May 30, 2007

Fred's In
— Slublog

It's tempting to call this breaking news, but it's really not all that surprising.

Fred Dalton Thompson is planning to enter the presidential race over the Fourth of July holiday, announcing that week that he has already raised several million dollars and is being backed by insiders from the past three Republican administrations, Thompson advisers told The Politico.

Thompson, the "Law and Order" star and former U.S. senator from Tennessee, has been publicly coy, even as people close to him have been furiously preparing for a late entry into the wide-open contest. But the advisers said Thompson dropped all pretenses on Tuesday afternoon during a conference call with more than 100 potential donors, each of whom was urged to raise about $50,000.
It will be interesting to see how much he can raise in that initial burst of fundraising. We'll know then whether the FRED!mania that has gripped many a conservative in the blogosphere will translate into more than rhetorical support.

In a recent interview, Newt Gingrich said the 2008 campaign will come down to a choice between "them" and "not them." Being Gingrich, he of course put himself in the "not them" category, but I think Thompson's entry into the race changes that. If Thompson can prove himself a viable candidate, he would become the "not them" a lot of conservatives have been waiting to see in the race.

So which candidates will lose if Thompson runs? My gut says Rudy Giuliani. The race could eventually come down to a Romney-Thompson showdown, since Giuliani has too much political and personal baggage (*sob*) and McCain's campaign is on its last legs, thanks to his spirited support of immigration reform.

So take your guesses. How much can Thompson raise in a short time? Is he a contender, or a flash in the pan? And how much will everyone's campaign be hurt by the white-hot lightning of Mike Bloomberg?

UPDATE - Not so fast? Bottom line: still looks like he's in, but Politico got the announcement date wrong.

UPDATE TO THE UPDATE - Okay, I give up. No one knows when Fred will announce, I guess. (H/t: Allah)

Posted by: Slublog at 04:26 AM | Comments (202)
Post contains 358 words, total size 3 kb.

1

Fred!


Posted by: adolfo_velasquez at May 30, 2007 04:33 AM (PhYx4)

2 Gingrich ain't really a 'them;' he's more a of  'what'...

Posted by: The Waco Kid at May 30, 2007 04:36 AM (lCheg)

3 It will be interesting to see how much he can raise in that initial burst of fundraising.

I have my credit card in hand.

Posted by: Toby928 at May 30, 2007 04:38 AM (ATbKm)

4 Rudy is gonna hurt from this. People in the base are desperate not to nominate him. Fred! has been the only alternative.


Mike Bloomberg could seriously fuck up things if he aligns with the right nutbar or disgruntled candidate and runs as said Independant candidates VP because of his giant-ass piles of money. If he's an independant presidential candidate, then no measurable effect, because no one likes him because he's a dull, personality and nanny state doucherocket.

Posted by: Sinistar at May 30, 2007 04:39 AM (1Wvre)

5 I think Romney is the big loser with Thompson's entry. He has positioned himself as a true conservative competing against Guliani's social liberalism and McCain's enthusiasm for regulation, unchecked immigration, and thumbing his nose at the conservative base.

Fred appeals to those same conservatives that Mitt is after, but doesn't (at this point) have to deal with serious allegations of flip-flopping, nor does he have to overcome the objections some evangelicals have to Mitt due to his religion.

The even bigger loser is the cute blonde who played the ADA on Law & Order earlier this decade. With Fred in, the reruns of nearly all her episodes will be probably be yanked from TV. She's going to lose a lot of royalty checks.

Posted by: T-web at May 30, 2007 04:39 AM (57znu)

6

Ohhhhhhh, "in" the Presidential Race.


I thought this was another Fred Babe Action Alert.


 


 


my bad


Posted by: Dave in Texas at May 30, 2007 04:41 AM (pzen5)

7 Let the speculation begin:  If Fred (PBUH) is the nominee, who for VP.  What state do we have to get, that we wouldn't win without a favorite son?  I'm thinking Ohio but the state party there is in tatters.

Posted by: Toby928 at May 30, 2007 04:42 AM (ATbKm)

8 Giuliani: down; Romney: up; McCain: down; Debates: way up; Ron Paul: still dreamy.

Well, our last actor/President was pretty good. Here's hoping for a two-fer.

Posted by: rho at May 30, 2007 04:43 AM (8eBMH)

9 Fred will save the children, but not the liberal children

Posted by: Toby928 at May 30, 2007 04:44 AM (ATbKm)

10 Don't waste your money on Fred. Romney's too cocky. Rudy will be the uniter.

Posted by: splashtc at May 30, 2007 04:45 AM (zRX++)

11 This is going to devastate the Ron Paul candidacy. He will now begin polling in negative numbers.

Posted by: JackStraw at May 30, 2007 04:50 AM (t+mja)

12 Think VP Romney could carry Massachusetts? Gonna be a tough battle no matter who gets the nomination..

Posted by: Entropy at May 30, 2007 04:52 AM (m6c4H)

13 If Fred (PBUH) is the nominee, who for VP.
---------
Tancredo. Only the President requires charisma, correct?

Posted by: Perpetual Student at May 30, 2007 04:53 AM (PVWFr)

14

I don't think Romney would carry Massachusetts in a national election because it's a moonbat state.


