Posted on 11/10/2007 9:58:59 AM PST by Brices Crossroads
In September, I posted another vanity (linked below) in which I observed that the historical trends in this election favored Fred Thompson. Since then, his RCP average has dropped from about 22% to 16-17%. In the more volatile Rasmussen daily tracking poll, he has also dropped to 16%, about a 10 point drop from his post announcement high. In light of the above poll numbers, is it time for me to issue a mea culpa? No. This is not at all inconsistent with the hypothesis of my previous post.
Neither of the successful insurgent candidates in modern times, Reagan or Goldwater, has remained the frontrunner continuously. Reagan actually lost the mantle twice, both times in Iowa, when Gerald Ford upset him narrowly in 1976 and George H.W. Bush did the same in 1980. Goldwater was the underdog until he won the California primary. An insurgent candidacy cannot by definition be waged by a frontrunner. So Fred's poll numbers should not depress any of his supporters. In fact they ought to be a cause for quiet optimism. He remains in second place where he has been for the entire race. The Mainstream Media has bitten is tail trying to destroy him, much as it did Reagan. This has been beneficial in three ways that are not readily apparent. First, among fairminded GOP primary voters who are undecided (and overwhelmingly conservative), the attacks will be perceived as "over the top". Undecided voters in the GOP will not be sure who the elite establishment candidate is (I think it is Giuliani, principally, but an argument can be made that both Romney and McCain are default choices, in the event Giuliani implodes). They will be sure, however, who the establishment candidate is not. It is NOT Fred Thompson. Their contempt for Fred is not only a badge of honor for him, but in my opinion a magnet for votes among disaffected GOP conservatives, of whom there are many on Immigration, government spending and political correctness, among other issues.
Second, the barrage against Fred reflects a not very subtle anti-Southern bias in the elite. They despise the south in general and Fred's signature principle, Federalism, in particular. It stands in the way of their plans, which have been underway without interruption since Reagan left office in 1988, to concentrate power in Washington, D.C. This anti southern bias also plays into Thompson's hands, because it contains all the ingredients for a backlash among southern GOP primary voters. This backlash is magnified in importance because the South (having voted Republican so faithfully over the years) is apportioned relatively more delegates than its population would call for. Fred, as the only major southern candidate, would be the natural beneficiary of regional pride. His regional advantage will, in my opinion, be magnified by the not so subtle anti-southern bigotry of the elites.
Finally, the elites, and their MSM allies, are to be thanked for lowering expectations for Fred. They are basically telling GOP primary voters that it is over, he cannot win, etc. When he does better than expected, as I predict he will in every primary/caucus, it will cause a thunderclap in which he will be perceived as the victor, even if he does not place first in them all. Ironically, in lowering expectations, they are not damaging him among those of us who detest the elites and the MSM but they doing yeoman's work for the Thompson campaign. The free publicity Fred is virtually guaranteed to get after "exceeding expectations" could not be purchased with all of Romney's millions.
Just as a postscript, let me say something about insurgent candidates in general and Fred Thompson in particular. Insurgent candidates are uncomfortable and ineffective in the role of the frontrunner. Reagan was never comfortable in the role. Good, principled candidates are at their best on the offensive. Fred Thompson is no different. In his first election in Tennessee, he was at his best when he came from 20 points down to defeat a strong Democrat Congressman and to reclaim Al Gore's seat for the Republicans.
A frontrunner's campaign can be successful, but I do not believe it will be so this year. In any event, Fred Thompson is not the candidate to run such a campaign. His principles and honesty would be major impediments to such a "safe" strategy. However, in the particular circumstances the country and the Party find itself in in 2008, Fred Thompson is in exactly the position he needs to be to claim the GOP nomination. The times have indeed met the man.
Previous post:http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1900662/posts
Ping!
Fred Ping!
...who are you and why should I care about your political opinions?
Fred Thompson will make a great President.
This just shows the MSM bias against conservatives.
Their afraid because Thompson would beat Hilldog by a landslide.
IMO, Fred’s decline in the polls seems to have begun when he said of the Schiavo case (on 9/13)
“I can’t pass judgment on it. I know that good people were doing what they thought was best,” Thompson said. “That’s going back in history. I don’t remember the details of it.”
It certainly took the wind out of my sails. :(
I thought Terri Schiavo was a tragedy as well. But...r
Do you really think Congress can come in and pass special bill every time there is a miscarriage of justice, even a serious one, at the state level? The intention was good, but such a policy is bad.
So, because Thompson wasn’t as deeply immersed in the story as we here at FR were, he’s not a good candidate? Illogical.
Looking back over your posts, I find no “wind in your sails” to begin with concerning FRed.
No harm, no foul, eh?
Excellent post. Thank you.
I think you were able to put into one set of understandable words what many of us were saying in bits and pieces.
Again, great post.
At least Thompson’s voting record has been consistanley pro-life, which is more than can be said of the other top tier candidates.
Do you really think that nobody is aware of your posting history?
Great work! :)
I think Thompson is in a good position as well. I think there are going to be a lot of pundits with egg on their face.
WOW! Since FDT enjoys the company of so many of the current administration, and of the Rockefeller Republicans, how can it be said the establishmeent is against him? All candidates sink or swim under their own weight if they are given fair air time, IMO.
If you are implying that my post is not consistent with my posting history, that’s wrong. I have consistently said I like Fred better than the rest, but I’m disappointed about the Schiavo comments. (As I have written before.)
Never have I expressed anything positive about any others but Hunter (whom I’ve never supported outright or preferred).
So, what’s your point and what’s your problem? Or do you just prefer misleading innuendo?
I'm not going to do the legwork for you, but you're mistaken.
Clara Lou, the whole country and in particular the US Congress had an opinion on Schiavo.
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.