Taking a short break from all political discussion for a week, except to post on federalism and forms of federalism. As a realist and a Thompson supporter, I have not ignored todays polls and will not spin them, but until I see it last over a longer period than one day, then I’m not going to spin or comment until we see what happens with his announcement. Is it a possible backlash, it may be. Some have thought of me as nothing more than a spinmeister. They have gotten that wrong. I’m a realist who will not defend any candidate when I believe them to be wrong on an issue.
As a Thompson supporter, I am quite nervous about what will happen in the next month. He has left himself little room for error. This was a mistake. That doesn’t mean I’m backing away from him as a supporter. I just can’t predict what will happen. Writing him off is a mistake for opponents, but there is reason for them to be skeptical. The problem is that I can’t accurately predict or give any analysis until these things are cleared up.
However, he will announce his attention to seek the presidency this afternoon to supporters, with an official announcement next week.
BTW, reader Matt, if you read my post yesterday thoroughly, you’ll notice that I never gave my personal definition of federalism. I gave the dictionary’s definition, but did not endorse it.
LATE AFTERNOON UPDATE: Before Fox News, USA TODAY, Redstate, Wapo, there was the Race42008. Check the official time of all the news articles on the subject today, and you will find that Race42008 was the first to break the news of the Thompson conference call. The political story of the day, and possibly the campaign, and you heard it here first.
August 30th, 2007 at 11:18 am
Tommy,
If Fred doesn’t live up to expectations and drops out (assuming he ever gets in), who
is your second choice? I’m only asking because there are people saying that Romney will
get all of FT’s vots while Rudy will get all of McCain’s votes (Assuming McCain drops out to)
What are you thoughts on this?
August 30th, 2007 at 11:27 am
Ray, when Fred entered the race in the spring, he pulled mostly from Rudy. If he drops out, that support will go back to Rudy. I’m not sure why people say that all of Fred’s support will go to Mitt.
August 30th, 2007 at 11:31 am
#2 Richard,
Thanks, Me neither but I thought I’d get the opinion of a few FT supporters to
see what the consensus is. Anymore Fred supporters want to chime in with their
thoughts?
August 30th, 2007 at 11:32 am
#2 Richard,
By the way, FT isn’t officially in the race yet but I know what your saying.
August 30th, 2007 at 11:53 am
It depends Ray. Granted, this is speculation and I do not want to predict that Thompson will fall out. I have switched back and forth, and certainly have wondered who I would support if Thompson was not in the running. To be honest, enthusiasm would be nowhere near the same, as to some of us, we would be choosing between the least of a group where there is no candidate that is perfect.
On a personal side, and this is the first time I have ever revealed my own preferences besides Thompson, my choices for the GOP nomination would be either Giuliani, or possibly someone else not yet declared. In the next few days I shall outline my reasoning.
I can’t speak for all of Thompson’s supporter, but I can speak for the feelings of some. Romney might still have a chance to win me over, but after his reaction to the Craig scandal, I doubt he can say anything to prove to me that he has the necessary qualities to support during the primaries. The general election would be another matter, because with some of our candidates, there would be no candidate who puts federalist principle at the top of their list. The reason I might personally go with Rudy would be because, in my opinion, he comes in second on this matter.
However, I think that a lot of Thompson support would split in two or three primary places. I can say with some authority that among Thompson’s partisan supporters, it would likely split between Huckabee, Rudy, and Newt. Also, without one candidate that they percieve as being above the same “lesser of two evils,” some of this support in the general election would likely take a very long look at the possible candidacy of Sam Nunn on an independent ticket. Now socon’s from the beltway and in the north may go with Romney, but on a grassroots level, we are not very happy with him as a candidate, or the manner with which he has conducted himself. I’m not saying this to offend or anger Romney supporters, because it’s not their fault, but that is how I feel, and how many feel. What many don’t understand is that when you look at strength of support, Thompson is bringing in a large number of independents, who are looking for someone different than the usual suspects.