Other than that, I'd be happy with Fred or Romney (or both) on the ticket.


Posted by: adolfo_velasquez at May 30, 2007 04:58 AM (PhYx4)

15 Fred/Romney with Tancredo the new ICE czar.

Posted by: former republican at May 30, 2007 05:01 AM (7rZO4)

16

Carrying a deep blue state like NY or MA was always pretty far-fetched, even with a Rudy or Mitt at the top of the ticket.  I'm gonna go really dark horse here and predict a Jim Talent for VP pick by Fred! (its a foregone conclusion that Fred! takes the top prize).  Talent narrowly lost his Senate re-election bid to some democrat cypher with the benefit of a well-known family name.  He's extremely smart, great one-on-one with "the folks", good speaker and he's spot-on with regard to the issues.  He instantly puts MO in the "hot pink" category and makes it very likely that we carry that swing state with significant, but not crazy, electoral votes.  And talk about "outsider".


 


Oh, and I've got my check book out already to donate to a Fred Thompson campaign.  Bush and the current field has left me cold and I'm ready for someone to actually get excited about again.


Posted by: Fred at May 30, 2007 05:06 AM (ivbbD)

17

Fred doesn't have a chance.  He's simply the "great outside the beltway hope".


He'll be done by mid primary season.  


Having said that I hope he can force some of the others to  reveal their positions on some of the important issues, and perhaps force some of them to the right.


Right now, my money is on Romney, but if a scandal can be found to blow him out of the race(and they always find one), then Rudy will get the nod.


 


 


 


 


 


Posted by: Lokki at May 30, 2007 05:07 AM (wSBsc)

18 Let the speculation begin:  If Fred (PBUH) is the nominee, who for VP. 
What state do we have to get, that we wouldn't win without a favorite
son?  I'm thinking Ohio but the state party there is in tatters.




Posted by: Toby928 at May 30, 2007 09:42 AM (ATbKm)




That would be me, because I'm the only conservative left in Ohio, but I'd have to give up the AoS LifeStyleTM.

Posted by: HerrMorgenholz at May 30, 2007 05:08 AM (5aa4z)

19 Massachusetts is not necessary for an electoral win.  Romney carries the same slice of the electorate in the rest of the country as Fred.  Nice as he is, in political calculation, he would be a net loser over some other native son.  We experienced this with Cheney.  Bush was going to win Montana anyway and almost lost the election for want of a purplish state that a favorite son could have carried.

Posted by: Toby928 at May 30, 2007 05:12 AM (ATbKm)

20

Fred doesn't have a chance.  He's simply the "great outside the beltway hope".


Given "inside the beltway"  performance lately, these two sentences do not compute.


Posted by: Cuffy Meigs at May 30, 2007 05:15 AM (uOvAE)

21 To counter Hillbama, do we have any women that fit the bill for VP?

Posted by: adolfo_velasquez at May 30, 2007 05:16 AM (PhYx4)

22 Don't say Condi...

Posted by: Cuffy Meigs at May 30, 2007 05:17 AM (uOvAE)

23 Just a few pixs of Fred's smokin' hot wife out there and we'll have the male heterosexual vote wrapped up in '08. A key demographic we, well, already own.

Posted by: Hef at May 30, 2007 05:17 AM (Yn8HA)

24 If Fred (PBUH) is the nominee, who for VP.  What state do we have to
get, that we wouldn't win without a favorite son?  I'm thinking Ohio
but the state party there is in tatters.


What about Pennsylvania?  A boatload of electoral votes, plus Bush didn't lose it in 2004 by all that much, so it's doable.  Oh wait, I got it:

Fred Thompson/Lynn Swann '08!


Posted by: OregonMuse at May 30, 2007 05:21 AM (wQTRu)

25 What about Michael Steele? Maybe he'd be an option for VP?


Whatever, I'm glad Freds running.

Posted by: Sinistar at May 30, 2007 05:22 AM (1Wvre)

26 >>We experienced this with Cheney. Bush was going to win Montana anyway

pssst....Wyoming.

Other than that, you were rolling.

Posted by: JackStraw at May 30, 2007 05:22 AM (t+mja)

27

B-b-b-b-but, he played a racist in an episode of Wiseguy in '88 !!!


No chance


Posted by: franksalterego at May 30, 2007 05:24 AM (jqKZU)

28 I like the Michael Steele idea a lot...

Posted by: SOC at May 30, 2007 05:25 AM (1/F/d)

29 No OMuse, not Swann. The guy has ZERO charisma. He couldn't carry this state at all, he did poorly in the state election, he wasn't well informed, was indecisive, and was a weak candidate all around. Plus whoever the Dem nom is will likely get heavy support from Fast Eddie Rendell, who stomped Swann pretty handily, and is fairly well liked for some inexplicable reason...


