Fred Takes Big Money in Georgia

Alex notices that Fred Thompson pulled in $400K in one night, nearly beating the entire 1Q haul for Obama or Romney in the state of Georgia.

I recently had a good friend ask if Thompson had the fundraising power of Romney or Rudy. My answer was “yes” and I don’t see anything (at least in the red states) that will unhook that.

Additionally, behind the scenes there is significant positioning by the Republican power players at the national level (read: $$) to bolster Fred when he’s officially ‘in’. Tonight makes it look like the same support may easily exist within Georgia.

30 comments

  1. IndyInjun says:

    Fred Thompson is the #1 choice of the drowning GOP rats, desperate to find ANYBODY better than Guiliani, Romney, and McCain.

    FT is just another Bush apologist and THAT will get him beaten like a drum.

    RON PAUL is the antidote for the poison that has infected the GOP.

    Thompson will quickly fade.

    The party would do well to line up behind Newt, a guy, like Ron Paul, unafraid to dish out harsh criticism of the Bush gang.

    Fred is just another lap dog.

  2. Newt is awesome. Most of us would support a Newt ticket, I am just becoming afraid of the timetable. Next best thing: Romney/Gingrich ticket. Get a board!

  3. Bull Moose says:

    I think the fact of the matter is that if you want to prevail in terms of raising money in Georgia in terms of politics, you need Steve Croy on your team.

    While I currently disagree in terms of Croy’s efforts, I totally think that a winning team requires Steve Croy.

    I can’t wait to welcome him to the McCain effort!!!

  4. John Konop says:

    Thompson lobbied for abortion rights

    Does this give Fred Thompson the same problem that Romney has on abortion? If you are pro-life does it make sense you would be a paid lobbyist for the pro–choice movement?

    Yahoo-The Los Angeles Times reported on its Web site that Thompson was retained by National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association to lobby the administration of President George H.W. Bush to ease a regulation that prevented clinics that received federal money from offering any abortion counseling.

    Fred Thompson, who is weighing a Republican presidential bid as a social conservative, “has no recollection” of performing lobbying work in 1991 for a family planning group that was seeking to relax an abortion counseling rule, a spokesman said Friday.

    The Los Angeles Times reported on its Web site that Thompson was retained by National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association to lobby the administration of President George H.W. Bush to ease a regulation that prevented clinics that received federal money from offering any abortion counseling.

    At the time, Thompson, a lawyer, worked as a lobbyist at Arent Fox Kintner Plotkin & Kahn, a Washington firm.

  5. Erick says:

    Konop, it’s amazing that the LA Times has a hit job on Thompson and there is zero documentary evidence to back it up except an alleged line in minutes of the organization.

    There is no lobbyist registration, no White House logs, and the only two people who say it are people who actively fought Thompson on the Roberts and Alito nominations.

  6. Ben Marshall says:

    Erick, well, we’ve never seen Konop have the capacity to do anything except cut and paste articles into the comment box.

  7. John Konop says:

    This is a lot more evidence here than your hit piece on Isakson no matter how you spin it!

    Your Isakson post was a made up rumor by you with no facts!

    Do you really believe what you write?

  8. Erick says:

    Get back to the meds John. Get back to the meds. Pretty soon you’re going to think you actually made a good showing against Tom Price.

  9. Help me understand why the Republicans have such a difficult time with Sex Education & Family Planning? Until they come up with a stem cell to help us ebil menfolk grow a uterus, i’d like to see the debate predominantly by and among womenfolk.

  10. John Konop says:

    The lawyer in you always comes out when you get caught! Go personal and avoid topic, the only problem Erick is the truth catches up!

    As far as Tom Price goes it is big government republicans like him you support in safe districts is why the party is getting smaller!

    You talk about less government and spending but at the end NEOCONS like you support lawmakers like Price that voted for or supports No Child Left Behind, Farm Bill, Energy Bill, Highway bill

  11. Mark Rountree says:

    Victor, when opinion surveys are conducted regarding the abortion issue (by either Republican or Democrat pollsters), women come up as more pro-life than men.

    I realize that, to you, this fact turns conventional wisdom on it’s head; it is also a regularly overlooked fact by the national media buffoons posing as “analysts” when they discuss the issue.

    Womenfolk, as you call them, if given the right to vote, would likely outlaw most abortions.

    So yes, let the “womenfolk” debate. And then give them the right to Vote on their debate points … you’d support that, right?

    Give them the right to vote on outlawing abortion except in the cases of rape, incest, and the life of the mother (the national right to life position).

    What good is debate if you can’t then vote?

