On April 3 of this year Fred Thompson’s name first appeared as a potential 2008 Presidential candidate on the Rasmussen daily tracking poll. (During both Election 2004 and Election 2006, RasmussenReports.com was the top-ranked public opinion research site on the web.)Thompson was only “testing the water,” but was measured as an active candidate.
On his first day he was in the top tier, six points ahead of Mitt Romney, in third, right behind former front-runner John McCain while the “second tier” conservatives languished.
On May 3, the first Republican Debate, designed entirely by and for Democrats, diminished all ten declared Republicans. Thompson, by contrast, occupied a spotlight, alone, the next evening, addressing the Orange County Republicans who had launched the career of Ronald Reagan.
On May 17, John McCain embraced Ted Kennedy in the long, political kiss of death that was the 2007 Senate Comprehensive Amnesty Bill, the primary principles of which all the “top tier” candidates (except Thompson) had previously endorsed. Within 2 weeks, Mitt Romney (spending money like a well-connected billionaire son of an Industrial Giant) met McCain, (spending political capital like a long-presumed front-runner) at about 16 points, where they seemed to fuse together and free-fall to a June low of 10 and then flat-line, motionless, at 12. Giuliani, despite the new availability of voters abandoning McCain and Romney, continued his steady decline from a March high of 37 to a June average of 24.
During that same period, between May 29th and June 12th Thompson literally doubled his numbers to shoot into a tie for the lead. By publishing political commentary on the internet.
In response to the Thompson phenomenon, investigators from the American Left spread out from Washington D.C. to his home state turning over rocks. They began looking desperately for dirt, starting rumors, and floating anything they could find that they thought would separate him from the Republican base. Was he gay? Was his wife a bimbo? Was he in poor health? Lazy? Shallow? Pro-abortion? Was he close to Nixon? Did he sell his influence? Date painted women? Was he not a Christian? Did he attend church enough? Had he read a Harry Potter book? Did his uncle snore?
On June 19 Fred Thompson took over first place in the race for the 2008 Nomination and has never relinquished it. Without announcing. Without spending a dime. Without breaking a sweat.
Monday the new numbers came out:
Rudi Giuliani dropped another 2 points to 21% continuing his constant slide from 37% in March.
Fred, already on top, has gone up two points and is the only leader trending upward.
And he hasn’t started running.
But he is hiring some of the best political minds in the GOP.
To help him “test the water.”
Is there a draft in here?
LIKELY REPUBLICAN PRIMARY VOTERS NATIONWIDE
While “investigators from the American Left” might be desperately digging for dirt, the Right finds it in plain sight. “He who has eyes to see.”
My glasses must not be working. Where is it in plain sight?
Plain sight is that none of the candidates are catching fire but Fred and it’s sweeping. He has a very good voting record he will sweep the South, including Florida (which really isn’t the South) and has a good chance at the Rust Belt and Midwest. if he can take the Middle and South that means he loses on the West Coast and the NE. Granted, this is the perfect case scenario, but you tell me of a different candidate with his bonafides that can do this right now.
Is he a conservative who can beat Hildebeast (Funny but rude, I know), yes, I think he can.
There is zero point in holding out for some miracle senario where a minor candidate comes in to win this election.
It’s time to get on the bus cuz it’s leaving the station and the minor candidates will be gone in a month or two unless this is an election that takes place as a made-for-TV movie.
Joan,
I think your glasses might be fine. You’re just looking in the wrong direction. You’re looking at pure politics. I’m looking at principles. It’s plain to see the man is pro-choice on abortion. You can be against Roe vs. Wade and still be pro-abortion-choice. We’ve been hearing this for years now, and Fred Thompson demostrates how it’s done. Leave it up to the states. I think that’s what the pro-slavery-choice folks said too.
You say there is zero point in holding out for a miracle scenario. I suppose I should just settle for “magic”.
The real trainwreck heading Thompson’s direction is the lobbying activity after he left the Senate. Dems are hoping Fred is the nominee. The Aristide account is a real concern.
Rocketdog, The Democrats will not be able to use any “lobbying” claims against Thompson in the general election because their nominee will be former President Hillary Clinton. Fred will shred. The Clintons sold U.S. defense secrets to the Red Chinese. The Clintons sold pardons to drug lords. The Clinton’s sold the Lincoln bedroom.
The only help hits on Fred’s legal work would be to Democrats is if it helps secure the Republican nomination for someone they can beat. That’s why Democrat organizations like the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association, are in the forefront of these attacks on Thompson. Your assertion that they are attacking him because they want him to win the nomination is absurd on its face. It is purest fiction.
The easiest two candidates to beat would be McCain, because most of the GOP base now hates him, and Giuliani, because he will lose the votes of every social conservative AND every opponent of Illegal Immigration when they find out his actual record on those things. Either issue is enough, by itself, to sink the GOP in 2008. Polling shows that 2/3 of likely Republican Primary voters still don’t know he’s pro-abortion, but whole organizations, like Catholics against Rudi, are forming to publicize it. Even fewer know the depths of Rudi’s footprints supporting Illegal Immigration. I still hear relatively informed Republicans who bought his debate rhetoric and say he’s on our side! But Giuliani’s position is even less defensible than McCain’s because he openly advocated breaking the law, not just changing it. And it will be easy to prove when the time is right, should it come to that.
How important are those things?
Since Roe vs. Wade, 35 years ago, Republicans have never won the White House without a pro-life nominee. Social conservatives are too large a component of the Reagan coalition. They can’t be tossed overboard by anyone expecting a national victory.
And the demise of McCain should be a signal how potent the Illegal Immigration issue is with the base.
And I still haven’t gotten around to his anti-gun position.
Giuliani’s steady drop in the polls is the gradual discovery of who he is.
Michelle, this is politics. The American people yell and scream and fight and debate with each other to determine who the next leaders will be.
The Christians have a voice in the debate and recent history tells us that they have a strong voice.
Duncan Hunter is a very good man. Think he is a contender? Are the Christian groups supporting him? He is right on all the issues but obviously that is not good enough, and why is that?
Why is that??? Apparently, because they’re looking for a rock star or a movie star.
Actually, the Christian groups are pretty divided right now between Brownback, Hunter and Tancredo, and yes Thompson.
Brownback is toast though, because of his support for amnesty. The pro-lifers in Iowa are going for Tancredo, because they get someone who is pro-life AND opposed to amnesty, which is why Brownback is now attacking Tancredo.
As for Hunter, he just doesn’t have the fire that Tancredo has. I think he’d make a great VP.