Unfortunately, the PA state GOP is about as competent as the one in DC now...meaning they're total RINO dumbasses that support other RINO dumbasses, so you'll be hardpressed to find a strong person to draw on in PA.

Posted by: Sinistar at May 30, 2007 05:28 AM (1Wvre)

30 What about Michael Steele? Maybe he'd be an option for VP?

What?! A black Republican on the ticket? Maybe....

Posted by: The Black Republican at May 30, 2007 05:29 AM (bt3om)

31 Thompson/Santorum!!!

Posted by: Entropy at May 30, 2007 05:36 AM (m6c4H)

32 Duncan Hunter.  Squashes then chickenhawk meme and adds immigration cred, yes?

Posted by: The Waco Kid at May 30, 2007 05:37 AM (lCheg)

33 Thanks for that lesson in PA politics, Sinistar.

The GOP is in sad disarray in PA, OH, DC, and we know it's useless in IL, else Obama would still be just another state senator, instead of having a shot at the presidency.

My question is, is there a state in which the GOP is not totally fucked up incompetent?
(please, no giggling)


Posted by: OregonMuse at May 30, 2007 05:37 AM (wQTRu)

34

Probably still couldn't carry PA. Rick did lose after all.


Goddamn Sinistar and his moonbat friends all high on pot with melted cheeze whiz dripping down their chins...


Posted by: Entropy at May 30, 2007 05:38 AM (m6c4H)

35
pssst....Wyoming.


Sorry, all that big sky country looks the same to me.

Posted by: Toby928 at May 30, 2007 05:40 AM (ATbKm)

36 GOP is useless up here.  After all, we are the state of Snowe and Collins.

Posted by: Slublog at May 30, 2007 05:40 AM (R8+nJ)

37

Wow...the 4th ... It Will Be Glorious!


 


I do like Condi as VP!


 


My check book is in hand…


Posted by: Paladin at May 30, 2007 05:45 AM (ZO0u/)

38

and we know it's useless in IL


Ahh but do you know why?


Because it was deliberately dismantled and destroyed by a corrupt RINO who couldn't handle any principled opposition and so drove it all out.


Posted by: Entropy at May 30, 2007 05:46 AM (m6c4H)

39

We're in decent shape.


Oh, and Delay still hasn't gone to trial.


 


I have a prediction though, based on how well he handled it last time the GOP looked for another candidate,


J-Mac is going to implode.  Full-on nucular, tactical temper tantrum, severe collateral damage freakout.


 


It'll kinda be funny to watch.


Posted by: Dave in Texas at May 30, 2007 05:47 AM (pzen5)

40 J-Mac is going to implode.  Full-on nucular, tactical temper tantrum, severe collateral damage freakout.

It will be the South Carolina concession speech all over again.

And it will be beautiful.

Posted by: Slublog at May 30, 2007 05:49 AM (R8+nJ)

41

GOP is useless up here.


*snort*


Have you seen how hapless the CT 'leadership' is? At this point I have to agree with the liberals that Rell got reelected on the Cancer Victim ticket, because she sure ain't no Republican.


Posted by: lauraw at May 30, 2007 05:50 AM (HHpe0)

42 Are you talking Cheesesteaks Entropy?

In this part of PA, its provologne and a bit of mayo. Nobody does Whiz around here to my knowledge.

Philly sucks ass, and the rest of the state hates them because their out of control gangsters and criminals are now spreading their rot to the rest of the state. We've had a big spike in gang or drug related shootings around here, most of whom were Philly imports. Fuck Philly.

Posted by: Sinistar at May 30, 2007 05:51 AM (1Wvre)

43

J-Mac is going to implode.  Full-on nucular, tactical temper tantrum, severe collateral damage freakout.


When I see those veins throbbing in his forehead I break out in silly giggles.


Posted by: lauraw at May 30, 2007 05:51 AM (HHpe0)

44 Condi = Bush/Iraq Fatigue, writ large. Time for a clean slate.

Posted by: Cuffy Meigs at May 30, 2007 05:53 AM (uOvAE)

45 Agreed Cuffy, no Condi. The current admin is radioactive in terms of electability.

Posted by: Sinistar at May 30, 2007 05:55 AM (1Wvre)

46 Heh, I'm gonna love to see McCain flip out when he has to bow out. I just hope the bastard doesn't pull a TR and run indie to fuck things up.

Posted by: Sinistar at May 30, 2007 05:56 AM (1Wvre)

47

My question is, is there a state in which the GOP is not totally fucked up incompetent?


I've got Inhofe (anti-global warming crusader) and Coburn (awesome). Take that bitches!


On the other hand, the state GOP has managed to lose the governorship to a twelve year old girl from the Democrat party.


Posted by: adolfo_velasquez at May 30, 2007 05:56 AM (PhYx4)

48 Heh, I'm gonna love to see McCain flip out when he has to bow out. I
just hope the bastard doesn't pull a TR and run indie to fuck things up.


