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.
I watched all night. I’m certain Fred was briefly in 4th for about 30 minutes (I think it was with about 76% counted at say 11PM Central but I’m not sure of the exact time or %), but Fred was in 3rd the rest of the night both before and after this 30 minute period
And out of the other side of their mouths they’re touting McCain like he’s the second coming of Jesus, yet he got less votes than Fred.
Also, as an employer, if you do not offer insurance to your employees you are penalized a certain dollar amount per employee.
So, the government tells me what I can afford, I have to pay for people who can't/won't pay for it, and if I don't do what they say, I have to pay more in taxes, which have absolutely nothing to do with health care.
How would you describe it?
Well, it isn’t perfect and Mitt has said that it might not work for all states. He has also said that he will not mandate it from the federal level. It costs the state a lot less by going this way than paying for the uninsured at hospitals.
Are you required in Mass to pay property taxes and auto insurance premiums? What is the real difference here.
I pay for health insurance, and we are self employed. It costs a lot for us to do so. But we do it.
I do not need the government to babysit me, and this is just one more gubmint hand in the individuals business. And I am not okay with that. I do not care if it is "for the common good" or not. All Mitt's plan does is provide yet another way for the lazy to get more from those who work.
NO MORE NEW BANS, LAWS, OR MANDATES.
Dang.
As far as what he "said", he's a politician, so you know you can trust him. Right?
Forty eight. Fred took 2nd in Wyoming today.
Yep, lets just continue to bankrupt the hospitals and the state and have health insurance premiums go through the roof. I guess that is one kind of solution. /sar
You’re just mad because you backed the all-time loser of losers, Duncan Hunter.
Don’t go away mad, pissant. Just go away.
sitetest
what? you make zero sense...
The thing to do with trash articles is ignore them, not post them here.
Ignore it next time, ace.
Mad? I’m happy as a clam at high tide. I’d be pissed if someone convinced me Fred was a staunch conservative, only to find out the truth later.
OK deuce
The problem is not from where to get additional money. The problem is in the outrageous costs assigned by hospitals not only for care administered, but by products used as well. Their costs are incredibly inflated.
The problem also needs to be addressed through health insurance lobbyists, so that health insurance costs are brought down to an acceptable level that is fair for both sides.
You are thinking like a liberal. More money is not the answer, nor is more government intrusion into the lives of individuals.
Address the problems, and the rest will follow.
More government and more money is not how problems get solved. For crying out loud people, the government is not your damned mother.
“Mad?”
If not mad, then insane.
Although I suspect mad is still closer to the truth. You’ve backed one of the biggest losers in party history. Did Mr. Hunter make it out of the asterisk category the other night? Last time I looked, with 86% of the vote in, he wasn't at one percent even if you rounded. It’s a wonder, considering the hundreds and hundreds of dollars he’s raised.
It is true, however, that Mr. Hunter’s share of the polls would increase much more dramatically if Mr. Thompson dropped out than vice versa.
Adding a percent to Mr. Thompson’s 13% in Iowa wouldn’t have moved the needle much.
However, if Mr. Hunter had garnered a reasonable 1/10 of Mr. Thompson’s vote (only idiots and schizophrenics believe he could get more), he’d have more than quadrupled his own result.
His national polling might actually put a number to the left of the decimal!
But he’d still be well within the margin of error of 0%.
sitetest
Whats a misallocation ???
The noun form of misallocate - To allocate (resources or capital, for example) wrongly or inappropriately. See http://www.answers.com/misallocation&r=67
It was a reference to Fred's team moving resources into Iowa instead of using them where they would do some good.
Hells bells teeny, not only that, the frauds throw billions at phony problems that will put us into a binding warming treaty.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1924826/posts?page=138#138
What a stupid comment. how can we have a conversation if you attack me as a liberal? Your candidate is not worth destroying the republican party over.
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.