December 12, 2007
Thompson’s Debate: “Hands Down”- Philip Klein
Fred Thompson’s ‘I Paid for This Microphone’ Moment
I don’t use the campaign mailers to post reactions, so it takes me a lot longer to get these out as I find these myself. I’ll post my own thoughts later.
Is it too late? You never know…
Philip Klein At the American Spectator:
Fred Thompson Wins, Hands Down
Fred Thompson was the only candidate who stood out. He was funny, charming, and peppy. Here was a guy who wasn’t afraid to speak hard truths, and who displayed knowledge of the policy issues–especially on entitlements. But the moment of the debate, the moment that will be talked about should he defy expectations and go on to win the nomination, was when he refused to raise his hand at the behest of the moderator. This demonstrated conviction, showed he was able to stand up for his principles, that he was a man who valued substance, a leader rather than a follower, and somebody who is running a different kind of campaign. In short, today Thompson was everything that conservatives had hoped they’d be getting when he announced his candidacy.
Huckabee was off today, and he is starting to get all of the scrutiny that comes with being a frontrunner. With Thompson promising to spend virtually all of his time in Iowa between now and the caucuses, Thompson stands to be the major beneficiary of any Huckabee fall. This is a wild presidential race, and Fred is not dead yet.
Jennifer Rubin at the American Spectator:
The winner: Fred Thompson
John Tabin at the American Spectator
Thompson did the best
Chuck Todd of MSNBC:
…the candidate who had the best afternoon I think was Fred Thompson. This was easily his best debate performance and he seemed to shine in this subdued format.
Jim Geraughty- the Campaign Spot at National Review Online:
Winner: (Fred) Thompson. Don’t know if it will be enough, but he ought to get at least a little bump out of this. The moment he basically told the moderator where she could stick her “show of hands” question – well, I was inspired.
Fred Thompson was smart, funny, irascible and consistent, and probably helped his standing here. He even got in a good dig at Romney.
Marc Hemingway at the Corner:
Seriously, it’s like Thompson came to the debate in Des Moines today to do two things: Kick butt and chew gum. And it appears he’s all out of gum.
Rich Lowry at the Corner:
Romney: A strong performance. The risk for him was seeming small in fights with Huckabee. The format saved him from that. The emphasis on the economy, education and other domestic, non-hot button issues benefited him. He seemed in control, substantive and positive. If there was a winner, it was Romney.
…Fred: Was unflappable, funny, and used his theme of “truth telling” very effectively. Standing up to the moderator was a memorable moment that will be talked about a lot. He deflated Romney a bit with his lines about being rich enough not worry about taxes and his comeback in the exchange with Mitt that Romney is becoming a good actor. This performance should help in Iowa where he is focusing now and is in third place according to the RCP average.
More Lowry:
His (Thompson’s) refusal to do the stupid hand-raising thing was an excellent moment. It’s his best debate yet.
I want to take a chance on telling the truth to the American people” -Very nice line from Fred.
Erick at RedState:
Had the Fred on stage today been around these last few months, he’d be winning. I really do think he won this debate.
More Jim Geraughty:
Where the hell has this Fred been for the past few weeks? This guy looks like he could eat most of the rest of the field for lunch
John Hawkins, Right Wing News:
Winner: Fred Thompson. Good substance, good personality, and his I won’t raise my hand for an answer question reminded me of Reagan say “I paid for this microphone.” Fred definitely won.
UPDATES
James Antle at the Spectator:
I thought Romney was fine — certainly better than Giuliani, McCain or Huckabee — but not as good as Fred Thompson. Giuliani was just okay.
BIG ONE:
David Yepsen of the Des Moines Register:
Fred Thompson did himself the most good in Wednesday’s debate among Republican presidential candidates in Iowa.
http://race42008.com/2007/12/12/thompsons-debate-hands-down-philip-klein/trackback/
December 12th, 2007 at 4:44 pm
I love all the posts that follow a debate.
December 12th, 2007 at 4:45 pm
i admit fred did well. so did romney. fred should have given to huck when talking about the nea.
December 12th, 2007 at 4:45 pm
While I’m not disagreeing with any of the above, it was a lame debate.
