Running Against Hillary

The Boston Globe quotes Fred as saying that the Republicans need to give voters a reason to vote for the Republican rather than running simply against Hillary.

Glad to see that someone (and FDT in particular) understand this principal.

Giuliani on Being a Republican

Here is a clip of Giuliani from his NYC mayoral days explaining his "fusion" candidacy. Very confusing, but consistent with Fred's recent comments that to the best of his knowledge Rudy has not called himself a conservative.

This does not necessarily go against what Rudy claims for himself. His qualification for the Republican nomination is that he is best suited to win based on the fact that he appeals to a broader base than Fred or Romney. That is the source of Fred's comments at the NY Conservative Party that conservatives do not win by becoming more like Democrats. One of the lessons of Reagan is that a plainly conservative message can draw Democrats and Republicans alike.

Note: saying that you are "fiscally conservative" (which Rudy has) is different from claiming to be conservative.



H/T Elephant Biz

FDT Primary Strategy

Fred has canceled a campaign stop in New Hampshire. Since Fred is a distant fourth in New Hampshire, it appears that he is conceding New Hampshire and focusing on Iowa and South Carolina (etc.). I think this is a sound approach. A more energetic effort in New Hampshire would help Giuliani win in New Hampshire. I think that would be a good result for Fred, but it could be that Romney really doesn't have a chance, so it doesn't matter if he wins there.

Jeri -- the Indiana Connection

I don't know why I didn't realize this. Jeri will be speaking at a California women's conference. The announcement says that she is a graduate of DePauw University in Greencastle.

Fred on Cavuto

Fred was on Neal Cavuto's show today. As usual, Fred presents himself very well and spends most of the interview contrasting himself with Giuliani, in particular, and the rest of the Republicans as well as Clinton. He does so with grace and without rancor. He goes as far as saying that he would support any of the other candidates if he loses, but emphasizes that he doesn't lose campaigns.

Here is the video.

MSM Goal Revealed

I have noticed several articles recently talking about the amount of money that Fred has earned. A filing revealed at least some ranges of income that he has had from various sources during the last year. Most of his income came from acting and residuals from films and tv program reruns. But one other source has been talked about and the Politico has revealed the reason for the interest. Fred made between $100,000 and $1M by serving on the Board of Directors of Guggenheim Advisors, a financial investor for "ultra rich" clients. So what is the issue?

Thompson’s affiliation with Guggenheim in some ways bucks his efforts to cast himself as a good ol’ boy more attuned with regular folks than his competitors for the Republican presidential nomination.

So that is where they are going with announcing his income. Note that all the candidates have to make the same revelations, but I am only seeing articles on Fred.

Hummmm.

FDT Gets Maryland Leaders

Top Maryland GOP Lawmakers are lining up behind Fred.

More Thoughts on Giuliani-Romney

MSNBC's First Read talks about the point of the Giuliani Romney spat. He points out the same two possibilities that I talked about in my post yesterday. Let me pose another possibility:

What if Giuliani wanted to bolster Mitt's standing in the race to keep the conservative vote split between Romney and Fred?

How would he do that? How about engage Romney like he was the only guy in the room indicating that you think he is your main competition?

By the way, Fact Check has more critiques on Giuliani's ummm inaccuracies on his credentials.

On a local note: some of Giuliani's claim seem very similar to Indy's own Peterson regarding police.

The Romney-Giuliani Spat

At the debate this week, Romney and Giuliani aimed at each other over taxing, spending and the line item veto. I have been thinking about whether or not this was good for Fred. I have two lines of thinking:

On one hand, the guys fighting are generally the big dogs. They have the most to gain by knocking the other guy down. Not too many people try to destroy Ron Paul--there is nothing to gain by it. No one was trying to knock down Fred, except Matthews.

On the other hand, if you are not involved in the fight, then you are above the fray. This is the view of one commentator, John Fout at The Street:

Sometimes winning an election comes from not losing. If Romney and Giuliani hurt each other, Thompson could quietly wind up standing tall in this race.

