Dems Apparently Fear Thompson

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: ayabe

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: loki8481
imo, Fred Thompson is laughable and symbolic only of the weakness of the other Republican candidates.

He's the uber republican. Like a charicature. I hate his views on a lot of stuff, like gay marriage (how do you work a lifetime in hollywood and hate gay people?) But he's the only pro-gun candidate, so he'll be getting my vote.

Good thing you have your priorities in order, way to be an informed member of the electorate!

I'm a single issue voter. The way I see it, if all else fails, at least we'll be able to vote from the roof tops.

 

[jman19]

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: ayabe

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: loki8481
imo, Fred Thompson is laughable and symbolic only of the weakness of the other Republican candidates.

He's the uber republican. Like a charicature. I hate his views on a lot of stuff, like gay marriage (how do you work a lifetime in hollywood and hate gay people?) But he's the only pro-gun candidate, so he'll be getting my vote.

Good thing you have your priorities in order, way to be an informed member of the electorate!

I'm a single issue voter. The way I see it, if all else fails, at least we'll be able to vote from the roof tops.

Please stop trolling :roll:

 

[ayabe]

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: ayabe

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: loki8481
imo, Fred Thompson is laughable and symbolic only of the weakness of the other Republican candidates.

He's the uber republican. Like a charicature. I hate his views on a lot of stuff, like gay marriage (how do you work a lifetime in hollywood and hate gay people?) But he's the only pro-gun candidate, so he'll be getting my vote.

Good thing you have your priorities in order, way to be an informed member of the electorate!

I'm a single issue voter. The way I see it, if all else fails, at least we'll be able vote from the roof tops.

Well.....where to begin.

To you, what is the difference between a pro gun and anti gun candidate? Are the laws going to change significantly either way? The answer is no.

What current gun law do you feel needs to be repealed that you think you pro gun candidate could bring about?

What potential law do you fear from an anti gun candidate?

Just a little flabbergasted that with all the problems this country faces, this is the most important issue to you.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: Corn
Welcome back CsG!!!!!!

Wow, it feels like 2002 all over again.

Welcome back, CsG! This is a pleasant surprise. It feels like just yesterday I was putting "Unban CsG!" in my sig.

Welcome back to shinerburke too!

 

[Hacp]

Originally posted by: alchemize
Marijuana isn't addictive, but I digress

I'm pretty sure it is. Well, at least CNN says it is, so it must be true!

 

[Hacp]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Sheik Yerbouti

Originally posted by: alchemize
Marijuana isn't addictive, but I digress

Pot is not physically addictive, however, it is mentally addictive. And dumbya is as likeable as a 6 week old egg salad sandwich left in a baggie in the late july florida sun.

I don't subscribe to "mental addiction" - there really is no such thing.

If there was, well we should outlaw sex, and doritos, and WoW, and Anandtech Forums!

Yet, there is proof that mental addiction does exist.

 

[shiner]

I was addicted to Pepsi once so anything is possible.

 

[Deudalus]

Originally posted by: loki8481
imo, Fred Thompson is laughable and symbolic only of the weakness of the other Republican candidates.

Common now, be serious.

The Democrats aren't exactly swelling up with talent either:

Edwards: The man with a 1,500 dollar haircut running around preaching about how he's sooo in touch with poverty

Obama: Overly inexperienced who has done absolutely nothing aside from be an articulate minority which makes you libs swoon.

Billary: Just what we need, the past 4 presidents will all be named Bush or Clinton. Wonderful.

Kucinich: Angry midget.


The rest are too worthless to even makes jokes about them.

 

[Hacp]

Originally posted by: Deudalus

Originally posted by: loki8481
imo, Fred Thompson is laughable and symbolic only of the weakness of the other Republican candidates.

Common now, be serious.

The Democrats aren't exactly swelling up with talent either:

Edwards: The man with a 1,500 dollar haircut running around preaching about how he's sooo in touch with poverty

Obama: Overly inexperienced who has done absolutely nothing aside from be an articulate minority which makes you libs swoon.

Billary: Just what we need, the past 4 presidents will all be named Bush or Clinton. Wonderful.

Kucinich: Angry midget.


The rest are too worthless to even makes jokes about them.