December 12th, 2007 at 4:46 pm
Now I know who is going for Huck — I’ve been reading comments on other blogs about the debate and kept hearing this from people who thought Huck won the debate: He’s do reassuring.
That’s exactly what I heard from so many FDT supporters: He’s so reassuring.
Hmmmm.
December 12th, 2007 at 4:47 pm
Btw, off-topic, but first Alaskan caucus poll is out:
http://ktuu.com/Global/story.asp?S=7479052
Ron Paul – 29%
Mike Huckabee – 22%
Rudy Giuliani – 14%
Fred Thompson – 12%
John McCain – 9%
Mitt Romney – 9%
Other – 6%
Seriously.
December 12th, 2007 at 4:48 pm
Fred did have a great debate today – no taking that away from him. It was nice to see his energy front and center.
December 12th, 2007 at 4:50 pm
#5, ???What?? Is that real?
December 12th, 2007 at 4:50 pm
I meant in terms of, every poster will come out and say their guy won.
December 12th, 2007 at 4:50 pm
Tommy – was that smarmy little comment really necessary? I thought FDT had an excellent debate, as I thought Romney did as well.
I just thought the smarmy comment was below you as you have been extremely objective and honest about your candidate’s many fumbles recently.
December 12th, 2007 at 4:50 pm
Fred had a very strong night.
December 12th, 2007 at 4:51 pm
#5 interesting
December 12th, 2007 at 4:52 pm
#7, Alaska was one of Pat Buchanan’s first big surprise states back in the 1996 caucuses. This state is very non-interventionist/liberty-minded–New Hampshire on steroids. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Ron Paul pull off a first place there.
December 12th, 2007 at 4:54 pm
#5. . I don’t doubt those poll results. Drive down any street in Anchorage and there are Ron Paul signs everywhere. Keep in mind – Alaska is a bit different from most states politically. We’re very independent up here, seperated from the lower 48 by more than just Canada. And while we have Walmarts and shopping malls and McDonalds and color TV and cell phones, people still think we all live in igloos and drive to work on dog sleds. Alaskans are proud to be Americans, proud of our strong military history, and definitely proud of our independence – in spirit and in practice – and that is clearly reflected in these polls.
December 12th, 2007 at 4:57 pm
#13, Check out this graph: http://www.ronpaulgraphs.com/donors.html
The only states that donate more money to Ron Paul than Alaska does are Montana and New Hampshire.
December 12th, 2007 at 4:58 pm
What comment Ray?
I didn’t really say anything above except that I like to find these things myself. I take longer than most to post reactions because I don’t like to use campaign emails. It’s just my style.
December 12th, 2007 at 5:00 pm
Fred amd Mitt did well, Huck seemed to flop. This seems to be the story out of an otherwise boring campaign.
December 12th, 2007 at 5:01 pm
And if you are refering to the title of the post, I was just using a quote that I liked. I haven’t posted my own thoughts about the debate yet.
December 12th, 2007 at 5:02 pm
Romney seemed the strongest yet in style. Thompson was at his own best so far. In terms of substance, I agreed with Fred, but felt like Rudy is best at packaging a specific argument in an assertive message.
My problem with Mitt remains that I can’t really agree with anything he says when he says it. And when I think about it later, I usually find a lot to disagree with. His poll-tested messages are neither fish nor fowl and unfortunately tell me near nothing.
But nine candidates is simply too many.
December 12th, 2007 at 5:02 pm
I hope Fred did as well as those pundits claim. It’ll be nice to have a choice of two or three rational candidates. I’m in Idaho, so I won’t be voting until way after Super Tuesday.
December 12th, 2007 at 5:08 pm
Chris Matthews is slamming Huckababy for the “Jesus and Satan” comment. Unfortunate that it takes a screaming liberal to do so.
December 12th, 2007 at 5:10 pm
#14 Josiah. . .Interesting. The above post calling us “New Hampshire on steroids” is fantastic. We also have a very active student social movement at the University of Alaska, both in Anchorage and Fairbanks. The “keep the govt out of my business” attitude up here is as strong as it is in, say, Montana or Idaho. Anchorage has half the state’s population (the whole state has just 625,000 residents – more people live in metropolitan Memphis, Tennessee). Outside of Anchorage, there is a “you leave me alone, I’ll leave you alone” mentality ripe for such figures as Ron Paul, Pat Buchanan, and the like. I recently joined the state’s Romneyt campaign, so I will be interested to see how we handle that.
