I have no idea who the rest of the Daily Pundit contributors will be supporting come 2008, but I’ll be backing Senator Fred Thompson. I cannot see Tom Tancredo ever reaching liftoff in the primaries, but from what I have learned so far, aside from Tancredo, Thompson is the only candidate on the horizon I could vote for without holding my nose.
My personal nightmare would be an Obama or Clinton vs McCain race, which would force me to sit out another election. I’m going to do what I can to help assure there is at least one candidate in the contest I won’t have too many qualms about supporting.
Next question: Can the Ronald Reagan “actor fire” strike twice? It is said that tough times call forth strong leaders. Bush was not first elected in tough times, and his re-election was more a phenomenon of the loathesomeness of the Democratic candidate than it was an endorsement of Bush’s leadership. To put as charitable a gloss on it as possible.
This is the first open election of the current round of American tough times. I’m hoping that Thompson will be the response called forth to meet them.
Submit to Stumbled Upon!
I’d be curious to see some debates first, Bill. Thompson and Tancredo are both promising - Tancredo moreso in my book. I’d like to see what those guys would do with some additional exposure and plenty of people listening.
No matter who is selected, another strain of Derangement Syndrome will surely continue.
Ulthar, I don’t really place a lot of stock in debates, because they tend to be carefully scripted exchanges of talking points, as well as springboards for the agenda-driven media to score points on conservative candidates.
As long as a Republican leader does not intentionally jettison the conservative base, as Bush (and congressional leaders) did, they need not fear Leftist Derangement Syndrome. Reagan, for instance, used to crush those folks with ease. And the country is far more conservative today than it was in his time. Never confuse a rejection of McCain/Pork Republicans and Compassionate Bushes as a rejection of conservative principles.
I also suspect that Thompson will run more strongly in the general election than Tancredo would. And this time out, I want to see the Democrats crushed decisively - lose the House by a big margin, go down ten seats in the Senate, and have the Presidential election called by nine o’clock in the evening with a Thompson victory and an overwhelming advantage in the Electoral College.
Is this the synopsis of your next book?
Bill wrote:
Me too, but even if this happens we will still find ourselves with a mess for a couple of cycles because Republicans apparently have a hard time finding and running Republicans that don’t smell like a RINO McCain or G.W. Bush or Gov. Schwarzenegger or Gov. Jeb Bush or Gov. Perry or Guilani or Mayor Bloomberg or … The ‘94 Congress lagged Reagan’s initial election by over a decade.
Yes, and the world can go complely to hell, leaving all of us dead.
I’d rather look on the bright side for a while, and work in that general direction. I know many of my readers consider me to be Doctor Doom, but that is not my natural inclination. Crushing the Democratic party is a goal that appeals to me, so I see no problems in working for that outcome, and I know I’ll be a lot happier working for something than inveighing against everything.
It is not, by the way, a goal that is inconceivable to achieve.
I’ve been checking out Thompson since the buzz started. I was listening to him sub for Paul Harvey for the last couple of weeks. The man has gravitas and presence. But he also has a good ole boy charm underlying the whole thing.
He’s smart and knows the DC game and how to play it. I find him far more attractive as a candidate than anyone else in the field.
Now all we have to do is convince him to run.
Better get a Draft Thompson banner up, Bill…
You might want to temper your desires for the Senate, Bill. Only one-third of the membership is on the ballot in ‘08, and two thirds are Republicans trying to hold onto their seats. A ten seat margin is numerically possible, but running the table is unlikely.
The Senate is close enough that control can change, and it should be seen as a major victory just getting control of the committee chairs.
Bill may change his mind when he finds out I agree with him on Fred Thompson… or he may just cite it as the example of the blind pig finding the acorn. 8-)
I can support Thompson although I prefer Tancredo
I do think Fred Thompson has promise, but all I’m saying is I don’t yet see the change to be magical. While I find the generic Republican platform to be far more to my liking, I believe the cause of most of our issues are not rooted in the Democratic or Republican party affiliation of folks but in their avarice and lack of a fervent patriotism and desire for sovereignty.