And Thompson is a former Nixonian Aide. He fought for abortion as a lawyer. He is divorced, and has a trophy wife. I wouldn't call his ticket strong either.

 

[shiner]

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: Deudalus

Originally posted by: loki8481
imo, Fred Thompson is laughable and symbolic only of the weakness of the other Republican candidates.

Common now, be serious.

The Democrats aren't exactly swelling up with talent either:

Edwards: The man with a 1,500 dollar haircut running around preaching about how he's sooo in touch with poverty

Obama: Overly inexperienced who has done absolutely nothing aside from be an articulate minority which makes you libs swoon.

Billary: Just what we need, the past 4 presidents will all be named Bush or Clinton. Wonderful.

Kucinich: Angry midget.


The rest are too worthless to even makes jokes about them.

And Thompson is a former Nixonian Aide. He fought for abortion as a lawyer. He is divorced, and has a trophy wife. I wouldn't call his ticket strong either.

So having worked for Nixon in some capacity excludes you from becoming President? I must have missed that part of the Constitution.

He fought abortion? Oh no!

He is divorced? So what. Clinton got blow jobs in the Oval Office for Christ's sake.

Trophy wife? Good for him.

 

[Hacp]

So having worked for Nixon in some capacity excludes you from becoming President? I must have missed that part of the Constitution.
No, but it will make people question his morality.
He fought abortion? Oh no!
There have been reports from the LA Times that he lobbied for abortion rights.
He is divorced? So what. Clinton got blow jobs in the Oval Office for Christ's sake.
His family values will be questioned because of a divorce.
Trophy wife? Good for him.
Family values again.

 

[CallMeJoe]

Originally posted by: Hacp
And Thompson is a former Nixonian Aide. He fought for abortion as a lawyer. He is divorced, and has a trophy wife. I wouldn't call his ticket strong either.

Fred Thompson's greatest contribution to the Nixon administration was as junior counsel to the Watergate Committee. He was the one who famously inquired about the existence of recording devices in the White House. Fred Dalton Thompson is the man who undid Tricky Dick.

Back OT, Thompson has the gravitas, the physical presence and the oratorical ability sadly lacking in the rest of the Republican candidates. While I do not support his policies, I think he may be the most electable of the leading Republicans. He just has to get past the "Social Conservatives", if he can, to get the nomination.

Also, I think Newt Gingrich fears FDT more than any Democrat does. Thompson fills the spot Newt had picked, expecting to grab the nomination when Rudy, Mitt and John fold their tents.

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: shinerburke
So having worked for Nixon in some capacity excludes you from becoming President? I must have missed that part of the Constitution.

It should, and we should also add working for Bush to that list.

 

[BMW540I6speed]

This is what Thompson said in March when interviewed by Chris Wallace on Fox News:

WALLACE: What would you do now in Iraq?

THOMPSON: I would do essentially what the president's doing.

Ughhh...just what I wanted to hear.

Like the vast, vast majority of Republican "tough guys" who play-act the role so arousingly for our media stars, from Rudy Giuliani to Newt Gingrich, Thompson has no military service despite having been of prime fighting age during the Vietnam War (Thompson turned 20 in 1962, Gingrich in 1963, Giuliani in 1964). He was active in Republican politics as early as the mid-1960s, which means he almost certainly supported the war in which he did not fight.

So what exactly, makes Thompson such a "tough guy"? Mark Halperin, in a fawning piece in Time, hailing Thompson's "magnetism" and praising him as "poised and compelling" and exuding "bold self-confidence", provides the answer:

Even before his Law & Order depiction of district attorney Arthur Branch, Thompson nearly always played variations on the same character -- a straight-talking, tough-minded, wise Southerner -- basically a version of what his supporters say is his true political self.

And he is often cast as a person in power -- a military official, the White House chief of staff, the head of the CIA, a Senator or even the President of the U.S. It could be called the Cary Grant approach to politics. As the legendary actor once explained his own style and success, "I pretended to be somebody I wanted to be, and I finally became that person."

One of the truly striking attributes of the organizations and commentators who blather on about "social conservatism" is the way in which they focus on surface appearances almost to the perfect exclusion of genuine examinations of the backgrounds of the political personalities they approve of.