That's my big fear, as well.  McCain is just angry, impulsive and egotistic enough to do it, as well.

Posted by: Slublog at May 30, 2007 05:58 AM (R8+nJ)

49

When I see those veins throbbing in his forehead I break out in silly giggles.


 


I am so glad I wasn't the only one.


Posted by: Dave in Texas at May 30, 2007 05:59 AM (pzen5)

50

J-Mac,


Don't be a Kyle.


 


Like Teddy was.


Posted by: William Howard Taft at May 30, 2007 06:03 AM (pzen5)

51 Fred and Newt are playin' this like straight-up pimps! You know, sit back, let all the bitches fight for awhile, then step in and handle it.

Posted by: bmac at May 30, 2007 06:03 AM (Nr4dg)

52

Condi is a nonstarter.


To hell with electability (although Sinistar and Cuffy are right) I don't want any more of these goddamn people.


Thank god Bush didn't pick a VP who wanted to run after him.


Posted by: Entropy at May 30, 2007 06:04 AM (m6c4H)

53

Check out the poll on Townhall's main page.


I don't know what that sort of thing translates to in reality but Fred! gets an unbeleivable amount of support from the intertubes.


Posted by: Entropy at May 30, 2007 06:07 AM (m6c4H)

54 Bloomberg's interesting only because he has a beaujillion dollars.

If he were to really dump a billion(which he could) into his campaign, he could be a real factor. He won't win the nomination. He won't win the general election if he goes indie, but like Perot, he'll damage the Republicans enough to guarrantee a Dim win. Maybe a complete sweep.

Posted by: rinseandspit at May 30, 2007 06:11 AM (q9jq7)

55

Is it too much to hope for that Bloomberg gets picked up as a VP candidate for an indy run by whichever of Obama/Hillary! doesn't take home the Democrat nomination?  That would be fun to watch.


Why should we be the only ones who get screwed over by mavericks?


Posted by: Jake at May 30, 2007 06:14 AM (pKWt0)

56 I am glad he's not announcing on the 4th because that would have been proof he was an idiot...who is going to be paying attention to presidential announcements that day or weekend?

Maybe we should worry about getting him nominated before picking the VP candidate?  He's going to raise a lot of money with his one day stunt but so did Howard Dean. Let's hope Fred! has more staying power.



Posted by: Drew at May 30, 2007 06:19 AM (gNyUT)

57 Ted Poe for VP.

Posted by: Roy at May 30, 2007 06:19 AM (RNbCq)

58 I disagree rinse&spit, he's such a dull candidate, he'd have to know that money would be wasted if he were to run for Prez, and no matter how much money you have, it doesn't matter if you are a total crap candidate. As a VP to say, a disgruntled McCain running Indie, that oughta scare the shit out of you.

Posted by: Sinistar at May 30, 2007 06:20 AM (1Wvre)

59 Saaaaay, speaking of Perot, I figured that jug-eared homunculus would be yapping away on Larry King about all this immigration shit, given that that and NAFTA were Nimitz sized planks in his '92 platform. Where is he?

Posted by: Cuffy Meigs at May 30, 2007 06:21 AM (uOvAE)

60

A John McCain independant presidential campaign would be a very good thing...


 


 


...for me to poop on!


Posted by: Triumph, the Insult Comic Dog at May 30, 2007 06:23 AM (pzen5)

61 It will be interesting to see how much he can raise in that initial burst of fundraising.

The day he announces, I'll make a significant contribution, I've never done that before, and I'm probably not the only one.

Posted by: Kensington at May 30, 2007 06:24 AM (kFwRi)

62

Drew's right.  On the 4th, everyone will be at the movies, watching Transformers.


There will be fireworks to celebrate Optimus Prime's victory over the Decepticons.   I just know it.


Posted by: Some Guy at May 30, 2007 06:26 AM (lPxkl)

63 UPDATE - Not so fast?

Number of premature ejaculations: 3.72

Posted by: Toby928 at May 30, 2007 06:29 AM (ATbKm)

64

If he were to really dump a billion(which he could) into his campaign, he could be a real factor. He won't win the nomination. He won't win the general election if he goes indie, but like Perot, he'll damage the Republicans enough to guarrantee a Dim win. Maybe a complete sweep


But Perot at least appealed to a certain sort of conservative-ish voter who wasn't enchanted with the GOP status quo.  Who is going to vote for Bloomberg, other than foolish liberals in Manhattan?  How does that hurt the GOP?


Besides, after all the money that George Soros flushed in his efforts to oust Bush, does anyone still believe you can buy the presidency?


I hope Bloomberg does run, because I'll enjoy the look of stunned outrage on his face on election night.  "What do you mean I lost!?!"


Posted by: Kensington at May 30, 2007 06:29 AM (kFwRi)

65 #23 "Just a few pixs of Fred's smokin' hot wife out there....."

It will be the first time that discussion of the First Lady's cleavage becomes a water-cooler (or locker room) topic.