  12. Mark Rountree says:

    PS to Vic: some great photos on your site by the way — grave markers for Paul Revere, Sam Adams, etc. People don’t get to see those often…

  13. Mark Rountree says:

    John,

    You called Erick a big government Republican. Not quite clear what all that was based on…

    But in your campaign weren’t you for having the federal gov’t raise tariffs on imported goods, and for eliminating some of the free trade agreements? isn’t that big government?

  14. SouthernConservativ says:

    Since I do not have “new thread” abilities I figure’d I’d post this here.

    Everyone in the GOP and Conservative mind set needs to step back from Fred Thompson for a moment.

    I believe we need to be looking for the next Great Leader….not the next Ronald Reagan.

    If the GOP and/or the conservative movement continues looking to the past and not the present or the future we will lose.

    It is important for “us” to find “todays” candidate. A candidate to move “us” forward and lead “us” into the future.

    With this in mind….is Fred that candidate? Is there a candidate in the field that is that candidate?

    Reagan failed on many levels….under Reagan we had the immigration fiasco…the Cold War…IMO…never really ended….but the media convinced us it did…….things got renamed….look at the relations today….appears to be the Cold War to me…..

    We all need to step back and get some perspective on history and current events.

    JF
    Savannah, GA

  15. Mark,

    Could you please link us to some of the polls, which include the underlying polling participants selection criteria?

    Since the problem of unplanned parenthood and widespread stds seem to be reaching proportions that make them a top republican priority, i have trouble squaring the lack of public education about it in our school systems.

    I am by no means recommending repeated abortions as a standard method of birth control. The decision and procedure must be painful enough without you, i or any third parties legislating what a woman or couple choose to do.

    Enjoyed your Landmark site. Wish the issue of campaign finance reform would surface occasionally. The way you described the way the Judicial and Law Enforcement Elections operate may be good blueprint to start with.

    Glad you enjoyed Paul Revere et al. They don’t make firebrand-radical, freedom-loving patriots like that anymore. Those guys drove poor King George to a nervous breakdown.

    Vic

  16. Ben Marshall says:

    I have amend my previous post to add that when Konop isn’t cutting and pasting articles, he’s rambles on and finds a way to relate the current topic to how Tom Price is the source of all that is evil.

  17. John Konop says:

    Mark Rountree

    I never said we should raise tariffs on real free trade. The truth is we have managed trade not free trade if you read the agreements. If we had real free trade why do need bills like the farm bill to subsidies corporate farmers?

    What I said was we should have no tariffs or subsidies on any bilateral trade deal as long as the other Country follows Intellectual Property laws, no child and slave labor (labor has rights to negotiate) and has the rule of justice.

    The father of the free market system Adam Smith was clear if the above does not happen we need to fine the other Country heavy enough to take away the incentive to cheat!

    Adam Smith was an abolitionist and a moral philosopher who believed in God. The phrase Life, Liberty and pursuit of happiness was coined from Adam Smith!

    BTW the late Charlie Norwood was very outspoken about this issue!

  18. John Konop says:

    Ben Marshall

    Since you support Congressman Tom Price and Erick Erickson on their support of No Child Left Behind, Farm Bill, Drug Bill, Energy Bill, Highway Bill

  19. John Konop says:

    Mark

    The trade issue is similar to our illegal immigration problem. Why do you think the behavior would change if we do nothing to enforce the law or have no teeth in an agreement?

    Do you not find it strange that China can send goods with poison in them and we do very little about it?

  20. Donkey Kong says:

    Vote Newt! If you don’t vote Newt, vote Fred! If you don’t vote Fred, put all the names in a hat and pick one–cause they’re all equally bad.

  21. IndyInjun says:

    Fred is just another empty suit front man for Wall Street. He is the ultimate Washington Insider.

    No thanks.

    Victor and John K you nail it about Tom Price and the rest of the Georgia GOP delegation – all of them are corporatists and fake conservatives who ushered in a doubling of debt and, with it, the chances of a financial doomsday.

    We fiscal conservatives have identified what they are by their backstabbing votes.

    Price is going to look real good, when the current Wall Street looting disguised as subprime mortgages, CDO’s, CLO’s, and financial derivatives no one understands in the $trillions fall like dominoes.

    The GOP turned into lapdogs instead of watchdogs. The Dems are having a field day as a result.

    Frankly, with candidates like these the GOP is going to get a richly-deserved death sentence.

