29 comments

  1. StevePerkins says:

    Are there any numbers on how Fred Thompson plays outside the South? He sure has lit a fire under Peach Pundit, but the last two national polls I saw have him coming in under Gingrich… who himself I don’t really see playing much outside the Southeast.

    Most of the passionate talk I hear about Thompson has to do with Southern-fried, “God, guns, and gays” discontent (although in all fairness, Chris Farris seems more concerned with spending issues). I’m still just scratching my head on how a one-term Senator, out of office and doing TV shows for the past half decade, divorced and married to a wife 25-years younger, has so caught the eye of grassroots values-voters. I just don’t get it at all… is it a local thing, a protest by disgruntled Southerners?

  2. jsm says:

    Steve, do some research on Thompson’s role in the Watergate hearings and follow his resume through the three decades since. He’s more than a one-term senator who does TV shows, and people supporting him are talking about much more than ‘God, guns, and gays’.

  3. StevePerkins says:

    Err, okay jsm… according to Wikipedia he was a lawyer who worked on the Watergate committee, and then he spent the next 18 years as a corporate lobbyist (apparently some of the special interests he lobbied for lead to the 80’s S & L crisis). Jack Abramhoff can match that.

    I don’t know… maybe in the modern age of telecommunications and front-loaded campaign cycles, national races will be more and more about the “rock star” factor. Hell, that sums up Obama in two words, and likewise the Republican front-runner is a MAYOR who few people really know anything about. Maybe the days of voters favoring governors and Vice-Presidents is drawing to a close. It’ll be interesting… we’ll see.

  4. Doug Deal says:

    Steve,

    We need to elect Presidents on judgement and values, and less on experience. George HW Bush, Gore, Kerry, Nixon and Ford all had remarkable resumes, but I would not want to see any of them as our next President.

  5. drjay says:

    i thought the whole reason he got into acting was that he had done some “famous lawyering” that was made into a movie and he ended up playing himself–i guess i did not realize he had been a “lobbyist”–that can be a bit unseemly

  6. drjay says:

    i just wikied him myself–and yeah one of his cases led to the downfall of a tennessee governor over selling pardons and it got made into a movie.

  7. StevePerkins says:

    I’m inclined to agree in principle, Doug. However, the realist in me recognizes that the fact one is running for President at all is evidence of poor judgment and values! 🙂

  8. Chris says:

    In Rudy’s defense, he was the chief executive of a government larger than most states. The fact he was a Republican in the bluest of regions indicates something too.

  9. SpaceyG says:

    Now that I think about it, those SAG dudes do pretty good in public service. Except for poor Sonny B. hugging that tree so darn hard. Ouch.

  10. Donkey Kong says:

    I’d take HW Bush any day. Not a Reagan, but there’s only been one Reagan. Bush definitely should not be lumped in with Nixon, Ford, Gore, and Kerry.

    What’s the deal with all you Thompson fans? Maybe he was sick, but when I watched him on Fox News, he was BORING. Don’t get me wrong, I’m all about the issues, and would probably support a less popular candidate if his principles are stronger. But if you want a solid conservative, GO WITH NEWT!!!!!!!!!!!!! Newt is as conservative, or moreso, than Thompson, and unlike Thompson, W Bush, et al, Newt can communicate exceptionally well.

    Newt’s my homeboy.

    Oh, and did I mention HE’S FROM GEORGIA? C’mon guys, for our own sake, do we still want Carter as our only President?????

  11. Doug Deal says:

    My problem with Newt is that I get that sleazy as Bill Clinton vibe about him.

    It might seem old fashioned of me, but I have trouble trusting a man that cannot be trusted by his own wife.

  12. Donkey Kong says:

    Doug, no beef with you there. I don’t like it either. But I do trust that Newt is conservative and that he has a brilliant mind with REAL solutions. I know that’s a campaign cliche, but if you’ve listened to him or read much of his stuff, I think you’d agree. I think that he has the communicative ability to not only propose hard but good solutions, but to bring Congress and the American people along with him. I really don’t think Fred can do that.

    Plus, I’m scared to see Fred debate Obama (would remind me of 1992 Bush v. Clinton debates). Newt would make Obama, or anyone the Dems bring at us, look like a child.