Posted by: Random Numbers at May 30, 2007 06:30 AM (vaiJp)

66 Cleavage is better than canklage!

Posted by: Cuffy Meigs at May 30, 2007 06:33 AM (uOvAE)

67 Paladin, I will never vote for Condi in any capacity.  Her stand on Israel is as bad as the Dhimmicrats.

Posted by: Robert at May 30, 2007 06:33 AM (qgw30)

68 FRED!

Posted by: exdem13 at May 30, 2007 06:34 AM (I4jEf)

69 Guys...don't worry about Bloomberg.  He won't run in the primaries because he's not really a Republican.  My guess is he doesn't like Republicans very much and won't want to have to be near them, especially those southern ones!

So, he runs as an independent (he's got the cash to set up an organization to get on all the ballots). At first the voters will say, "Who?" and then after he spends hundreds and hundreds of millions on ads to tell them who is is they will all say, "Why?"

He's dull, annoying and really he's just the guy who followed Rudy.

Bloomberg is a bored billionaire who is term limited in NYC. He'll find something better to do with his time and money.

Posted by: Drew at May 30, 2007 06:34 AM (gNyUT)

70

In all seriousness, though, July's probably a good time to announce for real- not too late to miss out on the crazy election money or the nervous Nellies who just can't wait, but not too soon to peak early.


I mean, he polls well for a not-technically-a-candidate (he beats millionaire Romney in some polls!), but he can't string us along forever.


I don't know if he'll be the nominee or not, but his campaign should at least be *fun* and substantive.  (If that shot across Michael Moore's enormously flabby bow is any indication.)


As for Veep pick...  I bet he'll pick a non-Southerner.  (Yeah, that's all I got.)


Posted by: Some Guy at May 30, 2007 06:37 AM (lPxkl)

71 I don't think you guys are seeing the risk with Bloomberg here. His independent run is stupid and pointless and a waste of millions, if he can humble himself enough to be VP to someone, and then throws his fortune behind a Independent that can garner some real support, its gonna be a real problem, and Ross Perot all over.

Posted by: Sinistar at May 30, 2007 06:38 AM (1Wvre)

72 You all worry too much.

When the Joo money men and the tri-lateral commission decide on a candidate, that will be that. Then they will roll out the Diebold electing machine and presto.

You guys could really learn a lot by just spending sometime at DU or Kos or reading some Larry Johnson and Juan Cole. Those folks have credu... creda... they know stuff.

Posted by: JackStraw at May 30, 2007 06:43 AM (t+mja)

73

For some reason I had a flashback to Randi Rhoades interviewing Ralph Nader, and yelling at him for running.


 


Damn that was funny.


Posted by: Dave in Texas at May 30, 2007 06:45 AM (pzen5)

74 Heh, true Jack, Zionist Neocon Worldwide Conspiracy FTW!

Posted by: Sinistar at May 30, 2007 06:45 AM (1Wvre)

75 Sinistar,

Bloomie ain't spending all that money to get someone else elected so he can be VP. 

Posted by: Drew at May 30, 2007 06:46 AM (gNyUT)

76

if he can humble himself enough


I think we can pretty much stop right here.....one thing his nanny-state run in NY has proven is that he has no humility or grace. He's incapable of keeping his ego in check.


Posted by: Francase at May 30, 2007 06:49 AM (FPtHm)

77

Bloomie ain't spending all that money to get someone else elected so he can be VP. 


Exactly!  The only reason he won the election in NYC is that the Democrat opposition was even too far left for New Yorkers, if you can imagine!  Republicans don't want him, and Democrats won't pick him over Obama or Her Thighness.  This is nothing more than a vanity venture for Bloomberg, and he's more likely to hurt Democrats than anyone else.  He's Nader with a bigger checkbook, really.


Posted by: Kensington at May 30, 2007 06:53 AM (kFwRi)

78

I think we can pretty much stop right here.....one thing his nanny-state run in NY has proven is that he has no humility or grace. He's incapable of keeping his ego in check.


Honestly.  What's he going to run on anyway?  A no smoking platform?


Posted by: Kensington at May 30, 2007 06:54 AM (kFwRi)

79

Yeah, Bloomberg isn't scary. His nannying will peel votes from Dems and maybe some NE-Corridor-RINO-rich-guilt-hedge-fund types.


He will get ZERO southern votes. Z-E-R-O.


Posted by: Cuffy Meigs at May 30, 2007 06:55 AM (uOvAE)

80 We've had a big spike in gang or drug related shootings around here, most of whom were Philly imports. Fuck Philly.

I understand Philadelphia is in some kind of race with Detroit to see which one of them can be the biggest crime-infested, corrupt shithole.


Posted by: OregonMuse at May 30, 2007 06:55 AM (efWVJ)

81 OK, cool. If he's running as Prez alone, he's wasting money and will go nowhere. I don't know much about the guy other than that he's a rich nannystater with no personality that rode Rudy's coattails into NYC swearing up and down that he'd continue Rudy's policies.

