Fred Thompson: This election's Wesley Clark?

[redblair]

It seems to me that Fred Thompson is relieving the Wesley Clark campaign from 4 years ago. They had lots people promoting them both to the public and to themselves. There was this sense prior to entering the race that they would be right at the top of the polls as soon as they entered. They were promoted as the "savior" of their party. Then as soon as they entered they struggled to break out of the middle of the race.

I've started calling Thompson, Fred Clark. I wonder if he'll become a talking head on CNN or go back to Law and Order?

B

 

[Waitone]

Don't be so tough on Fred. Fred has a mind of his own. Our buds in the media seem to think elections are held to provide members of the media a cause for employment and a continuing source of entertainment. The media has been snarky on Fred because he is late to the party and running in the horse race in a manner the media thinks is appropriate. He's evidently doing something right in that he is polling higher than some candidates who have worked harder and spent more money. In a recent article Fred has plainly told the media he will run his campaign his way, not their way.

I just love it when a politician tell the media to stuff it.

 

[Unregistered]

Fred is a great choice if you think Bush has done a good job and want another 4 years. I haven't been able to find one area where Fred and Bush differ significantly.

 

[G-Cym]

Fred Thompson gets a bad rap because he seems slow to respond to questions on TV. This is because it's actually HIM who's answering the question on the spot, not having a cabinet of pollsters and focus groups writing pre-planned and memorized responses like McCain and Rudy.

 

[Justme]

He could be slow to react because his preparation is something less than he's used to. Acting from a script and having the option for cuts and retakes spoils a guy.

 

[applesanity]

Wesley Clark is not Thompson. Wesley Clark is was put there in 04 by the Clintons so Hillary could make a run in 2008.

Divide the Dems (kerry the anti-war guy, Clark the ex-general), watch as GOP rallies around Bush. There was no chance for Dean to win. But if Kerry won - you can possibly see 8 years. Which means Hillary wouldn't have a chance until 2012... by then, what would happen to hubby Bubba's star power, or Hillary's?

It wasn't so long ago - think back. Of the major Democratic Party power players, it was just the Clintons who were really really in full support of Wesley Clark, even though Kerry looked like he was gonna get the nomination.

 

[ForksLaPush]

I think Fred is running for VP. That would explain why he doesn't seem to be running very hard. His more conservative stance on social issues makes him the obvious choice if Rudy gets the nomination. Just a wild guess, I also happen to think that the Republican party's "Rudy is not Hillary" strategy is not going to work.

 

[Justme]

"Rudy is not Hillary", brilliant synopsis of the republican campaign so far. But he is Hillary on everything that matters, and she will get more cooperation in the house, so it does seem a pretty weak strategy.

 

[Fremmer]

he is Hillary on everything that matters

Same position on partial-birth abortion?

Same position on taxes?

Same position on foreign policy?

LOL. I love it when democrats tell us that [insert Republican candidate] and Hillary are the same and have the same positions; it is so absurd that it is actually entertaining.

 

[Danzig]

Fred Thompson is not Hillary Clinton any more than George W. Bush is Hillary Clinton.

There are many fundamental differences but one big one immediately jumps to mind; Hillary Clinton has big dreams about increasing the size and scope of the government...and I am sure that she will increase taxes to fund her version of a welfare state.

George W. Bush (and most other republicans, Fred Thompson included) also want to increase the size and scope of government..but unlike Clinton, they have no plans to fund their ideas and will continue to grow the deficit.

This is no endorsement of Clinton..but it is a scathing indictment of George Bush, Fred Thompson, and their ilk. What kind of moron racks of a bill without having plans to pay it??!!

 

[Justme]

Fremmer do you honestly think that Hillary and Rudy are that different in any substantive way? I think the apparant differances are all semantics and pandering, I honestly believe they would govern virtually identically. I can live with that. I just don't want another moron in charge who doesn't know how to put together a cabinet nor oversee said cabinet. Competence is my #1 "issue" and why I don't support Obama in my party's primary.

 

[Fremmer]

Sure I do.

Hillbama wants more gun control. Fred doesn't.

Hillbama wants federal funding for partial-birth abortion, and no restrictions on partial-birth abortion (or any other abortion, for that matter). Fred doesn't.

Hillbama wants socialized medicine. Fred doesn't.

Hillbama wants to surrender in Iraq. Fred doesn't.

Hillbama wants to raise taxes. Fred doesn't.

Seriously, those of you who don't think there is any difference between Hillbama and Fred are in the twilight zone.

 

[Unregistered]

Fremmer is correct. Thompson is different from Hillary and Obama on many issues. He is exactly the same as Bush on the issues. If you like George Bush and think he has done a great job over the last 2 terms, then you would be very happy with Thompson.

Thompson supports Campaign Finance Reform, Medicare Reform (the drug benefit program), No Child Left Behind, the Patriot Act, larger federal government, more spending, and will continue to fight the never-ending War on Terror and the War in Iraq, I am sure with the same success as Bush. If this sounds good to you, then vote for Thompson and he won't let you down.

 

[Justme]

I guess I got off track on the Guliani vs Clinton thing there, sorry. But you're right, Fred is not like Rudy or Hillary. My girlfriend likes Fred, needless to say we don't talk about it much.

 

[GoSlash27]

I'd consider that an insult to Gen. Clark...but that's just me.

 

[Bruxley]

The difference is one that will endure long after any other effects of their administrations, their judicial appointments.

Toss your vote and get more decisions like the eminent domain non-sense from the Supremes before Bush's appointments. Like States not being able to combat the detrimental effects or immigration from circuit rulings, like the 9th circuit decision on the 2nd amendment.

Think your vote is some willy nilly thing to be tossed and bawl for 4 years then live with the effects till an activist judge dies. Pretend Hillary won't give you more Ginsburgs that treat the Constitution like a 'living document' with no real intent. Don't cry the need for Paul's loyal Constitutionalism then say you don't care who wins if you can't vote your guy. It matters....alot.....and for a LONG TIME.

Those that want to tear it all down are enthusiastic. If your not them they win. Your vote is your voice and if your going to use it to whisper then accept that the will of the shouters will be asserted.

There will never be any choice other then the 'lesser of 2 evils' except maybe once and only for a very few. The odds of a candidate becoming prominent enough to contend for the Presidency with their parties nomination that has NO 'cons' and ALL 'pros' are very slim. There are FAR too many different personal priorities in our 300 million person population for 1 candidate to meet enough of them to not be a 'lesser of 2 evils' to most people.

 

[DesertDawg]

I'm voting for Mitt Paul Huckathompson, the only candidate that has been a Mormopalian ordained minister and an actor that played the part of a Constitutional gynecologist in a TV series! To heck with that Rudy McCredo guy that wants to build "the wall" around NYC!

 

[Unregistered]

The difference is one that will endure long after any other effects of their administrations, their judicial appointments.

The Supreme Court has been dominated by Republican appointees for years, and we still get crap out of them. So I don't see that as a big selling point for Republicans. Their appointees have not been much better than the Dems.

 

[big_jack11]

Don't put down Fred Thompson. He knows what he's doing. He's one of the only good GOP candidates.

 

[Selfdfenz]

Fremmer do you honestly think that Hillary and Rudy are that different in any substantive way? I think the apparant differances are all semantics and pandering, I honestly believe they would govern virtually identically.

X-ring. I bet they share the same DNA.

S-