  13. drjay says:

    i think a fred thompson prepped for debate would be at least as effective as DA branch is presenting to a jury. also he should be able to ad lib and react to his opponent unless he is a just really crappy actor…

  14. StevePerkins says:

    Plus, I’m scared to see Fred debate Obama (would remind me of 1992 Bush v. Clinton debates). Newt would make Obama, or anyone the Dems bring at us, look like a child.

    Heh. Funny you should say that… the debates are the exact reason why I’m squeamish about Newt. I have no doubt that he would come across as smarter than anyone the Dems put up, but Al Gore looked a lot smarter than Dubya in 2000. Americans respect smart, but they generally DON’T like “snarky”… Newt and Gore both come across as snarky-smart.

  15. Chris says:

    Americans respect smart, but they generally DON’T like “snarky”

    There goes my political career.

  16. Donkey Kong says:

    Steve,

    You’re right, in that my biggest concern is that Newt will appear condescending. No matter who we put up, IMHO, right now Obama wins the likeability factor. But if we can show him to be ignorant and young, and demonstrate the need for experience and intelligence (i.e. in an age of unusually complex foreign policy, dwindling social security, and record deficits, can we trust our well-being with a young senator from Illinois?), Newt could win out.

    When I met Newt at CPAC, I got the vibe of: hey, let me talk TO you, not with you. I’m smarter than you, so listen. He DEFINITELY needs to work on that. It’s said that no matter who Clinton was talking to, the person felt as if Clinton genuinely wanted to know their thoughts. I think Obama can pull that off. Newt needs to work on it. BUT, let’s not be mistaken, Newt knows how to debate. He knows how to win. He just needs to make sure he does it in a likeable fashion.

  17. jsm says:

    “according to Wikipedia he was a lawyer who worked on the Watergate committee, and then he spent the next 18 years as a corporate lobbyist (apparently some of the special interests he lobbied for lead to the 80’s S & L crisis). Jack Abramhoff can match that.”

    As soon as you said Wikipedia, the credibility of the post went way down. Working on the Watergate case and lobbying is not all Thompson has done. Do you suggest that the S&L crisis was caused solely by deregulation and that this was somehow caused by Fred Thompson? That’s a stretch, too.

    Have a look at what else Thompson has done:
    http://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodisplay.pl?index=t000457
    http://www.lawrenceburgs.com/fred-thompson.html

  18. StevePerkins says:

    As soon as you said Wikipedia, the credibility of the post went way down.

    Yeah, because posts on partisan political blogs are chock full o’ credibility in the first place. If you feel that Wikipedia has incorrect on unbalanced information about Fred Thompson, and Fred Thompson is your man, I invite you to make edits to the article to balance out the community-created profile. That’s sorta the point.

  19. Icarus says:

    I’ve been out of pocket for a few days, just getting caught up.

    Chris, Glad to see someone take the initiative to set up GA’s for Fred. Do you have cookies, and do I have to join in my real name to get them?

    Steve,

    I’m also very interested in seeing how Thompson polls in purple states like OH, PA, WI, NH, CO, etc. My guess is that based on current trends, we at least lose OH from the 2004 election, so we’re going to need at least one pickup. That’s why I’ve been trying to convince myself to support Rudy, but I’m still scared as hell that Kerik’s issues don’t just belong to Kerick.

    And as for Newt, I’ve posted my thoughts on him here and at RedState. At the risk of repeating myself, Fred Thompson’s baggage fits in the overhead compartment, while Newt needs a 747 Freighter for his. I like Newt. After the November massacre, he was my first choice. But I’ve resigned myself to the fact that he’s unelectable, and needs to be in a somewhat behind the scenes, “wise-man” kind of role.

  20. Chris says:

    Icarus

    Bring me 10 new Fred supporters and you get a cookie. I will need a real name to deliver it. 🙂

  21. Icarus says:

    “But if you can convert snarky into smart-ass, you could become a blogger. ”

    Well then, I guess I’ve arrived.

  22. Icarus says:

    Too late. Icarus has crashed and burned. Welcome to my rehab.

    Andre, want to join me at step 1?

Comments are closed.