Fred Thompson (flamesuit ON)
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Fred Thompson (flamesuit ON)
To all you potential voters out there. Just an fyi... Kind of an interesting take on the deal.
Yes, the Next Reagan
by Bruce Walker, Columnist
March 26, 2007
Two months ago, I wrote an article, "The Next Reagan," in which I outlined many of the reasons why Fred Thompson will be the next Ronald Reagan. Events since then have confirmed my arguments. I predict that Fred Thompson will enter the Republican nomination, that he will win it fairly easily, and that he will also defeat Hillary comfortably in the presidential election. Why?
First, no Republican since Ronald Reagan draws remotely as much genuine enthusiasm among conservatives as a serious presidential candidate. Both of the Bush presidencies have been mild disappointments. Though respect for our current commander-in-chief is high, President Bush is simply not an effective communicator or articulator of conservative principles. President Bush, however, is light years ahead of Senator Dole, the 1996 nominee, and also better as a communicator and campaigner than his father. That is how bad things have been for conservatives since the Gipper left the White House.
Fred Thompson, in stark contrast, is a phenomenal communicator. His background as a film and television star combines perfectly with his background as a very persuasive trial lawyer so that he is not only comfortable in front of the camera or at the microphone, but his skills in rhetoric are unequaled in any major political figure since Senator Robert Taft over fifty years ago.
Second, Thompson has always walked the walk on ethical issues. When he was Republican counsel in the Watergate hearings – the same hearings in which Hillary cut her teeth in politics as a Democrat – Fred Thompson did not tolerate the corruption of the Nixon Administration. He can effectively point out that both Hillary and he were on the same side in opposing corruption when it was his political party that had problems. Thompson also, though, was unrelenting in his opposition to the corruption of the Clinton Administration and stood out as the lone Republican senator will real guts during the impeachment trial of Clinton. The combination of these two principled stands will allow Thompson to relentlessly condemn Hillary as an accomplice in her husband's thoroughly corrupt eight years in office, to ask her point-blank about how she began the best investor in America (with no experience), and otherwise to do more than simply suggest that Hillary is a liar, a hypocrite and a bully.
Third, Thompson would unite the whole leadership of the Republican Party. No one dislikes him and almost everyone likes him. Although some conservatives may worry about his friendship and past support for John McCain, the critical fact is that friendship is reciprocated: McCain would be a very active and passionate supporter of Fred Thompson in the presidential election.
Fourth, the rap on Thompson is that he was "lazy" when he was in the Senate. This is precisely the same sort of rap that Leftists made about Ronald Reagan. In fact, this is strength. Because Thompson acts from principle, he does not need to engage in the Machiavellian machinations which pass for "work" in Washington. The reality is that it is absurd to consider Thompson, who has worked during his life in more real jobs than almost any politician in Washington and who today stars in two television programs as well as being the substitute for Paul Harvey and a frequent commentator in conservative periodicals is "lazy" at all. Like Reagan, he probably works harder than anyone in Washington.
Fifth, because he was an extremely popular Tennessee senator, Thompson would completely sweep the South, including problematic states like Arkansas, Florida and Virginia. Thompson, like Reagan, is one of the few modern candidates who has true regional drawing power. Thompson, though, would run very strongly in swing states outside the South like Ohio, Iowa, Wisconsin, Oregon and New Hampshire. His appeal to truly independent and undecided voters is very real.
Sixth, Thompson cannot be demonized. His whole life has been a study in how the American Dream works. His blue collar background, his constancy of moral purpose, his lack of ambition for power for its own sake, his palpable decency – all of these will make anyone who tries to slime him look awful and any attempt will backfire in sympathetic support for him.
Seventh, because Thompson cannot be hurt in the usual ways that Leftists hurt conservative Republicans, Hillary will have to campaign him on the issues. This will create an insurmountable problem for her because, like all Leftists, Hillary has no stands on any issues. She just wants power. Thompson just wants what is best for America. We have our Reagan. ***
Yes, the Next Reagan
by Bruce Walker, Columnist
March 26, 2007
Two months ago, I wrote an article, "The Next Reagan," in which I outlined many of the reasons why Fred Thompson will be the next Ronald Reagan. Events since then have confirmed my arguments. I predict that Fred Thompson will enter the Republican nomination, that he will win it fairly easily, and that he will also defeat Hillary comfortably in the presidential election. Why?
First, no Republican since Ronald Reagan draws remotely as much genuine enthusiasm among conservatives as a serious presidential candidate. Both of the Bush presidencies have been mild disappointments. Though respect for our current commander-in-chief is high, President Bush is simply not an effective communicator or articulator of conservative principles. President Bush, however, is light years ahead of Senator Dole, the 1996 nominee, and also better as a communicator and campaigner than his father. That is how bad things have been for conservatives since the Gipper left the White House.
Fred Thompson, in stark contrast, is a phenomenal communicator. His background as a film and television star combines perfectly with his background as a very persuasive trial lawyer so that he is not only comfortable in front of the camera or at the microphone, but his skills in rhetoric are unequaled in any major political figure since Senator Robert Taft over fifty years ago.
