Actually, he can go back to his real friends...
Posted on 11/06/2007 7:05:11 AM PST by Calpernia
U. S. Sen. John McCain, R-AZ, has spent the better part of the last decade running for president. He actively sought the office in 2000 and lost handily to George W. Bush. Since that time, he has done everything he could think of to antagonize the base of his own party.
Former Sen. Fred Thompson, R-TN, acts as if the thought of running for president just occurred to him five minutes ago. Some days he acts as though it still hasn't occurred to him.
For very different reasons, these two men, with their totally different approaches to politics, have probably slammed the door on their chances for winning the Republican presidential nomination.
In 2000, McCain was the darling of the mainstream media. Back in those days, he was the anti-Bush, which appealed to them. This year his worldview is anathema to theirs because he has unapologetically defended "Bush's war."
But McCain's unpopularity within his party stems from two other issues: illegal immigration and campaign finance reform.
On immigration, McCain seems to have learned his lesson. In what radio host and bestselling author Laura Ingraham would call a "Power to the People moment," McCain (along with a lot of other members of Congress), has gotten the message loud and clear: border enforcement first.
"I understand why you would call it a, quote, shift," McCain said to reporters after being grilled by voters in South Carolina. "I say it is a lesson learned about what the American people's priorities are. And their priority is to secure the borders."
Too bad it took a meltdown of the congressional phone lines last June to convince the senator of the common sense of the American people. Until he saw his poll numbers sink to single digits, McCain seemed absolutely oblivious to - nay, defiant of - the people's will. Nevertheless, those of us who have been incredulous to the deafness of the president and far too many members of Congress on this issue welcome Sen. McCain into the bright light of reason on this issue.
While "comprehensive immigration reform" (better known as "amnesty"), is dead, the legislation for which John McCain is best known is still alive and festering within our political system. The McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform bill passed by Congress and signed into law by the president will be haunting us for years, despite the fact that the Supreme Court has struck down certain provisions of the law. For that reason, it has left the base of the Republican Party with a permanent bad taste for McCain's brand of politics.
Fred Thompson's alienation from the GOP activists who comprise the nominating block of the party is much more recent. In fact, it unfolds like a wet blanket of sad disappointment day by day. Desperately seeking a candidate to rally around, social conservatives keep waiting for Fred Thompson to show them p something.
His recent underwhelming performance on "Meet the Press" did not help. Asked about his positions on abortion and same-sex marriage, Thompson, who has a respectable record on both issues, managed to flub his answer. He told host Tim Russert he opposes to an amendment to the U.S. Constitution on either issue, preferring to leave these two crucial social issues to the individual states. As Dr. James Dobson of Focus on the Family has pointed out, Thompson endorses the idea of fifty different definitions of marriage. The same is true, it seems, on the definition of life, since Thompson simply wants to see Roe v. Wade overturned and the issue returned to the states.
In addition, Thompson seemed muddled and indecisive about his opinion on water boarding as a technique for dealing with terrorist detainees.
With less than two months remaining until the Iowa caucuses, it is likely that Fred Thompson and John McCain will both continue to decline in the polls, while former Governors Mitt Romney (Massachusetts) and Mike Huckabee (Arkansas) will continue to gain on the current frontrunner, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani. So be it.
---------
Doug Patton is a freelance columnist who has served as a political speechwriter and public policy advisor. His weekly columns are published in newspapers across the country and on selected Internet web sites, including Human Events Online, TheConservativeVoice.com and GOPUSA.com, where he is a senior writer and state editor.
I will be voting for a candidate who will be strong on the Bill of Rights and who will deliver smaller, less intrusive government. If the third party candidate is the best, then yes.
Free speech for thee, but not for me? Now you're sounding like the Paulestinians.
“Countdown to the Thompson damage control goon squad coming in with a litany of ad hominem attacks against the poster and the author in 10...9...8..”
You’re too late.
“Doug Patton is a freelance dunderhead....”
Actually, he can go back to his real friends...
“I don’t see Duncan Hunter’s name on those polls anywhere {*snicker*}”
I think the most telling Poll is this one:
http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/poll?poll=197;results=1
(10/23) Who would you vote for if you were not afraid that your candidate might not win?
Duncan Hunter 31.1% 1,778
Fred Thompson 21.5% 1,230
I DID like him to start with, or at least I was certainly prepared to like him very much, because so many people I respect(ed) were in his camp, and because I liked the first visual, capitalist, and ethical impression he made. Also, I have considerable (if sometimes grudging) respect for Mormons overall, and that was a plus in my book.
Like you, the more I learned about his political views, the less I liked him. Upon investigation, it became crystal clear that underneath all that nice talk and smooth boo-sh*t (I basically sling bull for a living and thus know it when I see it), he is a big-government nanny stater who is in a way MORE dangerous than Low-Sodium Democrats like Rudy and Schwarzenegger because he thinks he's got God on his side. That type of innocent arrogance should stay out, out, out of the White House.
[Thompson] ... is clearly the best of the batch.
I hope, wish, and pray that Republican primary voters recognize the truth of that statement in time to make Thompson our presidential nominee.
There is nothing new under the sun. It is a little surprising that people are still not attuned to how it works.
No one, repeat, no one ever votes FOR all of a candidate’s positions. The only choice we ever get is the one that let’s us most probably deny the least desirable candidate power. Simply that, and nothing more. You don’t, and never will, vote FOR anyone. You always will vote AGAINST someone in the way most likely to deny them power.
GW Bush was not the great conservative savior in 1999. Gary Bauer was running. Steve Forbes was running. Alan Keyes, too. GW Bush was not the most conservative of those options then, and there were handfuls of FR people announcing that they would vote third party if anyone but their choice of 2 or three options was nominated, and then after the country had a dose of Al Gore it would “learn its lesson” and everyone in the US would become right wing.
Well, it didn’t happen — and it never will. GW Bush was the best candidate of a group of 2000 candidates that may not have been spectacular. He won. Twice. He disappointed some people now and then, and he did so far less often than Al Gore would have.
There is nothing new here. We have another group of less than spectacular candidates. Some are rightward of the moneyed choices. Some are not. It is the moneyed choices that have the best odds of winning, not just the nomination but also the election. Hillary’s money must be countered and only solid funding will do that.
So let’s just let the pressures and gaffes from all the candidates accumulate and see which is best able to manage an organization and therefore a campaign — and win. None of us are going to be voting FOR anyone in the general election. We’ll be voting to deny power to she who we would hate the most.
You can’t be serious. FR polls don’t mean squat. How many times was that poll spammed by DH supporters?
Even my grandma is voting for Rudy. I need to get a hold of her.
Who you for?
Okay, then answer this, who do you think is going to win?
Who you for?
Okay, then answer this, who do you think is going to win?
If it comes down to them, we're doomed. The future of this country is depends on Fred winning the nomination. If we pick the liberal, the lying politician, or the southern Democrat, I'll vote third party.
If you have reason to believe that any of us ‘spammed’ the poll, please address that to the moderators at FR.
“Giuliani is preferred by 23%”
wait till he goes south, baby.
Oh, for Pete’s sake.
?
Yeah, a lot of lurking or latent DUer's are snickering about the dying of conservatism in the GOP, so you're in large company.
The poll seems out of whack to me, too. Feel free to alert the Mods.
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.