Posted by: Sinistar at May 30, 2007 06:56 AM (1Wvre)

82 The day he announces, I'll make a significant contribution, I've never done that before, and I'm probably not the only one.

You aren't the only one.  I've never contributed to a campaign in my life, and I'll be right there with you the day he announces.

Posted by: leoncaruthers at May 30, 2007 06:56 AM (7iTO9)

83

I understand Philadelphia is in some kind of race with Detroit to see which one of them can be the biggest crime-infested, corrupt shithole.


MEMPHIS - The Detroit of the South


Posted by: Cuffy Meigs at May 30, 2007 06:57 AM (uOvAE)

84 I don't know what that sort of thing translates to in reality but Fred!
gets an unbeleivable amount of support from the intertubes.


Well, so does Ron Paul, which only goes to show that internet polls are not an indication of anything.


Posted by: OregonMuse at May 30, 2007 06:58 AM (efWVJ)

85 Heh, pretty much Muse. Fucking hellhole.

Posted by: Sinistar at May 30, 2007 06:59 AM (1Wvre)

86 Honestly.  What's he going to run on anyway?  A no smoking platform?

Well, that and no trans-fats.

"Bloomberg: The Nanny State Now Has A New Name."

Posted by: OregonMuse at May 30, 2007 07:00 AM (efWVJ)

87

Well, so does Ron Paul, which only goes to show that internet polls are not an indication of anything.


Yah...I don't think Fred!'s supporters are sitting on townhall gaming the poll though. I think Fred's internet support is actually legitimate.


But people who use the internet are just a small subset not neccessarily representative of people at large.


Posted by: Entropy at May 30, 2007 07:03 AM (m6c4H)

88 I popped my cherry by donating to Bush last time, so I will have to donate even bigger to Fred or Romney this time.

Posted by: adolfo_velasquez at May 30, 2007 07:04 AM (PhYx4)

89

I don't know what that sort of thing translates to in reality but Fred! gets an unbeleivable amount of support from the intertubes.

Well, so does Ron Paul, which only goes to show that internet polls are not an indication of anything.


Well, sure, and after the Howard Dean fizzle it's important not to read too much into Internet support.


But!


Isn't it safe to say that Dean and Paul share the same supporters, basically college age goofballs who don't really vote anyway? 


I ain't no college kid.


Posted by: Kensington at May 30, 2007 07:04 AM (kFwRi)

90 Wait, here's a better one:

"Bloomberg: The Nanny State Is Coming For YOU!."


Posted by: OregonMuse at May 30, 2007 07:06 AM (efWVJ)

91 Isn't it safe to say that Dean and Paul share the same supporters,
basically college age goofballs who don't really vote anyway?


That sounds about right.

Let's hope that Fred! appeals to a more responsible demographic.


Posted by: OregonMuse at May 30, 2007 07:08 AM (efWVJ)

92 Cuffy-

Amen, brutha... think Ophelia Ford will go into her rehab for (ahem) anemia?

Anyway, in a perfect world, the VP candidate would come from either California or NY- perhaps not even to win the state, but to force the Dems to have to spend real money defending their turf. Fred can carry the South pretty much all by his lonesome... but bear in mind (and I frankly am inclined to vote for Fred in the primaries at this point) that Giuliani is carrying the South right now.

Be interesting to see how this all shakes out, but let's keep the broad picture in mind here. Our front-runners give us a hell of a set of choices... a socially liberal New Yorker that people support... a Tennessee ex-senator with rock star visibility and substantial conservative cred... a Massachusetts ex-governor with serious conservative cred from one of the bluest of blue states... and a whole bunch of different views represented by the three of them.

Not a bad bag to pick from, if you ask me.

tmi3rd

Posted by: tmi3rd at May 30, 2007 07:09 AM (7XeAy)

93 Wouldn't Bloomberg fuck up the Dems more than the Repubs if he ran Independent?  Outside of NY he's not really considered a R, right?  Like Arnold out here in Cali - you folks know he's really a Dem/Socialist.

Posted by: SOC at May 30, 2007 07:10 AM (1/F/d)

94

I think The Fred's announcement does the most damage to Romney.  They're both holding themselves out as conservative picks, so the social moderates in the party won't see him as a viable option to Rudy anyway (other than perhaps in terms of electability).  And I can't imagine The Fred would pick Romney as veep, because Romney can't hope to carry Massachussets, and that state only has twelve electoral votes anyway -- not an insignificant number, but not enough to make it worth the risk.


Posted by: Sobek at May 30, 2007 07:14 AM (6GK9U)

95

Is Tennessee the south, the midwest, or the northeast?


Posted by: Entropy at May 30, 2007 07:15 AM (m6c4H)

96 Did we lose all our trolls calling for Ace to apologize?  Man, trolls don't have the stubborn pride they used to... I blame this shoddy work ethic on their parents.