Second, Thompson has always walked the walk on ethical issues. When he was Republican counsel in the Watergate hearings – the same hearings in which Hillary cut her teeth in politics as a Democrat – Fred Thompson did not tolerate the corruption of the Nixon Administration. He can effectively point out that both Hillary and he were on the same side in opposing corruption when it was his political party that had problems. Thompson also, though, was unrelenting in his opposition to the corruption of the Clinton Administration and stood out as the lone Republican senator will real guts during the impeachment trial of Clinton. The combination of these two principled stands will allow Thompson to relentlessly condemn Hillary as an accomplice in her husband's thoroughly corrupt eight years in office, to ask her point-blank about how she began the best investor in America (with no experience), and otherwise to do more than simply suggest that Hillary is a liar, a hypocrite and a bully.
Third, Thompson would unite the whole leadership of the Republican Party. No one dislikes him and almost everyone likes him. Although some conservatives may worry about his friendship and past support for John McCain, the critical fact is that friendship is reciprocated: McCain would be a very active and passionate supporter of Fred Thompson in the presidential election.
Fourth, the rap on Thompson is that he was "lazy" when he was in the Senate. This is precisely the same sort of rap that Leftists made about Ronald Reagan. In fact, this is strength. Because Thompson acts from principle, he does not need to engage in the Machiavellian machinations which pass for "work" in Washington. The reality is that it is absurd to consider Thompson, who has worked during his life in more real jobs than almost any politician in Washington and who today stars in two television programs as well as being the substitute for Paul Harvey and a frequent commentator in conservative periodicals is "lazy" at all. Like Reagan, he probably works harder than anyone in Washington.
Fifth, because he was an extremely popular Tennessee senator, Thompson would completely sweep the South, including problematic states like Arkansas, Florida and Virginia. Thompson, like Reagan, is one of the few modern candidates who has true regional drawing power. Thompson, though, would run very strongly in swing states outside the South like Ohio, Iowa, Wisconsin, Oregon and New Hampshire. His appeal to truly independent and undecided voters is very real.
Sixth, Thompson cannot be demonized. His whole life has been a study in how the American Dream works. His blue collar background, his constancy of moral purpose, his lack of ambition for power for its own sake, his palpable decency – all of these will make anyone who tries to slime him look awful and any attempt will backfire in sympathetic support for him.
Seventh, because Thompson cannot be hurt in the usual ways that Leftists hurt conservative Republicans, Hillary will have to campaign him on the issues. This will create an insurmountable problem for her because, like all Leftists, Hillary has no stands on any issues. She just wants power. Thompson just wants what is best for America. We have our Reagan. ***
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,550
Likes: 2
From: Mount Airy,MD
So far with everything I have seen or heard, he would have my vote of all the candidates out there, dem or rep.
The closest on the dems side is Richardson. As far as other reps, I don't like any of them, and I'm a rep myself.
I will say, I think the dems may be worried about him as he hasn't even announced yet and the NY Times is already trying to smear him.
The closest on the dems side is Richardson. As far as other reps, I don't like any of them, and I'm a rep myself.
I will say, I think the dems may be worried about him as he hasn't even announced yet and the NY Times is already trying to smear him.
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,448
Likes: 0
From: Texas in the heart
I will say, I think the dems may be worried about him as he hasn't even announced yet and the NY Times is already trying to smear him.
I just hope it's not another election where you have to pick between the best of the worse.
Trending Topics
Senior Member
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
From: Crestview, FL
Originally Posted by kingfish51
the NY Times is already trying to smear him.
NO WAY!! they are such a fair and balanced newspaper too.
i would have thought they would have given him a fair shot 
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,121
Likes: 0
From: Hammer Lane
Originally Posted by CrAz3D
God, people need to stop with Reagan. Sure, ok, he was pretty good, but he was just one dude back in the 80s.
Can't live in the past
Can't live in the past
He'll do until someone better comes along. So far, nobody's even close. Comparing Thompson to Reagan isn't really fair. I do like the guy though. I hope he runs.
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 1999
Posts: 1,209
Likes: 0
From: Baton Rouge, La
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 774
Likes: 1
From: western washington
Originally Posted by CrAz3D
that's way besides the point, he's dead.
I'm just saying people shouldn't be concentrating on him and reviving him, basically
I'm just saying people shouldn't be concentrating on him and reviving him, basically
No one is trying to revive him. We are looking for a suitable replacement for the best president this country has ever had. Comparing the two is not uncalled for.
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,895
Likes: 0
From: Starkville Mississippi
Fred Thompson has my vote. I think he is a great leader and the kind of solid person we need in office. Although I believe there are a lot of people that will vote for him, I get this scary feeling that there are enough clueless wackos out there that will put Hillary in office...
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 891
Likes: 1
From: Lost some where in the middle of the Ozark Mountains!
If Hilary wins, "may god help us all" it will be interesting to see if she gets her revenge on Billy Bob by getting a little tounge to grove form one of the male (or female) interns in the Oval Office.
There is always a silver lining.
There is always a silver lining.
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,079
Likes: 0
From: Pikesville, MD
Originally Posted by Bruce Walker, Columnist
.
.. Both of the Bush presidencies have been mild disappointments. ...
.. Both of the Bush presidencies have been mild disappointments. ...
Fred Thomson isn't bad but I wonder how many people are voting for the actor not the person.
And Craz3d...Reagan was our last great president, he built the conservative movement you care so much about. Show the man respect. Many people would like to carry on the Reagan legacy. Few I fear could though.
My vote remains unchanged.