December 12th, 2007 at 5:17 pm
To continue the Alaska thread. . .One of the Libertarian Party’s recent leaders, serving as the party’s presidential candidate in 1992, was Andre Marrou, a former state rep in Alaska elected as a Libertarian. He ran unsuccessfully as the LP vice presidential candidate in 1988 – with Ron Paul at the top of the ticket. Just another reason for Paul’s popularity here in the Great Land.
December 12th, 2007 at 5:30 pm
i think fred has done well because he has nothing to lose. have you ever watched a football game where one side is trying to not lose, instead of trying to win? Right now it feels like rudy and mitt are putting in their “prevent” defense, and it allows a candidate like fred to play with what the defense gives him, and keep picking up first downs. whether he can complete the hail mary while the clock runs out remains to be seen.
December 12th, 2007 at 5:32 pm
It is more & more clear to me that Romney & Thompson are the only serious candidates that I could support.
December 12th, 2007 at 5:39 pm
Yes, the majority of sites say that Thompson did well. Congratulations. It has to be very heartening for a died-in-the-wool Fred supporter such as yourself to see him do well. The question is, will it be enough?
Most places I’ve seen say that Mitt did swimmingly, as well. The consensus seems to be that Mitt and Fred were the two that had the best debate.
December 12th, 2007 at 5:46 pm
marK,
That’s the million dollar question. At the very least, it refocuses the spotlight on Thompson, along with Romney and Huckabee, in Iowa.
December 12th, 2007 at 5:47 pm
I would hardly say that Fred “won” the debate. He did appear more poised and generally alert than he has in previous events. But he didn’t blow anyone out of the water. And he is far too low in the polls to make up serious ground in a week or two.
http://www.political-buzz.com/
December 12th, 2007 at 5:51 pm
CHANGE THAT HEADLINE.
“HANDS DOWN” IS PROPER. There is NO apostrophe in that! It represents a pluralization! “Hand’s” would be possessive (”The left hand’s ring is very pretty) or a contraction (”The left hand’s got a pretty ring on it!”).
Thank you in advance.
December 12th, 2007 at 5:52 pm
#5 wow. Someone post that on the main page!
December 12th, 2007 at 5:52 pm
TLG,
Do you get extra credit with your english teacher for this stuff?
December 12th, 2007 at 5:56 pm
Yeah, I think tonight was a good night for Fred. Do I think it will make a difference? Nah- there wasn’t any “BIG” moment… although I loved the way he got in a few digs on Mitt. Classic, and pretty quick on the uptake for someone who doesn’t seem to be a quick-draw.
December 12th, 2007 at 5:58 pm
TLG,
This is a blog, not some college paper. We don’t even have a preview function..
December 12th, 2007 at 6:03 pm
I would love to see a Mitt/Fred Ticket
December 12th, 2007 at 6:05 pm
TLG,
You may be correct. I will update accordingly.
December 12th, 2007 at 6:05 pm
Fred seems like a better sidekick roll than a main roll
December 12th, 2007 at 6:11 pm
I haven’t watched the debate, but I will tonight. I look forward to seeing Fred do well, he’s a perfectly acceptable candidate.
December 12th, 2007 at 6:13 pm
Thanks, Tommy!
murphy, cwpete — I’m just a grammar Nazi. Sorry! There’s nothing that can be done. I ignore minor errors, but always go after the basics: your/you’re, they’re/their/there, and apostrophes.
December 12th, 2007 at 6:14 pm
FDT is too old to be a VP pick. Assuming two successful terms for the GOP team, FDT would be pushing 75 in 2016. We need a VP that can carry on a winning GOP run. We can’t pull another Cheney and then find ourselves with no general frontrunner again in 2016.
December 12th, 2007 at 6:18 pm
alaska jake,
I disagree. I actually like the idea of having no heir apparent. It’s made the process more vibrant, and allowed us to more easily disassociate ourselves from an unpopular administration.
December 12th, 2007 at 6:20 pm
on a 1 to 10 scale, Romney 10 Thompson 9, McCain, Huckabee, Giuliani Hunter, 6 who cares 2
December 12th, 2007 at 6:23 pm
alaska jake, who do you suggest for a VP to carry on?
