Posted on 01/23/2008 4:54:05 AM PST by libstripper
Fred Thompson's campaign announced via e-mail Tuesday afternoon that Thompson had dropped out of the Republican presidential race. To which one might respond, "Fred Thompson had a presidential campaign?"
Thompson announced his candidacy on "The Tonight Show with Jay Leno" half an hour after, and 3,000 miles away from, the Republican presidential debate in Durham, N.H., last September 5. It was an act of hubris borne of the disconnection from everyday reality that Hollywood stardom often produces even within otherwise sensible people.
The Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary exist to give lesser-known and under-funded candidates a shot at winning their party's nomination. Thompson never realized that he was one of those candidates. He thought he could ride his mid-level celebrity over those pesky little states and alight in South Carolina with a known name, a familiar accent and the right ideas, and conservatives would fall over themselves for the chance to mark the little oval beside his name.
But Thompson was not that famous. As one Manchester, N.H. resident told another who pointed to Thompson and asked who he was, "That's the guy from 'Law & Order,' Fred Thomas."
To win conservative voters, you first must make them familiar with your name, your message and yourself. Thompson expressed no serious interest in doing any of that.
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
Naaah.
He jumped ship WAY too soon.
Now whaaadya got?
Where’s my tackle box? It wuz around here somewherees....
Sadly that is a pretty accurate synopsis of the worst campaign in history.
No... I would give that tittle to H. Ross Perot... but thats old history too
Exactly.
Actually, I found it sort of nice that he wasn’t trying to con his way into office. I liked his manner, but most Americans have gotten so used to being entertained that they don’t see a gentle, laid-back style as captivating or interesting. On the other hand, we are being entertained by Huckabee, McCain, Rudy, etc. and everybody seems to be having a wonderful time arguing about whose the best. If you like a show, then I guess this is enetertaining, but personally, I prefer to chose my own style of entertainment. I don’t care much about what I’m hearing from the ones who are left in the field.
Unfortunately, this outcome was fairly predictable.
I never did get the people saying “Just wait until Fred gets into the race, then this thing is going to take off.”
We’re still waiting for old “fill in the blank with a name” to get this thing to take off.
That may be true, but still, Thompson jumped ship waaaay too soon. As of this very day, until his terse, 45-word announcement, the Presidency was Thompson's to lose.
And Andy Cline needs to understand something that Tom Sowell talks about, and that is that when faced with choices, one MUST chose among the range of choices actually available.
The ideal candidate described by Cline wasn't running this year.
Thompson was.
Old history, but he got 20 percent. Fred did not.
Fred’s biggest problem was that he was not willing to pander to the special interests and pretend to be something he wasn’t in order to get elected. We had a chance to elect a Conservative this year. We blew it. We let the MSM pick our candidates.
Mr. Cline endorsed John McCain before the New Hampshire primary.
Our only hope now (and it might come true) is that Romney picks him to be VP. I know you are not thrilled with Romney but I sincerely believe he is better than the Huckster. After Mitt gets the nomination (if he does) and Thompson comes aboard (maybe), I would love Romney to be man enough to allow Fred number 1 chair. Romney would gain so much respect from that and he will still be able to run in 2016 and could possibly be the best president in history after learning about what conservatism is about through 8 years as Vice President. Yes a lot of wishful thinking, but that is about all we have now a days.
Thats the bottom line.
True, and Ross never ran to win. He ran to split the vote and get Clinton elected. His campaign was too successful, and he had to drop out to stop his momentum.
I had mentioned this a couple of days ago...Fred would have been a great 19th century candidate—meaning that those candidates (Abraham Lincoln, etc.) would not have fared well in today’s superficial criteria for gaining the office. He is a man of substance in a time which puts greater value on style.
I remember the Perot campaign. At one point in July of that year he led over GHW Bush and Clinton. Then he pulled some of the most bizarre political moves I have ever witnessed and in the long run all he succeeded in doing was getting Clinton elected.
It was obvious some time ago. In December I posted this, and I don’t see anything I would change:
If elected, Romney can be an effective president. So can Mccain and Giuliani. I don’t think Huckabee could be more then Carter 2. Hunter seems like a cipher and disappointingly Thompson hasn’t made his case.
I strongly felt at the time that this would be detrimental to Fred's campaign. Seeking the office of POTUS is IMHO a very serious matter and to announce your candidacy on a late night comedian show, to me, just did not bode well for the start of his campaign. As far as I'm concerned, it's been all downhill since.
“He is a man of substance in a time which puts greater value on style.”
“If elected, Romney can be an effective president. So can Mccain and Giuliani. I don’t think Huckabee could be more then Carter 2.”
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.