The Candidates
With the recent Fred Thompson boomlet, I was beginning to feel that it was perhaps time for me to reevaluate my skepticism of Fred Thompson’s interest in the 2008 race.
My doubts remain however.
After all, Thompson is making a wonderful living as an actor and radio commentator, has never seemed interested in longtime career in politics (he decided to leave the Senate shortly after the Sept. 11th attacks to resume his acting career), and is a longtime friend and supporter of Sen. John McCain.
National Journal’s Mark Ambinder is suspicious as well:
“Until the middle of last month, however, [Fred Thompson] was a very informal adviser to close friend John McCain, and he would occasionally telephone donors and potential supporters on the senator’s behalf.”
“Some Republicans suspect that Thompson is an angler — that his presidential flirtations will help him serve as a fishnet to scoop up conservatives and then dump them into McCain’s basket. They think he’ll raise his stature, muse publicly about the presidential race, build up anticipation, and then, presto change-o, announce that he thinks McCain would make the best president. A good many solid conservatives — House members, donors, activists, and state party elites — in the Thompson net would follow him to McCain. Or so the thinking goes.”
Thompson’s recent change of heart on CFR could be seen in this light as the burnishing of his conservative credentials in order to heighten the impact of his eventual McCain endorsement.
Of course anything is possible. But it seems very unlikely that Thompson would be willing to walk away from his highly successful and lucrative acting career for a longshot presidential run against his close friend and ally. Especially when a lifelong career in politics has never been something that Thompson has valued.
*Hat-tip to Alec Oveis at Political Insider.
March 19th, 2007 at 4:55 pm
It would be interesting to try to see F. Thompson try to dump his supporters on McCain. I’m not sure if it would work,considering that most of his potential support comes from people who were dissatisfied with the field (and hostile to McCain).
This could create a really interesting dynmaic if, come autumn, Thompson dumps all of his support on McCain and Newt Gingrich dumps his on Rudy Giuliani (which is what I’m expecting from Newt).
March 19th, 2007 at 5:01 pm
Hah! I was just writing a post where I was speculated the same thing as Ambinder. After all, McCain and Thompson are the closest of friends, he even endorsed McCain in 2000 and served as the national co-chair of his presidential campaign. Based on that alone, I have a hard time seeing him legitimately challenging McCain. And then there’s this, via Jon Martin:
I wonder if McCain is also one of the ones who’ve encouraged a Thompson run. If that’s what’s going on, Thompson could end up blunting a lot of Rudy’s, but especially Romney’s support. This could get very, very interesting.
March 19th, 2007 at 5:43 pm
Thompson endorsed McCain OVER W in 2000.
Rudy endorsed *W* OVER McCain in 2000.
If Thompson enters, it will be interesting to see conservatives reconcile those facts.
March 19th, 2007 at 7:15 pm
Surprised Rudy didn’t endorse Gore
Interesting article, and sounds plausible. Personally I don’t think Hagel will enter the race. Unity08 seems his best bet. And he probably doesn’t care about staying in the Senate. He has plenty of interests outside to keep him going if his political career ends in 2008…
I think Thompson is enjoying flirting with the idea, but won’t go ahead with it. You have to really really want it to make a good shot of it. Far better to continue a lucrative acting career and endorse your friend, than lose 2 years of your life to a cause that will probably come to nothing.
March 19th, 2007 at 10:32 pm
With all due respect, I think Giuliani supporter and colleague Kavon is engaged in some wishful thinking here. Neither he nor Mr. Ambinder are applying any facts to this discussion, only speculation with little foundation.
The same things were said about Rudy Giuliani running - he won’t because he would be passing up too much income and because he would not want to run against his good friend John McCain. And we all know how that turned out.
Those who are speculating that Fred Thompson will run tend to have sources close to him; those who are speculating that Fred Thompson will not run tend not to have sources close to him.
And as to the political aspirations of Fred Thompson, those who know him or know those close to him understand that he has been thinking about running for president for awhile. It is why he got into elective politics in the first place. As I posted the other day, up until the time his daughter died, which motivated him to leave public office, Senator Thompson was putting a legislative staff together with national political experience that could be and was designed to be parlayed into a presidential campaign operation. So the speculation that Senator Thompson lacks the fire in the belly for the position is misguided.
