Fred Thompson speaks to AFP

October 5, 2007 – 12:02 pm

The first thing I notice. He is the first candidate to come up with his wife. She walks away. And AFP messes up the music. But the crowd is attentive. I think that the people here want to believe in him and support him.

He just mislead the audience. He talked about his first time here as when he was in the Senate. Of course, he was a lobbyist here. And a staffer. That’s silly.

I am just hearing platitutdes.

That said, I like the stuff about corporate tax rates. That’s really important stuff.  But why 28%? What’s the principle?

Now he talks about mandatory spending. This is important. He is willing to talk about the real issues on this stuff. This is completely necessary for our country.

And the need to simplify the tax code. All true, but what’s the structure here? Why isn’t the corporate tax stuff combined with this?

Again, the crowd responded. I am in a side room watching on video. And people clapped at the end. For a guy down the hall. Interesting.

Tags: ,

By eye | Comments (3)

What Would Romney Do?

October 1, 2007 – 9:33 am

Reading the morning news, this little vignette about Fred Thompson at the Iowa Christian Alliance meeting struck me:

At one point in the receiving line, a man’s Huckabee sticker fell off while he was shaking Thompson’s hand, so the former Senator picked it up and playfully slapped it back onto the man’s chest.

This seems to capture Thompson perfectly: gentlemanly, courteous, etc. I wondered what other candidates would do? What would Mitt Romney do? Maybe he would crack a weak joke or just ignore it. Maybe, internally, he would attribute it to the "family poltergeist that has haunted my ancestors for generations."

Tags: ,

By eye | Comments (2)

Glad someone finally said it

September 11, 2007 – 5:48 pm

Todd Harris said what everyone has been thinking for a while:

The statement from Todd Harris, communications director for Fred Thompson, accuses Mitt Romney’s campaign of a "half-baked cover-up" of what he alleges is the association between a Romney consultant and a hastily pulled website that said nasty things about Thompson.

Harris concluded with the kind of rhetoric that tends to warm Democratic hearts: "This latest episode only serves to prove what many voters are already figuring out: Mitt Romney will do anything, say anything, smear any opponent and flip flop on any position in order to win. The American people in general and the Republican Party in particular deserve better than this."

Amen. Team Thompson telling it how it is.

UPDATE: Full statement after the jump.
Read More »

Tags: ,

By eye | Comments (15)

Thompson turns down 1-on-1 debate

September 11, 2007 – 10:49 am

Hotline has the story. Apparently Fred Thompson turned down Mike Huckabee’s invitation to debate.

While I understand why Thompson wouldn’t want to do this, doesn’t this play into the narrative that he isn’t engaging in real campaigning? Especially with New Hampshire groups offering to host the debate?

Tags: , ,

By eye | Comments (0)

Huckabee challenges Thompson to 1-on-1 debate

September 7, 2007 – 5:15 pm

I love this. The release:

“I am aware of your comments on Fox News that you would like to participate in a series of Lincoln Douglas-styled debates. I would like to officially accept your offer,” wrote Huckabee in a September 7, 2007 letter to Senator Thompson"

With would be a lot of fun. Huckabee invoked Newt too:

“I share your view of the debates and agree that Newt’s ‘Nine Nineties in Nine’ concept is a far better way to make sure America’s next President has the character and capacity to lead our nation forward, that’s why I have already signed that pledge. I agree that what is needed is a real discussion by the candidates about their vision for the future of our country,” wrote Huckabee.

I hope they do this. Full release after the jump. Read More »

Tags: , ,

By eye | Comments (3)

Fred’s volunteer conference call

September 6, 2007 – 9:09 pm

I stopped in at a Fred Thompson House Party organized by my friends at Virginians for Fred Thompson. Other than a party, which I’m always up for, there was a conference call. I took some notes.

Randy, the political director talked about the "momentum to get to February 5th." That struck me as an odd date. Why then? I assume that this means that they think the contest will be determined on the 5th. With this complicated a field, I am not convinced.