Good points all around, Bill. I see what you’re saying about a debate being scripted, though I think early debates tend to be less so. Plus, no matter how scripted, Tancredo has the type of views that won’t exactly blend in with the rest of the field. That’s what I’m looking forward to. I can’t stand debates where everyone disagrees even though they all state the same point of view.
Regarding a crushing defeat - I’d much rather look forward to a defeat with the right kind of people coming in than some kind of landslide seat switch with a bunch of RINOs coming in.
We’ll see. People are tired enough of the BS that this time around some straight talk - backed up by a track record supporting it - could push a candidate a long way. The next election won’t be boring, that’s for certain.
I’m hopeful that what we did in 2006 - booted the GOP out of the leadership over the RINO issue - will markedly improve the sort of candidates and platforms we see in 2008. That’s one of the reasons I helped do it, anyway.
Bill,
One of your worst sticking points against McCain is his support for McCain-Feingold. Thompson voted for that bill when he was a Senator. Thompson is another Compassionate RINO in the Bush-McCain mold.
Kevin, the available evidence suggests Thompson is better on economic issues and far better on the right to keep and bear arms than either Bush or McCain. He did support McCain-Feingold, which is a strike against him, but I believe he has made regretful noises since (he could stand to do more).
From the WSJ’s Washington Wire:
If he takes that position he’ll be fine.
Chef, or one of these.
I think I’m giving this a little time to see what falls out of the trees. There’s a few things that make me worry me, but the most important issues to me, taxes and guns, he’s strong on. IIRC, his record on trade isn’t so hot, and that’s my third most important issue.
Here’s his voting record, via http://draftfredthompson.com/
* Voted YES on extending free trade to Andean nations. (May 2002)
* Voted YES on granting normal trade relations status to Vietnam. (Oct 2001)
* Voted NO on removing common goods from national security export rules. (Sep 2001)
* Voted YES on permanent normal trade relations with China. (Sep 2000)
* Voted YES on expanding trade to the third world. (May 2000)
* Voted YES on renewing ‘fast track’ presidential trade authority. (Nov 1997)
* Voted YES on imposing trade sanctions on Japan for closed market. (May 1995)
Oldsmoblogger:
It’s not exactly hard to do better than either Bush or McLame on economic issues.
As for the right to keep and bear arms, I’ll gladly cede that point to you. Again, it’s not difficult to better on that issue than Bush or McLame.
As for McCain-Feingold, unless Thompson repudiates that vote, I cannot support him for the same reasons I can’t support McCain or Guiliani. He voted for a blantantly unconstitutional law.
I’m leaning toward Ron Paul right now, his surrender monkey approach to Islamofascism not withstanding, because he’s the only small government candidate in the race so far on Republican side. However, I’m definitely in the market for an alternative. If Fred Thompson can repudiate his support for the Incumbant Protection Act, then he’ll probably have my vote.
I have been supporting Fred Thompson for about the last year to 18 months. There was a posting either here or at Little Green Footballs about a year ago and I posted to that for Fred T.
He’s by no means a “perfect” convservative nor even another Reagan so far. But he’s far and away the best in the field with a good chance of winning both the nomination and general election.
He has little record on foreign policy but I believe he would be strong and agressive fighting the long war on Islamofascism. He somewhat reminds me of Harry Truman.
Growler, guess I didn’t remember correctly. Upon reviewing this website, it looks like my problems are with him are social (gay marriage stuff), and government power stuff (War on Drugs stuff), in addition to the immigration and Mc-Fien issues others mentioned.
Lots of good stuff on that page, though.
I’ll vote for anyone from the South or West before I vote for someone from NY.
We’re doomed no matter who wins.
Yeah Jack, I know what you mean given how well Bush has worked out.
Has anyone seen anything to indicate how he would do in an executive office?