  22. Donkey Kong says:

    Indy,

    Exactly how is it Tom Price’s fault for the subprime mortgage let-down? The SEC regulates Wall Street, not Tom Price and the Georgia delegation. The securitization of loans has proved greatly beneficial for our economy, increasing liquidity and improving market efficiencies. (And, Indy, even if you are correct in blaming the Congress, which you aren’t, the GOP isn’t the majority party. If you don’t like the absence of tougher security regulations, blame the Dems).

    Want to know who the Wall Street empty suits are? Follow the money. Both Hilary and Obama received massive amounts of $$ from the street, more than any GOP candidate (except perhaps Romney, who is a street veteran of one of the top PE firms). John Edwards, the alleged great defender of the poor, has served as an adviser for Fortress Investment Group, one of the highest contributing firms on the street. In 2005, for the first time since 1994, the Dems received more $$ from the street than the GOP, and the trend has continued to increase in the Dems favor over the last year and a half. Please stop your whining about this.

  23. IndyInjun says:

    The subprime mess happened totally on the watch of the GOP POTUS, Congress, SEC (see Pitt and Cox), Fed (Greenspan and the current clown Bernanke are both REPUBLICANS).

    This is a matter of record.

    What was Bush’s advice after 9/11? That idiot told us to go out and SPEND. Then he went out and set a pace to borrow more money than all of the previous presidents COMBINED. At the same time Greenspan dropped real interest rates into negative territory, forcing moneyof conservative folks out of banks and into Real Estate speculation. I know, because I did it rather than see my life’s savings wiped out by their wave of inflation.

    Then there is Greenspan, who at nearly the precise moment that interest rates were at rock bottom, when folks should have locked in FIXED RATES, advised them all to take out ARM’s!

    The subprime mess, the CDO’s, the CLO’s were all ‘innovations’ of the last 6 years, when the EXECUTIVE authority was in the hands of the GOP’s Bush.

    I have always been a conservative and voted GOP, but no more. That party has wrecked the finances of America and there is no denying their role.

  24. Donkey Kong says:

    Indy, as long as there is a FREE market, we will have overspeculation and inflation, followed by a recession. Its the business cycle. Why? Because we’re human, and humans make mistakes. But, in a way, those mistakes are good for the savvy investor. Warren Buffet makes his billions off the mistakes of the street clique.

    Bush’s advice to spend DID save our economy from a likely recession. Long-term, its stupid. Short-term, it worked. The large majority of economic forecasters say that consumer spending carried our economy during those times. The lowered fed rates also spurred the economy to halt a recession. Econ 101 says that as the cost of investment decreases, companies will invest more. Greenspan’s fed policies made it easy for companies to invest in the future. With every decision comes a negative side, and that was found in the mortgage sector. Since the cost of borrowing was so low, banks thought they could relax their credit requirements and take on increasingly risky borrowers. It was foolishly risky, and it caught up to them. Ironically, you are criticizing the very two things that kept our economy humming the last few years. Would you prefer a recession?

    CDO’s, CLO’s, et al are a side effect of the lowered cost of borrowing. Supply/Demand says that as the cost of a good decreases, consumption increases. The cost of borrowing decreased, and so borrowing increased. The increased demand for loans drove the creation of CDO’s and CLO’s. Those who invest their money in foolishly risky investments will lose it in the end, and that’s how the market works. The government didn’t force lenders to lax their credit requirements, lenders did it themselves, and many of them will pay for it.

    If you have always been a conservative, then you should understand that humans are fallible and that in a free market they will make mistakes. But those mistakes are better than the alternative: the government telling you how you can and cannot invest your money.

  25. Donkey Kong says:

    The real threat that I see to our economy is a combination of our global ties and the fancy financial instruments that you mention. I agree that they are highly risky. Here’s the problem. The global economy is progressing magnificently. But not all countries have the same corporate standards that we do, creating a risky investment environment.

    I work for a global financial services firm and am frequently exposed to investor sentiment abroad. I can’t be specific, but I can say that there are many examples of Asian firms (particularly in India and China) purchasing companies at highly inflated prices, sometimes as much as 60 – 80% higher than their real value. Sooner or later, these markets will see a correction. The correction could be large or small, but the real danger is that our complex financial instruments magnify the potential losses in an ill-timed market correction. So when the markets to eventually correct, hedge funds in particular stand to lose big.

    But the savvy investor can see through this. High returns are almost always coupled with high risk, and the long term return on capital in these risky investments is often similar to the average market return. Some will get lucky and get out at the right time, making their billions. But most will not, and they will lose their job, their fortunes, and their reputation because of it. The savvy investor recognizes that they are in this for the long-term. Long-term does not mean you avoid risk, but that you are critical of each new investment fad.

Comments are closed.