Replies

>>Fred definitely gets it - he knows what our greatest threat is!<<

Romney has been saying the same @$#@ thing for months. He openly calls them jihadists. And so far, he’s talked in more depth and with more substance than Thompson has on the issue and on securing the border, as well. He flat out condemned McCain-Kennedy and came out with a MUCH improved strategy towards attracting legal immigrants (i.e. people with skills who actually pay for themselves).

It just amazes me how quickly Thompson has caught on here. I’m not criticizing Thompson or his supporters, really. I’m just scratching my head a little.

We have a proven executive who has displayed over and over again that he can run an operation better than just about anyone, be it an investment firm, an Olympic Games, or a state. An executive who hasn’t been afraid to veto Rat legislation (and pro-life legislation) over and over again. And an amazing speaker.

And we’re clamoring all over a SENATOR? (And I’ve heard the argument over and over again right herethat a Senator can’t win a presidential election).

I’ll probably be joining the Fred-heads before long. I’m just baffled. And I say that as a Tennesseean who has voted for Thompson.

It just amazes me how quickly Thompson has caught on here. I’m not criticizing Thompson or his supporters, really. I’m just scratching my head a little.

Stop scratching and I'll explain. Thompson doesn't flip-flop. Thompson is a conservative. Most Freepers like principled, consistent conservatives.

Thompson won't grab our guns, won't take our money, wants smaller government spending, will secure the borders and offer no amnesty, will fight the Jihadis as well as the dhimmis and doesn't support the homosexual agenda.

To sum up, he doesn't have to apologize for or hide the existence of or flip-flop on any of his positions when addressing conservatives.

And we’re clamoring all over a SENATOR? (And I’ve heard the argument over and over again right hear that a Senator can’t win a presidential election).

Usually a Senator doesn't bring enough to the table, but there are exceptions. Didn't a Senator make it to the White House in 1960? I know...different time, different circumstances, but it can happen. Perish the thought that a Senator from New York can do it in 08!

All I can say is, if Thompson runs and get's the nomination, I hope ALL republicans support him.
Just a side note, John Kennedy was a senator.
Actually ( correct me if I am wrong ) but, isn't the only requirements to run for president in the US is : you must be 37 years old, and a natural born US citizen ( I know, I know, that person must have some kind of experience, but, Ike was a US general ).
I wanted and supported Duncan Hunter, and if he get's the nomination, that would be great, but, that looks as of now his chances look slim.

THOMPSON-HUNTER 2008 ..... the only common sense choice in 2008 ...

And we’re clamoring all over a SENATOR? (And I’ve heard the argument over and over again right herethat a Senator can’t win a presidential election).

You can throw that old cannard out the window if it's former Senator Thompson vs. Senator Clinton or Senator Obama someone from the Senate will be President.

You're right about Romney though. The problem with him is that his social conservative credentials are a little thin...no matter what he says today. In 1994 he ran to the left of Ted Kennedy fr that Senate seat. One gets the feeling that he's willing to say whatever he thinks his audience wants to hear. I don't completely trust him and I'm not sure that he's a real conservative.

I get you about the odd lack of enthusiasm for Mitt. In a way, he seems to have it all. He’s young, good looking, articulate, has a funny (if low key)personality. I would love to see him as Veep so the country could get to know him.

I think a lot of people are afraid the Mormon thing would drag him down and are desperate for a candidate who could win.

But Fred just has a presence and charisma...and, it’s hard to explain but, there it is.