It is especially interesting that the "Southerner" card is played with such gushing approval when speaking of Fred Thompson given the number of examples in American arts and literature of Southern elites who are depicted as corrupt on the inside while maintaining a facade of respectability.

This intense focus on the superficial also manifests itself in their criticisms of candidates they don't approve of.

John Edwards is a "Breck Girl". Hillary Clinton is a dangerous feminist man-hater. Barack Obama has a name that sounds suspiciously like Osama. These are the themes played by the media elites in concert with the right-wing movement.

As long as a "social conservative" candidate can gin up an appropriate image, their actions are clearly less important. Tom Delay acts like a social conservative, therefore, his indictment on money laundering doesn't matter. I. Lewis Libby acts like a social conservative, therefore, his conviction on perjury and obstruction of justice doesn't matter. George W. Bush lands in a jet on an aircraft carrier, therefore, his checkered history as a member of the Texas Air National Guard doesn't matter.

The image is what matters.

As an example, a literal image is currently to be found tucked away on the official White House website depicting Vice President and Mrs. Cheney posing with their new grandson. The caption reads, "His parents are the Cheneys? daughter Mary, and her partner, Heather Poe." This frank acknowledgment of reality stands in utter contrast to one of the planks of the 2004 Republican Party platform which states firmly that:

We strongly support a Constitutional amendment that fully protects marriage, and we [oppose] forcing states to recognize other living arrangements as equivalent to marriage. The well-being of children is best accomplished [when] nurtured by their mother and father anchored by the bonds of marriage. We believe that legal recognition and the accompanying benefits afforded couples should be preserved for that unique and special union of one man and one woman which has historically been called marriage.

However, there is no particular discussion to date of one of the GOP "standard bearers" utterly ignoring his own party's platform on an issue that plainly is of great concern to those who style themselves "social conservatives".

While this image on the White House site may be very truthful and genuine, it has been carefully hidden away while the masses are treated to the far more important public image of the Vice President "talking tough" to Wolf Blitzer on CNN and telling him that he is "out of line" when asking about Mary Cheney's pregnancy earlier this year.

That's what validates Richard B. Cheney's credentials as a conservative and that image is what really matters to the authority-worshipping masses

 

[ProfJohn]

Hey where did all these right wing posters come from at this rate P&N might actually have some decent balance before long...

 

[ScottMac]

So far, what I like about Fred Thompson, is that he talks "enough;" he covers the topic, but doesn't beat you up with dodgy qualification. He answers the questions directly, with relatively few words (a verbal desert compared to most of the candidates from any of the other sides).

So far, the best thing I've heard him say is: if you can't sell yourself and your position as a candidate in a couple months, you should get out of the race. Amen!

We've got over a YEAR of hearing these people (both sides + Independents) duck & weave and beg for money, and promise stuff they can't possibly deliver and mutilate the other side's positions and whine whine whine .... gonna (continue to) suck.

Curses on the "early starters;" I won't vote for 'em like I don't buy products from companies that have annoying commercials. You can't encourage 'em or they'll just get worse.

 

[Pliablemoose]

I think FDT is the closest thing to an electable candidate the Republicans have, and I'll lay $100 out to the first person that wants to bet that he won't be the next president.

Another interesting factoid is that his ex GF's are on board with him being the president.

The charge of a trophy wife is disputed by those that know her, she's evidently pretty damn intelligent & well thought of.

 

[Hacp]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
I think FDT is the closest thing to an electable candidate the Republicans have, and I'll lay $100 out to the first person that wants to bet that he won't be the next president.

Another interesting factoid is that his ex GF's are on board with him being the president.

The charge of a trophy wife is disputed by those that know her, she's evidently pretty damn intelligent & well thought of.

Doesn't matter. One national ad on Fred Thompson's trophy wife and conservatives will shy away from Fred. He's a pretty weak candidate because he has all these liabilites.

 

[Pliablemoose]

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
I think FDT is the closest thing to an electable candidate the Republicans have, and I'll lay $100 out to the first person that wants to bet that he won't be the next president.

Another interesting factoid is that his ex GF's are on board with him being the president.

The charge of a trophy wife is disputed by those that know her, she's evidently pretty damn intelligent & well thought of.

