April 16, 2007
Re: Fred? Fred, Who?

A couple related notes to coverage of Fred Thompson below:

1) Postman's coverage of the King County Republican Party Lincoln Day Dinner noted Thompson and Mitt Romney seemed to have done best in the informal, show-of-hands poll conducted by MC John Carlson. John McCain was a very distant fifth apparently. Postman mentions, and I had forgotten to mention in my original Thompson post, that Kirby Wilbur is a vocal Fred enthusiast.

2) The P-I crowned Mitt Romney the leading Presidential fundraiser in the state, three months into the year. Of course, candidates haven't spent much time here either so not too much could or should be read into it.

Lastly, a clarification on a point in my original post. Some commenters took umbrage with my dim view of Thompson's lack of zeal for continued service in the Senate. No, I don't think serving in that august body is in-and-of-itself meritorious, though I appreciate those of all political stripes willing to serve their country thus. But, one nondescript term in the Senate is not usually the greatest foundation upon which to build a Presidential run, especially when the lion's share of ultimately successful Presidential candidates in the last half century have run with notable executive experience of some kind on their resumes.

Posted by Eric Earling at April 16, 2007 07:33 PM | Email This
Comments
1. I dunno Eric, it could be argued that his giving up his Senate seat shows he doesn't just want power for the sake of power. It really looks to be illustrative of a humble and modest man.

As for the KCGOP dinner, McCain was the first name out of the proverbial hat. He had a healthy showing. Giuliani and Romney both had modest showings -- but it was Fred who actually elicited cheers, and an emotional response from the crowd.

To me, that looks like a possible groundswell of excitement in our state for Fred.

Posted by: Patrick on April 16, 2007 07:45 PM
2. Now, Patrick, I was at the dinner too, at the table behind you. I saw your hand go up for McCain.

Fred Thompson clearly had the most support at this informal show of hands. McCain was dead last. Giuliani, Gingrich and Romney were more or less tied, quite a bit more than McCain, quite a bit less than Thompson. (I raised my hand for Giuliani. My wife for Romney).

Posted by: Stefan Sharkansky on April 16, 2007 08:48 PM
3. There was definately a lot of cheering for Thompson but that doesn't change the fact that he hasn't annoucened and probably won't announce and is a one term Senate candidate with no military experience. Not that he's a bad guy. I don't think I'd have a problem with him as president, would definitely vote for him over any of the Democrats with their hats now in the ring, but let's all be real. Our next president is going to be McCain, Guliani, Romney, Hillary or Obama (let's hope it's one of the first three).

Posted by: WarmFuzzyPuppies on April 16, 2007 09:05 PM
4. "There was definately a lot of cheering for Thompson but that doesn't change the fact that he hasn't annoucened and probably won't announce and is a one term Senate candidate with no military experience."

And what military experience, besides loathing them, does Hitlery posess? Hmm. Please enlighten us? Did she even serve in the Civilan Air Patrol like cotton candy Darcy Burner?

AN what military experience does Barack HUSSEIN Obama have? Hmm. Please enlighten us.

Fred has a helluva chance because he has excitement.

Posted by: pbj on April 16, 2007 09:18 PM
5. Says Patrick @ #1:"It really looks to be illustrative of a humble and modest man."

Must be a first. A RepubliThug calling a Hollywood guy "humble and honest."

Look up, and scan for pigs.

Truth be told, Patrick is clearly one of those Eternal Optimists. He must be one of those who believes the pro athletes (and personal injury lawsuit plaintiffs) when they say "It's not about the money." Because everyone else knows Freddie T is all about the spotlight and the 3 day work week.

And that's the truth.

Posted by: The Ump on April 16, 2007 10:41 PM
6. Oh brother, I've been outed. Viva McCain!

Posted by: Patrick on April 16, 2007 10:42 PM
7. The Dump @5. Thanks! I do enjoy Fred on Law & Order, but as others have said here, he still has a long way to go to be prez.

That being said, how can you quibble with a man whose famous for saying, "Stack 'em. Pack 'em. And rack 'em."?!

Posted by: Patrick on April 16, 2007 10:48 PM
8. Patrick postulates that Fred Thompson gave up his senate seat because he is an honest and "humble" man. That he didn't want it for the sake of power. Please... Fred saw an opportunity for even more fame and fortune in t.v. -hardly a "humble" profession. Now that he sees a possible opportunity for even more fame via the presidency, he's hoping to jump on that bandwagon.

Posted by: David on April 17, 2007 04:21 AM
9. I like them all; I would have to think twice about Gingrich, though.

Posted by: swatter on April 17, 2007 07:39 AM
10. Before jumping on the Fred Thompson wagon be sure to check his activities between the Senate exit and the present. The Ariside money might get a bit ugly. Romney (in his present incarnation) appears to be the consevative answer. He might be interesting if he could get past the Mormon thing. I'm not sure that is doable however.

Posted by: Rocketdog on April 17, 2007 07:58 AM
11. Dog, I hear you. This is somewhat shocking because it is okay to be a Muslim, Evangelical, Catholic, atheist, Baptist, etc. Yes, maybe even a Jew.

As a member of each of these religions, I can tear apart the other religion if I so chose.

But not a Mormon for President because that religion is weird? But, aren't the others strange, too in each person's context? Sounds like a Catch 22 argument against Romney.

Posted by: swatter on April 17, 2007 08:03 AM
12.
It's great that Romney is scooping up all those "tithes".

But does that mean popular vote?

Giuliani is the Boss.

Posted by: John Bailo on April 17, 2007 08:15 AM
13. Guiliani would be alright. If Fred Thompson garners momentum, that would be better. I take a dim view of the remaining lot. Gingrich would be good for a cabinet position, but let's get real - he has way too much baggage to be a successful Republican nominee.

Anyone who can cleverly distance themselves from Bush - whether it be showing decisive leadership and being for borders, language and culture has a chance, but not unless they do these things. Wake up and smell the coffee ! The Bush White House has (at least for the time being) decimated the Republican Party - just look at the indicative polls if you don't believe this...

Posted by: KS on April 17, 2007 09:05 AM
14. Romney (in his present incarnation) appears to be the consevative answer. He might be interesting if he could get past the Mormon thing.

I think he has to get past that Flip-Flopping thing first.

Personally I think Guiliani has the best shot with the general public and independents. There a lot of people who go back and forth (ie Reagan Democrats, Clinton Republicans), you need those people too not just the standard GOP base (that 32% of people who still like Bush is not enough to win an election).

Posted by: Cato on April 17, 2007 10:53 AM
15. Romney has another black mark on his record! He signed legislation allowing gay marriage in Mass. If he truely was a consevative, he would have VETOED the bill and made the legislature over-ride his veto.

Why is only 13% of the population dictating what the rest of us accept?

Posted by: DH on April 18, 2007 10:56 AM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?