Posted on 01/05/2008 9:05:25 AM PST by pissant
Manchester (NH): Fred Thompson spent most of caucus night in Iowa hovering between third and fourth place -- a far cry from the lofty first-place position he held in Rasmussen's poll of likely Republican caucus-goers last June. It has been a long time since Thompson has made a compelling reason to be in this race. And it should be a very short time before he confesses a compelling reason to exit stage right. A bystander in his own race, Thompson's political what-could-have-been slipped through his fingers long before he announced his candidacy. “The process for running for president has begun so early,” says GOP political strategist Charlie Gerow, “that if you are not in the game, you are not in the game … and Fred Thompson was never in the game.” Larry Sabato, who directs the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics, says “the biggest loser of 2008 is already known: Fred Thompson. The biggest pre-candidacy buildup since Ted Kennedy in the 1980 cycle has led to the same result -- a failure to come close to fulfilling his high expectations.” The short story of Fred Thompson started just about a year ago at the conservative love-fest known as the Conservative Political Action Convention, or CPAC. There, hints of a Thompson hat-toss began. By late spring, he was all the rage. He hit his high note with a clever video smacking down docudrama king Michael Moore. Suddenly, the political and media worlds could not get enough of Fred. It was his shining moment -- except that Fred forgot to shine. Summer came and went. So did a whole lot of staff and a whole lot of opportunities.
His eventual announcement in September came with a hefty price tag -- the Republican Primary voters in New Hampshire. He chose to announce on Jay Leno’s show, bypassing the first New Hampshire debate the same evening.
“He was an attractive idea, an image, and the reality couldn’t match it,” Sabato says. “This may be the fate of anyone touted as the next Reagan. Reagan is no longer a man. He’s a myth. No living human being can fulfill those expectations.”
“My opinion of what happened to Fred Thompson is that he turned out to be ... Fred Thompson,” adds Matt Lebo, political science professor at New York’s Stony Brook University.
“I don't think it’s just his late entry -- that is just a symptom of the problem,” Lebo says. “The problem is that he has never shown a willingness to fight for conservative causes. Believing in those causes isn't enough. There should be some evidence that you are willing to do something about it.”
While comparisons have been made to the failed 2004 campaign of Wesley Clark, those may not be fair. Clark was a political novice; Thompson is not.
So why did Thompson go wrong?
“I think he was expecting to ride in, pick up the bouquet, and that would be that,” says Bert A. Rockman, head of the political science department at Purdue University. “It doesn’t work that way.
“People confuse appearance with reality. Thompson played hard-as-nails authority figures on TV and in the movies. But his campaign had no distinctiveness, no comparative advantage.”
Somehow, someone must have convinced Thompson that times had changed and he could run a different kind of campaign, one that suited his low-key approach to politics. A campaign sans rubber-chicken dinners, moldy bus tours and all the other degrading aspects of running for president.
Tack on the misconceptions that tens of millions of dollars were waiting for him, that he could easily round up organizational support -- and that pretty much sums up why the promise of Fred never happened.
As the country shifts its gaze toward New Hampshire, Thompson stands to fare even worse here than he did in Iowa. As of Friday morning, he was polling sixth among likely Republican voters.
So, the near-term question for Fred Thompson isn't if he drops out of the race but when.
Which is preferable to a candidate who has never had anything to squander.
***It’s time to stop throwing good money after bad. Get rid of the one who squandered lots of resources. It’s a sign he’s a lousy campaigner, especially since he had a lot of good name recognition.
Sure you are. It's in most of your posts.
As for your "facts," you stomped out your credibility a long time ago. You are FR's resident disinformatsia expert.
Nope. You can hide behind the fact that I got suspended, but the only ‘fact’ you ever remotely came close to disputing was when I used quotes for a paraphrase, which I then immediately corrected.
According to Intrade, it's twice as likely that Newt Gingrich will get the GOP nomination, and four times as likely that Condie Rice will get it.
You’ve been suspended twice this year. Your credibility is vanishingly small.
I’ve been suspended at least 5 or 6 times from FR. Only once for pissing off Jim regarding Fred. And it was not a lie, it was for posting Ramesh Ponnuru’s critical column, if I recall.
So one candidate’s numbers are in the low teens and the other is in, well less than 1%. And using your logic the 1%er is the better campaigner. You and pissant are cut from the same cloth.Fred has a slim chance at winning, Duncan has none. Simple truth!
Oh, and it helps when you guys whine to Jim and the mods too. LOL
FRED IS THE ONLY ONE THAT CAN WIN THE NATIONAL ELECTION AND HE WILL BE A GREAT PRESIDENT!
It must be a sad place to be when all his hopes are tied up in seeing a good man fail.
No, actually, I’m in a very unsad place. I’ve never felt as good about supporting a candidate since 1984
You’re entirely in control of your own credibility and reputation. True to your name, you piss it away at nearly every chance.
Current RCP averages have him 13 points behind Huckabee in SC, and that is before Iowa. Where do you see Thompson making gains between now and SC?
Coming from you, that is a compliment.
They also show John McCain ahead of Huck by 20% in NH. If that holds thru the NH primary where will Huck be? This thing is fluid right now and these polls will change dramatically as the each primary is concluded. I would not put to much stock in polls. If McCain persists in NH it will have the same effect on Huck as Huck had on Romney. It is always the expectations game.
The Club for Growth, the National Taxpayers Union and anyone who is not delusional knows that your post is untrue.
A “sad place” is not about your feelings(sorry) it’s that you make yourself look like a contemptable person scratching around for some bad comment to crow about. I feel sorry for lots of people that don’t think I should feel sorry for them and I feel sorry that you make your chosen candidate look bad by being petty and vindictive.
Stay classy!
I don't. I'm hopeful, but not optimistic, that he can get things in gear. I've been speaking ill of his campaign team ever since they announced the all-out effort in Iowa, and have no real reason to believe they will suddenly start to play smart.
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.