Posted by: Gekkobear at May 30, 2007 07:15 AM (X0NX1)

97 Fred! is like sunlight to trolls

Posted by: Toby928 at May 30, 2007 07:17 AM (ATbKm)

98 I blame this shoddy work ethic on their parents.

I blame their desperate need for attention on their parents. When the trolls didn't get Ace to engage them, it reminded them of how their parents ignored them. It's was too painful so they left.


Posted by: Drew at May 30, 2007 07:18 AM (gNyUT)

99 Sinistar,

It's not so much that he's a scary great candidate. There's no great cry across the land for a Bloomberg candidacy. His (possible) run's strictly a vanity project.

The damage he'll do is in the debates, just like Perot. Bush Mach 1 was under constant attack by both Perot and Clinton. Bush was never able to make a point without one or the other tearing it up.

Bloomberg's basically a Dim. His default position is liberalism, he'll attack the GOP candidate. The Repub candidate's going to be getting it from both ends like Sully on Lucky Sailor Night.

But, you're right about McCain, that would be the smart move. Make a deal that Jmac steps down after one term cause it's unlikely he'll serve two anyway and Bloomberg's got a shot in 2012.

Posted by: rinseandspit at May 30, 2007 07:20 AM (q9jq7)

100 >>And I can't imagine The Fred would pick Romney as veep, because Romney can't hope to carry Massachussets, and that state only has twelve electoral votes anyway -- not an insignificant number, but not enough to make it worth the risk.

I don't think he would ask Romney cause Romney probably wouldn't take it. But I think he would be a wise choice if he could be convinced to do it.

He has a lot of appeal in places like MI where he is from and his dad was head of AMC, governor and a Presidential candidate. He has weight in states like Utah for obvious reasons and he plays well in other northern states. He was also the head of the national governors association which gives him a lot of cred with the outside the beltway crowd. Plus, and I know this may come as a shock to some, but the good ol' boy/red truck thing isn't as charming on the colder side of the Mason Dixon.

Carrying MA isn't all that, hell Gore didn't even carry TN and he was a few hung chads from the Oval Office (shudder).

Posted by: JackStraw at May 30, 2007 07:28 AM (t+mja)

101 Allahu Akbar!  Fwed!

Posted by: Emperor of Icecream at May 30, 2007 07:29 AM (w4Bx4)

102

The damage he'll do is in the debates, just like Perot. Bush Mach 1 was under constant attack by both Perot and Clinton. Bush was never able to make a point without one or the other tearing it up.


The thing is, however, that Bush I wasn't a brawler, whereas Fred seems to have grasped that playing nice won't work when under attack.


I do have a significant concern about Fred!, though, and that's with his health.  I do worry that his lymphoma will come back.  That would be disastrous all around, and it is a genuine risk.


Posted by: Kensington at May 30, 2007 07:29 AM (kFwRi)

103 Oh yea, one other thing...Romney has a shit load of money and access to more.

Posted by: JackStraw at May 30, 2007 07:29 AM (t+mja)

104 Bloomberg's basically a Dim. His default position is liberalism, he'll
attack the GOP candidate. The Repub candidate's going to be getting it
from both ends like Sully on Lucky Sailor Night.

Rinseandspit makes a good point. But I still think it's a net loss for the Dems if he runs. He'd be taking votes from people more inclined to vote Democrat, in other words, idiots.

Posted by: Nice Deb at May 30, 2007 07:32 AM (9P6EO)

105 The thing is, however, that Bush I wasn't a brawler,

And Bloomberg doesn't have that maniacal energy that Perot does. Bloomie is soooo dull, it's hard to imagine him attacking anyone really. Especially someone who might punch back. 

If Bloomberg got in the debates he'd play the competent manager/policy wonk role, not the flame throwing ideologue.

Besides, Perot whet after the elder Bush because he hated him personally. Something about ruining his daughter's wedding or something, wasn't it?



Posted by: Drew at May 30, 2007 07:36 AM (gNyUT)

106 Isn't it safe to say that Dean and Paul share the same supporters, basically college age goofballs who don't really vote anyway?

Some. The key here is "votes in primaries", not voting in general, which is where Dean really fell down. He had pretty good traction and support, which can translate if done well.

Paul pulls support from a lot of folks who don't typically vote. You likely know quite a few of them--people who bitch about "Demicans" and "Republicrats". It takes a skilled campaign manager to convert that support into primary votes, which is where it counts. I don't see any evidence of such skill in the Paul campaign, but that's largely because those folks are expensive. It doesn't help that he's not a major player in the Party either. The Party wants political power, and that power comes from government. A message of "tear down the Dept. of Education, raze the IRS, stop meddling" does nothing for the Republican Party, just citizens.

Posted by: rho at May 30, 2007 07:38 AM (8eBMH)

107 I didn't know Bloods affiliated gangs were such Cheesesteak aficianados Remulak....

Posted by: Sinistar at May 30, 2007 07:46 AM (1Wvre)

108

I do have a significant concern about Fred!, though, and that's with his health.  I do worry that his lymphoma will come back. 


