Goodbye Fred

RealClearPolitics ^ | Salena Zito

[LonesomeHawk]

Goodbye Fred By Salena Zito

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."

[seekthetruth]

“I didn’t know Fred had 12 million to run on, that’s more than I thought he had.....
There is no reason for Fred to drop out.”

That FEC chart was as of January 7. Does not show what has been spent, but we know that Fred’s truck goals have always been met and then some.

[Prophet in the wilderness]

That is a disgusting picture, you have no class considering that Fred's mother is in the hospital.
You must be a typical liberal full of glee.
I call on Jim Robinson to get rid of this distasteful picture that you have posted here on FR.
GO AWAY YOU LIBERAL !

[CASchack]

This was a syndicated editorial cartoon that appeared today’s newspapers—originating in the Akron Beacon Journal.
It is topical, but I do agree that it is harsh.

I am no liberal.

[tortdog]

So the Democrats agree with Romney on:

* pro-life
* abstinence eductation
* ANWR drilling
* consistent role as leader with personal integrity
* support charter schools
* compensate teachers based on results
* opposition to abortion pill
* support faith-based organizations
* oppose gay marriage
* cutting government waste
* use private insurance companies to solve health care
* no driver’s license for illegal immigrants
* strict constructionist judges
* opposed to welfare programs
* no political correctness while conduct war on terror
* overrule Roe v Wade and let states decide
* human cloning unethical
* reduce costs - keep tax cuts
* up veteran’s pay
* Bush is right on war on terror

[Rick.Donaldson]

Well, you’re right. I just get ticked off at people who assume I’m not thinking, or call me names. That’s ridiculous. There’s reasoning behind my statements.

In reality, I’m a lot less concerned about Hillary or Romney damaging this country than I am some nation, like China damaging us and the President doing little or nothing at all.

I EXPECT Hillary to do NOTHING about China.

I expect that Obama would be less than useless.

I don’t expect Romney, Huckabee or Guiliani to do much about a foreign invasion/attack.

I DO expect Fred or McCain to do something militarily.

There are a lot of reasons to vote or not vote for most of these people.

But I don’t want someone in office I simply DON’T TRUST. Romney is one of those people I ‘DON’T TRUST”

[epow]

Oh, I don’t know, I thought conservatism was a fairly compelling reason.

You thought wrong, conservatism is no longer a compelling reason to vote for a candidate in the 21st century Republican party. This primary has now made it official, conservative candidates need not apply. The most liberal candidates have led the GOP field from day one, and the most conservative candidates were almost totally ignored.

I have voted Republican since my first vote in 1960, and I went though this same kind of disappointment for two decades before Reagan brought conservatives into the party's mainstream. But I won't go through it again, AFAIC the Republican party no longer exists, and it won't actually exist much longer as a viable party unless it turns back to Reagan era conservative policies based on traditional Christian principles.

[teddyballgame]

I can understand your lack of trust. I’ve lived in MA my whole life - a depressing thought I know, but can tell you Romney would be a strong leader. He governed MA as a conservative, despite all the posting on Free Republic.

[bushfamfan]

**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.”**

Yeah, his ‘brilliant’ strategy backfired. We heard nothing but how ‘brilliant’ Fred was in entering when he did because people would get ‘bored’ of the other candidates. Well Mr. Boring himself actually got in the race and it was all downhill from there. This goes to show you how polls and being labelled an ‘electable’ candidate with ‘name recognition’ means squat. People knew who he was and saw and heard from him but showed how bad he was as a candidate in that his pathetic candidacy imploded. He had all the advantages except the man couldn’t back it up himself. And that is an example of ‘unelectable’ as there ever was. Face reality, “FredHeads”, in that Fred can’t win and isn’t viable. Move along and make excuses for another candidate you can make the ‘less of the evils’. No Mr. Perfects after all, right? And Fred was far from perfect unfortunately.

[bushfamfan]

Continue on in your fantasyland. He can’t win and it’s a good thing because not only in the GOP primary but Fred would be an absolute disaster in a general election.

[gruna]

Smart move.

[murdoog]

GW has two man issues: war on terror and tax cuts. And he’s been adamant on both.

But he sure does like to spend money...

Sounds like LBJ with tax cuts.

[tortdog]

LBJ had SOME good qualities.

[Prophet in the wilderness]

I am sorry for being mistaken.. my bad... however, the cartoon is still dis tasteful....