Then Fred got on the phone. He started with "It became more and more evident that people are opening a door for us." I was struck by that language. That sounds more passive than it should be. Clearly he has a lot of support. But … I wouldn’t say it that way.

Then he cut into an interesting riff.  He explained, again, that he is going to talk about big, serious issues:

  • "Ready to talk about serious things in a forthright manner."
  • "Politicians are spending the birthright of people who are unborn and can’t protect themselves." (I thought that was interesting language)
  • "Unprecedented deficits and extremely high taxes" if we continue on the current path"
  • "Not pit one generation against another."

These are really important issues. Are they ballot questions?

Tags: ,

By eye | Comments (0)

Who’s more Hollywood?

September 6, 2007 – 10:48 am

There are two places that conservatives dislike more than New York City, at least prior to 9-11. One is San Francisco, which is one of the punch lines of Mitt Romney’s immigration Drudge ad from yesterday. The other is, of course, Hollywood.

And that’s why you have to wonder why Rudy Giuliani is dropping endorsements from famous Hollywood actors like Robert Duvall and Ron Silver this week. I mean, the Leno thing puts the whole Hollywood story on Fred Thompson. Does Rudy want a part of the spotlight?

Is he just another divo, like his late pal Pavarotti? (I didn’t know that they were friends. I admire that, and friendship deserves memorialization)

But should Rudy be reminding us that he is a Hollywood-loving, (effete?) opera-loving New Yorker?

Tags: , ,

By eye | Comments (0)

Different models for the future of the GOP?

September 2, 2007 – 10:50 am

Ross Douthat ends a discussion of Mike Huckabee with:

The most important thing, to my mind, is that a Huckabee-Giuliani-Romney race would be a lot healthier for the GOP than a Thompson-Giuliani-Romney race, which is reason enough to wish the Huckster well.

Now, assuming that these aren’t battles over personality, what are these candidates running as or, perhaps better, as?

Rudy Giuliani could be viewed as either a candidate of social moderates or as the national security candidate. I think that it is more fair to view him as the candidate who represents the resurgence of national security issues in the GOP. I have argued that his candidacy would have a transformative effect on the party. It also seems to me that the Fabrizio poll "Elephant in the Mirror" indicates that there is a "national security first" part of the party that could form the basis of a coalition, along with economic conservatives, that could be enough to win.

Mike Huckabee is certainly the most articulate and credible social conservative in the first or second tier. He is also the least conservative candidate on economic issues, as typically understood. Huckabee is the candidate who will make the most explicit attempt to maintain the party’s margins in the working class. The question is whether he will be able to get them to vote in a primary for him. Perhaps, more controversially, he is the candidate of a broader Christian agenda, including worrying about poverty, education, global warming, etc. Moderate and liberal evangelicals and Catholics have been swing votes in the recent national elections, and you can see him making a strong play for those. However, with his economic positions, one wonders how he will keep suburban voters. Hillary Clinton could become the candidate of share holders, when compared to Mike Huckabee. He would also be a transformative candidate for the party.

Fred Thompson, in his current form, seems to represent the status quo coalition, at least in the sense of the interest groups. This could shift with his "big ideas" talk and his seeming openness to raising taxes.  Earlier, it seemed that conservative groups were on the verge of tying the knot with Thompson. It is not as clear that they are at that point now. One can only imagine that the next couple of weeks is going to see a large amount of oppo begin to fall. Some of that is going to be muted by the Iraq debate in Congress.

Then there is Mitt Romney. What is he? The best that I can see is the candidate of the corporatist wing of the party. His staff seem primarily drawn from there., and his volunteers seem to be the country club set. His experience, family, and geography places him at that wing of the party. And his proposals on things like health care smack of the compromises that the Chamber of Commerce is willing to make to get the government to take costs off their hand. Clearly he is playing up his social conservative credentials to find other votes, getting a lucky break with the new Iowa gay marriage debate, but that is a stretch in light of his flip-flopping.