We’ll see. Certainly the Giuliani, McCain, and Romney camps are hoping that Fred Thompson does not run. And if Fred Thompson and Newt Gingrich, whose popularity profiles are soaring in large measure because Republican voters are unhappy with the current field of presidential candidates (57% according to the latest CBS News and New York Times poll of GOP voters), are going to run they might as well wait as long as possible to enter the race and let the level of unhappiness with the current field rise even more.
Of course as someone who is not yet wedded to any 2008 GOP candidate, I think that Fred Thompson and Newt Gingrich have a lot to add to the debate and should definitely run. They would be top-tier candidates and provide extra conservative options for Republican voters. But let’s base the analysis of whether or not Thompson and Gingrich will run on the facts rather than on wishes.
March 19th, 2007 at 10:54 pm
Republius,
I still don’t understand how Thompson is supposed to be this White Knight candidate when he was pro-choice in the past. Isn’t that the same complaint that SoCons have about Romney and Rudy as well? And I know you’ve taken Brownback to task in the past for being pro-choice as well around the same time. Why does Thompson a pass here?
March 20th, 2007 at 12:31 pm
LJ, the problem with Senator Brownback from my perspective is that he doesn’t admit to initially running for Congress as a pro-choice Republican. Honesty and forthrightness are the issues here, not abortion. Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush changed their positions on abortion, but admitted to such.
As to your characterization of Senator Thompson as having been pro-choice in the past, let’s look at the facts as opposed to the speculation and campaign spin. You cite no authority for your claim.
He voted in the United States Senate to ban human cloning (in February of 1998), to ban partial-birth abortion (in October of 1999), and to maintain the ban on performing abortions at overseas United States military bases (in June of 2000). He has always been for parental notification and against federal funding of abortion. He described himself as “pro-life” and called for overturning Roe v. Wade as “bad law” in an appearance on Fox News Sunday recently. He opposed the nomination of fellow Tennesseean Henry Foster as Surgeon General because of the latter’s liberal pro-choice views. And the only pro-choice position Senator Thompson has ever taken is that he opposes making abortion a crime.
The National Right to Life Committee graded Senator Thompson out at 86 in 1996; that same year Senator Thompson was graded out at 5 by Planned Parenthood and O by NARAL.
In characterizing Senator Thompson as a flip-flopper on abortion, as Senator Howard Baker used to say, that dog won’t hunt.
I don’t know that Senator Thompson is a white knight. I think what he may be is a Republican with solid conservative credentials, gravitas, and the ability to win the GOP nomination and a general election. The reality here is that the lack of bona fide conservative credentials on the parts of Giuliani, McCain, and Romney are creating the opening for Senator Thompson and Speaker Gingrich. For those of you who keep posting polling data around here, an additional fact is that last week’s CBS News and New York Times poll of Republican voters across the country showed that 57% were not happy with the current field of presidential candidates - probably because of the lack of heavyweight conservatives.
March 20th, 2007 at 2:01 pm
I agree that the polls showing conservative disillusionment with the field are important, but where I might disagree with you is on the idea that F. Thompson is a heavyweight who can win the nomination, and I definitely have a hard time seeing him beat Haillary or Obama. I just don’t see Thompson ever gaining any more traction than Huckabee, and he definitely won’t break into the top tier.
March 20th, 2007 at 4:50 pm
Republius,
Here you go:
Fred Thompson himself said that he was pro-choice.
March 20th, 2007 at 6:06 pm
LJ,
Isn’t that the same complaint that SoCons have about Romney and Rudy as well?
I think there’s a difference, in that Rudy is currently pro-choice, whereas Romney was formerly pro-choice. But good point on Thompson…his abortion position was exactly the same as Romney’s. In fact, when he ran as the incumbant in 1996, it was again as a pro-choice Republican.
Republius,
It seems Thompson converted to the pro-life side sometime between his last Senate election in 1996 and that legislation in 1998. That’s great. But I can’t help think of the many times Romney supporters have pointed to Romney’s 100% pro-life record in MA, as well as Romney’s constant support for parental notification laws and the like…just like you just cited Thompson’s record.