Doesn't matter. One national add on Fred Thompson's trophy wife and conservatives will shy away from Fred. He's a pretty weak candidate because he has all these liabilites.

So you'll take my bet?

And she's a trophy wife if you're freaking 70 Jeri Kehn Thompson

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
I think FDT is the closest thing to an electable candidate the Republicans have, and I'll lay $100 out to the first person that wants to bet that he won't be the next president.

Another interesting factoid is that his ex GF's are on board with him being the president.

The charge of a trophy wife is disputed by those that know her, she's evidently pretty damn intelligent & well thought of.

Doesn't matter. One national ad on Fred Thompson's trophy wife and conservatives will shy away from Fred. He's a pretty weak candidate because he has all these liabilites.

So they are going to shy away from Fred and head to Hillary?

Every time you guys make some comment on why group X won't vote a certain candidate your forget about what their other choice would be.

 

[Hacp]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
I think FDT is the closest thing to an electable candidate the Republicans have, and I'll lay $100 out to the first person that wants to bet that he won't be the next president.

Another interesting factoid is that his ex GF's are on board with him being the president.

The charge of a trophy wife is disputed by those that know her, she's evidently pretty damn intelligent & well thought of.

Doesn't matter. One national add on Fred Thompson's trophy wife and conservatives will shy away from Fred. He's a pretty weak candidate because he has all these liabilites.

So you'll take my bet?

And she's a trophy wife if you're freaking 70 Jeri Kehn Thompson

Unfortunatley, I don't gamble.

 

[Hacp]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
I think FDT is the closest thing to an electable candidate the Republicans have, and I'll lay $100 out to the first person that wants to bet that he won't be the next president.

Another interesting factoid is that his ex GF's are on board with him being the president.

The charge of a trophy wife is disputed by those that know her, she's evidently pretty damn intelligent & well thought of.

Doesn't matter. One national ad on Fred Thompson's trophy wife and conservatives will shy away from Fred. He's a pretty weak candidate because he has all these liabilites.

So they are going to shy away from Fred and head to Hillary?

Every time you guys make some comment on why group X won't vote a certain candidate your forget about what their other choice would be.

They'll probably be disheartened and not vote?

 

[Corn]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
I think FDT is the closest thing to an electable candidate the Republicans have, and I'll lay $100 out to the first person that wants to bet that he won't be the next president.

Another interesting factoid is that his ex GF's are on board with him being the president.

The charge of a trophy wife is disputed by those that know her, she's evidently pretty damn intelligent & well thought of.

Doesn't matter. One national ad on Fred Thompson's trophy wife and conservatives will shy away from Fred. He's a pretty weak candidate because he has all these liabilites.

So they are going to shy away from Fred and head to Hillary?

Every time you guys make some comment on why group X won't vote a certain candidate your forget about what their other choice would be.

I remember the liberal call to "true" conservatives to vote for Kerry because Bush wasn't conservative enough. Silly liberati always make me laugh.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
I think FDT is the closest thing to an electable candidate the Republicans have, and I'll lay $100 out to the first person that wants to bet that he won't be the next president.

Another interesting factoid is that his ex GF's are on board with him being the president.

The charge of a trophy wife is disputed by those that know her, she's evidently pretty damn intelligent & well thought of.

Doesn't matter. One national ad on Fred Thompson's trophy wife and conservatives will shy away from Fred. He's a pretty weak candidate because he has all these liabilites.

So they are going to shy away from Fred and head to Hillary?

Every time you guys make some comment on why group X won't vote a certain candidate your forget about what their other choice would be.

They'll probably be disheartened and not vote?

Not if Hillary is the candidate, trust me on that.
Now say Gore comes along and gets the nod then I could see Republicans sitting at home.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: Corn

I remember the liberal call to "true" conservatives to vote for Kerry because Bush wasn't conservative enough. Silly liberati always make me laugh.

That's really not relevant in context, but at least it gave you a chance to use your favorite word!

As it happens, as to the topic at hand, it seems to me Thompson isn't AS obviously problematic from a nomination standpoint as Giuliani or Romney, but he really isn't optimal either. Although the Democrats as a party seem quite capable of screwing up a wet dream, there's little question this is their election to lose.