December 12th, 2007 at 6:26 pm
It looks to me as if Romney is going to win this thing. Assuming so, let’s start discussing VP candidates!! I’m not advocating this, but what would the pros and cons be fore Condoleeze or for Colin Powel?
December 12th, 2007 at 6:26 pm
The race for 3rd place in Iowa (after Mitt & Mike) is heating up. FDT’s decision to give up on NH and focus on Iowa means he needs to come 3rd, else his campaign is over.
What’s interesting is how McCain & Rudy now need Mike to win Iowa if they’re to win NH & keep their hopes alive. Mike is the key to this race. Either he:
- fails, and Mitt wins everything.
- does well, and breaks the field down for Rudy to win on Super Tuesday.
- does very well, and wins himself.
December 12th, 2007 at 6:29 pm
Bob, Condi is never going to be picked. When aiming to attract more General election independents & wavering Dems the tactic of picking someone associated with a very unpopular president is never a good idea.
Colin Powell is more likely to be a Dem VP pick. Unless Iraq goes pear shaped and the GOP candidate needs to pivot to an anti-Iraq position he ain’t going to be picked either.
No, I think we can focus on the white male Senators. Perhaaps Demint?
December 12th, 2007 at 6:44 pm
[...] Fred Thompson won this debate today, hands down. Look at all who agree [...]
December 12th, 2007 at 6:59 pm
My VP picks depend on the Pres candidate we choose, but in general I’d go with younger talent, and seriously look at those who don’t fit the typical GOP look. People like Bobby Jindal, JC Watts, Sarah Palin (who won’t be this year’s VP pick, as I mentioned in previous posts). We can’t keep claiming to be an open and expanding party without ever seriously considering candidates who are not old white guys. At some point, even the few remaining non-white GOP supporters will stop believing that.
I think for someone like Romney or Rudy, Gen. Petraeus would be a fantastic choice for VP.
If we must stick with older options, I like Kay Bailey Hutchison the best, espcially for Romney. Lindsay Graham (the nicer John McCain) is another one, great for Rudy or Romney.
December 12th, 2007 at 7:04 pm
Another great VP choice would be Tom Ridge. He’s a McCain supporter now but would be a nice partner to Rudy and Romney as well, and as the most popular GOP politician in PA in years, he would help secure that state’s many electoral votes for the GOP.
December 12th, 2007 at 7:07 pm
Of course we could get real creative and choose one of McCains biggest supporters for VP: Curt Shilling from the Red Sox. He’s way more popular than any other Massachusetts politician, and with another great season could “pitch” MA to the GOP for the first time in decades!
December 12th, 2007 at 7:36 pm
Yes, Kay bailey hutchison is actually who I preferred, but was trying not to drop her name.
December 12th, 2007 at 8:01 pm
I did like that he wouldn’t do the stupid hands up thing for that question. It wasn’t really a yes/no question.
December 12th, 2007 at 8:01 pm
[...] that is what a lot of people are saying at least. This guy has a great round up of various [...]
December 12th, 2007 at 8:03 pm
I felt like if they wanted to know Republicans positions on that subject, they would have given them time to talk. Basically they wanted to trap them into a position, they could spin negatively later on.
December 12th, 2007 at 8:33 pm
Fred’s “No Hand Shows” moment was, in my estimation, the best performance of the campaign thus far and it bodes well for bold and robust conservatism under a President Thompson.
December 12th, 2007 at 9:41 pm
[...] The conservative crowd seems to think that Fred Thompson won easily. Okayyy…. Sphere: Related Content [...]
December 12th, 2007 at 10:09 pm
If I didn’t support Fred already, the NEA comment would have converted me. It’s about time we heard someone stand up against one of the most dangerous, anti-American, nanny-state unions in this country. I would love to see teachers feeling free enough to stand up against them, because there are many, many teachers out there who disagree with the NEA’s agenda. The best way to do this may be to lure the best teachers into other types of schools. The other idea Fred mentioned prior to this debate was loosening up accreditation so experts in various fields can be hired to teach.
December 13th, 2007 at 6:21 am
[...] Thompson’s Debate: “Hands Down†Easily. (tags: Fred Thompson 2008 election candidates debate politics) [...]