However, this does not mean that we are gone, or we will go quietly. I am more reflective in my approach, and I can’t speak for everyone.
August 30th, 2007 at 1:26 pm
As another person who supports Thompson as his top choice, but is open to other candidates, I support him for completely different reasons than most. I’m a small government guy and Thompson seemed like the best choice with his commentary on federalism and his voting record in the Senate. Add on his plainspoken public speaking skills and he’s got my vote. I think the next closest candidate for me would be Giuliani. Why? He may be more libertarian than Thompson, but also has a realistic view on foreign policy which I’m looking for in a candidate.
If Ron Paul had a realisitic foreign policy, I’d consider him as a candidate. But his protectionist and rather isolationist views on the issues are a bit of a put-off.
August 30th, 2007 at 2:03 pm
#5 Tommy,
Thanks for the your thoughts. I guess we all have strong reasons why we support a certain
candidate. For me it is Romney for many reasons I wont go into right now but mostly because
I’ve personally seen what he can do to a company when he gets his hands on it, the guys has
the Midas touch when it comes to putting the financial house in order, I have no doubt he would
bring those skill sets to the white house and balance the budget. Then again what is important
to me might not be important to most. That being said, there are many other things that
make him a strong candidate. Honestly, if Mitt doesn’t get the nomination, Rudy would be my
second choice. Don’t take this personal but Thompson rubs me the wrong way and if he should be
lucky enough to get the nomination I’d most definitely vote for him in the General, but only
because I will not vote democratic.
I DO NOT want to see Hillary win. I hope that no matter who gets the republican nomination
we (GOP) all ban together and defeat her, all we need is another 4/8 yrs of a Clinton administration.
It would be nice to see a President speak to us on TV that wasn’t a Clinton or a Bush.
August 30th, 2007 at 2:08 pm
WTFC….
August 30th, 2007 at 2:20 pm
Tommy,
I like the fact that you think it’s crunch time for Thompson. This will be a very interesting 1 or 2 month stretch. Extremely unpredictable, if you ask me.
August 30th, 2007 at 2:28 pm
If so-cons have to abandon Fred, they can’t go to Rudy. Unless they are not so-cons. That’s why Mitt can benefit if Fred pulls a Wes Clark and fizzles.
August 30th, 2007 at 2:54 pm
nate,
there is a difference between social conservative and federalist instinct.
August 30th, 2007 at 3:07 pm
Tommy,
I’m aware of that, but I’ve read many of your posts either directly or indirectly relating to the subject, and I think I have a fairly good idea of your view (or at least, the conclusions your view leads you to). I didn’t really intend to specifically address your view, but rather the seeming view of your candidates’, and similar simplistic views of some other Republicans.
August 30th, 2007 at 3:41 pm
Matt,
What you miss is that I don’t usually post about what I feel about federalist principles. There is no situation where you find the states to deal with something you’re uncomfortable with. One could even say it’s the opposite. You feel uncomfortable with personal decisions, but believe that it is not the federal governments place to involve themselves.
The most I post about is the fact that supporting judicial restraint does not mean that one supports a federal ban on gay marriage. The Musgrave Amendment was flawed in that aspect.
August 30th, 2007 at 4:59 pm
[...] reported by Race 4 2008’s own Tommy Oliver (who broke the story this morning), Fred Thompson announced via conference call that he will officially enter the race September 6th. [...]
August 30th, 2007 at 5:04 pm
[...] reported by Race 4 2008’s own Tommy Oliver (who broke the story this morning), Fred Thompson announced via conference call that he will officially enter the race September 6th. [...]
August 30th, 2007 at 8:05 pm
[...] Will Announce Filed under: Fred Thompson, Election 2008 — Psycheout @ 7:04 pm The buzz earlier today was that Fred Thompson would soon announce that he was going to announce his intention to announce [...]