don’t know what else Dobson said, but I do respect his opinions. And I’m leaning toward Fred right now.
I’m not thrilled with Fred’s support for McCain-Feingold and I’m not sure exactly where he stands on border security. The border is a deal-breaker for Huckabee and could be for Fred as well, although I don’t know if the secure borders crowd is going to be left with a viable candidate. (I’m not sure what Romney’s position is, and I don’t know if I’d believe him if he told me. Rudy is my last choice in the field.)
Somebody erased that guy's name from my ballot and wrote "Bush" instead.
My bad - I missed the word “social” when I read that sentence. It’s a shame to ruin a good line with a moment of illiteracy.
This is what Fred said a few months ago.
Hope this helps...
Romney’s position on anything is whatever you want it to be.
Fred’s positions on immigration can be summed up here:
http://fredfile.fred08.com/blog/2007/ask-fred-building-the-border-fence/
Here are some more:
This first one also touches on his reasoning behind McCain Feingold. Wallace gives him a little bit of a tough question with the immigration thing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sagvVMfAUa4&mode=related&search=
Here’s Fred at a recent speech:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0H3zhZu0S5w
Here’s an interview with Mark Levin on the subject:
http://jebstersr.freepgs.com/MLFAudio/FredThompson051807.wma
Another speech:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0H3zhZu0S5w
S’okay. We can pretend it was never said so you can use it again. LOL
Yeah, Bush is conservative on only one angle. he’s taken some conservative positions before, but that alone doesn’t make you a conservative. the Dems have taken conservative positions from time to time to. but on faith/social issues he’s been (usually) solid and I really don’t think social cnervatives have much to complain about on his end. On the Congress, sure, but Bush? Not really. i know the DUI story hurt him in 2000, but still. If that alone made 4 million sit at home I think these fantasies they’ll turn out for a social liberal like Rudy are just that. fantasies.
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.