I'm not sure which way will be the actual results--I hope that Fout is correct.

FDT's Facts Check Out

Fact Check is still processing through the Republican debate for whether or not the candidates used accurate information in their comments. The conclusion for Fred was that he was accurate:

Thompson stuck to the facts in his rookie outing. A number of his statements attracted our interest, but they all checked out.
...
Thompson was correct when he said of the U.S., "We have the second highest corporate tax penalty in the world."
...
Thompson corrected moderator Chris Matthews, who wrongly implied that the former senator had said Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction "right before" the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq
...
Thompson erred – but on the safe side – when he said, "We're enjoying 22 quarters of successive economic growth." Actually, the U.S. economy has grown for 23 successive quarters, according to the most recent figures from the Bureau of Economic Analysis. And when preliminary figures on gross domestic product for July, August and September are released later this month, the official total is expected to reach 24.
...
Thompson also was correct about the effect of restraining growth of Social Security benefits for future retirees

Very good information from Fact Check. They went on to point out Giuliani had many errors:

But Thompson made it through his first debate without making any false or misleading factual claims that we could detect, while former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani committed multiple factual gaffes, adding to a growing list of misstatements.

Who is Your Candidate?

I found a TV station that has an online quiz to decide which candidate agrees with you most on the issues.

I took it and Fred and Duncan Hunter were tied for first on my quiz. Hillary, Edwards and Obama were tied for last.

Have fun with it, but obviously take it with a grain of salt. I don't think that you always support someone because of their position on issues but rather because of the kind of person they are or the style of leadership that would provide.

Levin on Fred

Mark Levin has posted a nice article over at National Review talking about Fred and Rudy.

This "senior moment" and "Fred Thompson-is-lazy" stuff is really starting to irk. I remember hearing the same comments about Ronald Reagan in every campaign in which I participated

I have spent some time with Thompson. He is intellectually curious and sharp. He is engaging and vigorous. Yes, he chooses his words carefully. He speaks in a southern accent. But the attacks on him appear to have a Northeastern-liberal-style feel to them, emanating largely from the NewYork-Washington, D.C axis. This is a man, after all, who worked sixteen hours a day in both television and radio.

Other Thoughts on the Debate

Fred has gotten some good and bad press on the debate, which tells me he did OK. The part that I liked best was when Matthews made a snide comment. The discussion was on government intervention into labor disputes. The initial question was whether or not the government should intervene (poor debate question), to which Fred said "No." He then went on to explain the role of government (put pressure on countries that are intentionally devaluing the currency). Matthews then said, "That took a long time. You said 'No', you should have stopped there." As Matthews started to move on to Giuliani, Fred retorted, "No one asked your opinion Christopher". There was a pause there which made me wonder if Matthews was about to lose it.

I saw a quote in a comment over at Redstate (comment #7) that reflects my feel on Ron Paul:

Then there's Ron Paul but why dwell on the halfwitted uncle that shows up at the reunion wearing his underwear on his head.

So I won't dwell on him...

Michigan Debate

I have been moving for the last few days and have had problems with internet access, so there have been things that I would like to blog that I haven't had opportunity to.

Today I am watching the Republican debate. I have been most interested in how Fred handles himself. Unfortunately the format (with so many people involved) really is not good for anyone making a mark for themselves.

The only person that has made a mark for themselves in my mind is Ron Paul--and not for good reasons. My gut reaction is "he's a nut!" He is out of sync with the Republican party. His position on the projection of power is wrong. His position on how to win over voters regarding Republican (or his own) vision of the economy is wrong. His understanding of the Constitution is wrong. His tone for speaking to the American people is wrong.

Since I'm not live blogging (I'm trying to work while listening) I will have to wait until tomorrow to put together some quotes on these observations.

By the way, I think that Fred is handling himself well, but it is very hard to distinguish himself very much with all of the individuals involved. Mostly, everyone is trying to talk in sound bites. What Fred has not done well is that he has been using sound bites from the road that are already familiar.