So back to Ross’s point about what the healthiest fight for the party is. You can restate the point as the "national security (Giuliani) versus economic moderate (Huckabee) versus corporatist (Romney)" or the "status quo (Thompson) versus national security (Giuliani) versus corporatist (Romney)". It is clear that the Huckabee candidacy represents a new addition to the debate in the GOP, and in that way, it is clear that it could be more healthy. I think that Ross would make the further point that the Huckabee direction is the most likely to keep Reagan Democrats in the game.

But are any of these winning, long-term coalitions?

Tags: , , , , ,

By eye | Comments (6)

When is Thompson going to get the space to announce?

August 27, 2007 – 9:48 am

So I was reading all the news about Alberto Gonzalez’s resignation. Unless the White House never really nominates someone — highly unlikely — the news up until September 11th is going to be focused on the new nominee.

So how is Fred Thompson going to announce and get any attention? Especially if he is not participating in the September 5th debate, which I will be going to.

After September 11th, there is going to be 3 weeks of Iraq. And what’s Fred’s position on Iraq? He’s going to have to say

Can Thompson survive a month of minimal attention? If Iowa is in December, can he really kick off his campaign in October? I hear that he is not hiring much staff in these early states.

This isn’t going to help his expectations problem, which Mike Huckabee was kind enough to point out.

Tags: ,

By eye | Comments (0)

What does state general election polling tell us?

August 23, 2007 – 11:54 am
  Virginia Kentucky Alabama
  vs. Hillary Undecided vs. Hillary Undecided vs. Hillary Undecided
Giuliani  -3  5%  -5 7%  +6 6%
Thompson  -9 7%  -7  5%  +2  4%
Romney  -14 8%  -12  6%  -2  6%

Survey USA released a bunch more general election polling, commented on by the Hedgehog Report and DaveG at Race42008.  Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson, and Mitt Romney were matched up against Hillary in Virginia, Kentucky, and Alabama. I have rearranged the data to show both margins and the %-undecided. SEveral things are worth noting.

First, the GOP is in bad shape in both Virginia and Kentucky due to reasons that have nothing to do with candidates. Kentucky has an election this year where a seemingly-corrupt Republican incumbent governor, Ernie Fletcher, is polling down 2-1. This election is probably framing people’s party identification strongly, and that election is in the papers on a daily basis. This poll illustrates the difficulties that Republicans have in that state. I suspect that once the catharsis of firing Fletcher happens, these numbers will adjust somewhat. Similarly, in Virginia, the state GOP has lost two governor’s races in a row with lousy candidates, and the state party has been rolled legislatively on taxes and transportation issues, the bread and butter. Virginia is now, again, a swing-state with popular Dem leaders.

In other words, Kentucky’s numbers are probably more result of the local environment, while Virginia’s actually represents something bad going on.

Second, these numbers show some important differences. Even in the South, Giuliani is performing in a tier above the other first-tier candidates, while Romney is polling a tier below the other first tier candidates. Romneybots will argue that this is due to name ID, but Gallup polling consistently indicates that Thompson’s name ID is lower than Romney’s but his performance in polling is (often substantially) higher. This is yet more evidence that Romney’s electability problem is real.

The inescapable conclusion is that people know things about Mitt Romney and don’t like him for it.

Third, these numbers are likely to move. People are going to learn things about Rudy Giuliani. (divorces, married first cousin, things about his record, etc.) that are going to move his numbers down. They are also going to learn things about Fred Thompson (thin record, blah blah) and Mitt Romney (flip-flopped on every issue in sight), but they both have the opportunity to frame that first impression.  In other words, Giuliani’s numbers will fall — they are a ceiling — while Romney and Thompson’s can still go up. Some.  The evidence suggests, however, that Thompson’s ceiling is higher than Romney’s.

On the other hand, there is probably nothing to learn about Hillary Clinton. After all, 3 books were written about her recently that were supposed to be interesting. They weren’t, and no one noticed.

In other words, these polls confirm our sense that things in some of these states are weird and that these will be tough elections. They don’t mean that much yet because so few people are paying attention. But we do know where some of the dragons aren’t.

Tags: , , , , , , ,

By eye | Comments (3)