The Presstitutes (and I include FoxNews in this category now) have one commandment:
"Thou Shalt Not Give Fred Any Coverage."
It is like the novel 1984, or during Stalin's purges.
Fred has become an "Unperson."
Can people please agree with these fantastically obvious statements?:
1 - Romney, Thompson and Hunter are the most conservative across the board
2 - Romney has changed positions too much to retain credibility for many people
3 - Fred and Duncan ain’t gonna make it
4 - Although the others have lots of problems, any of them would be a lot better than obama or clinton
5 - we won’t stay home on election day
Was that so difficult?
Disagree!
Fred is a top tier candidate (3rd in Iowa, 2nd in Wyoming) but Duncan is not happening. Why lump them together?
Bill Clinton lost both Iowa and NH in 1992 but came on after winning SC. It is simply to early to declare "Fred is Dead".
My hope is that Fred will win it all. Huckabee is his biggest contender. I'm also hoping Huckabee's rise will peak real soon. Neither of these hopes are far fetched right now.
Time will tell.
The Presstitutes (and I include FoxNews in this category now) have one commandment:
"Thou Shalt Not Give Fred Any Coverage."
It is like the novel 1984, or during Stalin's purges.
Fred has become an "Unperson."
One comment I would make I think Thompson may win more votes than the media think but I doubt it will be enough to get the nomination but he may well help another candidate or as I am wondering may in fact be the party’s choice for VP.
He would bring the conservative block of the Republican Party with him but as I have said before I do not think he will appeal to independent or non decided voters across the country. However bringing the conservative vote with him and with the more countrywide appeal of whoever is the Presidential candidate it could well swing the election for the Republican Party in fact may well be the only way that the Republicans can win.
How can you write off Fred this early on in the process - after one state's caucus?
This is just beginning, the media, including Fox News, is currently blacking out anything to do with Fred simply because he refuses to kiss their a$$es but when Fred wins South Carolina they will no longer be able to do that and we are off to the races!
Yes, I can agree with #2.
Duncan Hunter has, in a year-plus of campaigning, never been able to get above the margin of error.
Fred Thompson, who entered the campaign a few months ago, has consistently polled within the margin of error of the top two and three candidates.
Brit Hume, Fox, and the rest of the MSM (Brit and Fox are MSM) report what they want you to know and refrain from reporting what they'd just as soon you not know. I watched in amazement as I heard ZERO, as in zilch, as in nada, as in null, as in ABSENT -- not a single mention of Fred Thompson on today's Fox News Sunday among the panel. Even though Thompson came in THIRD in Iowa, ahead of McCain. Even though he did it in a fraction of the time and on a fraction of the budget of his opponents. If that's not newsworthy, then water is not wet.
The MSM keeps its viewers ignorant of what's really happening in the world. What's really happening is that Joe Blow conservatives on sites like Free Republic who watched the debate have as much, if not more, to say about Thompson on the debates as any of the other candidates. What's really happening is that super-star conservative pundits like Mark Levin, Rush Limbaugh, Mark Steyn, and even Thomas Sowell, have identified Thompson as the most truly conservative candidate. Steyn and Levin have made it pretty clear they like Thompson best, and Rush has, in the opinion of many of his listeners, done the same. More important, Fred Thompson is viable -- clearly, consistenly ranking well within the MOE of the top poll winners is validation of viability. Indeed, the only reason apparently YOU think Thompson isn't viable is because you don't hear the media heads talking about him.
You gotta pay attention you'll get duped by the MSM, my FRiend.