Least of my worries- from what I've read, he's more likely to die of old age than the form of lymophoma he has... and given his wife's assests, I don't see old age taking him anytime soon- he has too much to live for.


I have a few minor concerns about him, but he's still by far and away my #1 pick right now. 


Posted by: Hollowpoint at May 30, 2007 07:46 AM (plsiE)

109

I do have a significant concern about Fred!, though, and that's with his health.  I do worry that his lymphoma will come back. 


Least of my worries- from what I've read, he's more likely to die of old age than the form of lymophoma he has...


Well, see, I'd like to get some confirmation about that, because I was under the impression that the odds were better than even for a reoccurrence within six years from now and that such reoccurrence would not bode well for his survival.


I hope he clears that up very soon.  I'd be thrilled to be wrong about that.


Posted by: Kensington at May 30, 2007 07:53 AM (kFwRi)

110

"I don't think he would ask Romney cause Romney probably wouldn't take it."


I doubt that.  I haven't seen anything of McCain-style petulance in him, and he's probably young enough to wait through eight years of The Fred to get his spot in the big chair.  (He's actually in his sixties, but he certainly doesn't look it).


Posted by: Sobek at May 30, 2007 07:54 AM (6GK9U)

111

I didn't know Bloods affiliated gangs were such Cheesesteak aficianados Remulak....


There is much you do not know young padawan, but you will learn.


Posted by: Entropy at May 30, 2007 07:54 AM (m6c4H)

112

Kensington - he was diagnosed in '04 so it's allready been in remission for 3 years.


And he never had it bad to begin with - not like Tony Snow or someone who had to go through all the treatments and whatnot. He never showed any symptoms at all and they seem to have caught a very slow cancer very early.


Posted by: Entropy at May 30, 2007 07:57 AM (m6c4H)

113

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/04/11/thompson.cancer/index.html


There's certainly a chance it will randomly come back with a vengeance and wack him.


But that's a not insignificant chance with any of these old geezers...Guiliani might randomly get cancer and die.


Odds are none of these guys will be alive in 20 years.


Posted by: Entropy at May 30, 2007 08:00 AM (m6c4H)

114 I don't attribute it to petulance, Sobek. The guy is used to being THE man. He's been the CEO whether it was in business, the olympics or politics. I don't see the allure of being VP after his career but ya never know.

As I said, if Fred does get the nomination, I hope Romney could be convinced. I don't care who the donks roll out, that would be a formidable team.

Posted by: JackStraw at May 30, 2007 08:01 AM (t+mja)

115 Drew, Some Guy:

The 4th is on a Wednesday this year. A Thompson announcement could just fill the news that night and the following morning - it would be the only significant thing happening that day (unless AQ gets frisky).

Posted by: Brown Line at May 30, 2007 08:15 AM (VrNoa)

116 Entropy, Heh.

Posted by: Sinistar at May 30, 2007 08:17 AM (1Wvre)

117
We Philadelphians get pretty ornery when you mess with our
cheesesteaks. We get pretty ornery about anything, now that I think
about it.


Didn't Philly fans throw snowballs at Santa once?

That's some funny stuff right there.

Posted by: Slublog at May 30, 2007 08:19 AM (R8+nJ)

118 A Thompson/Lieberman ticket might be a stroke of political genius.  Sure Lieberman is too liberal for GOP circles, but he is a defense hawk and he'd only be VP and could help attract enough Independent and Democrat votes.  Eh, just a thought.

Posted by: John at May 30, 2007 08:22 AM (QC96i)

119 A Thompson announcement could just fill the news that night and the
following morning - it would be the only significant thing happening
that day

Except no one will be around to see it or care. It's a bad time. Sure all the junkies are dying for a hit of Fred! but he needs to reach people who don't care yet and anytime around the 4th is a bad idea.

We'll see.



Posted by: Drew at May 30, 2007 08:23 AM (gNyUT)

120 Santa was asking for it. Fred would have done much worse to him...with his mind.

Posted by: MamaAJ at May 30, 2007 08:56 AM (X6Zdh)

121

You want a VP candidate for Fred? I propose Mary Cheney.


Mary Cheney for VP will have these advantages:


--get women's votes


--get gay votes


--get votes of hetero males who love girl on girl action


--get the votes of pro-life people. Mary is a mom!


--get votes of planned parenthood freaks. She planned her parenthood, right?


--get votes of anyone who likes tough women


--will make sure that the Cheney spirit lingers on in the corridors of power.


Posted by: Tushar D at May 30, 2007 09:01 AM (IlgNp)

122 Did you know that Dick Cheney's daughter is a lesbian?

Posted by: z ryan at May 30, 2007 09:08 AM (9Ml1C)

123 I think that Tushar might be on to something. Imagine a Cheney that the Dems absolutely could NOT attack.

Posted by: IllTemperedCur at May 30, 2007 09:11 AM (tVbxd)

124

Z Ryan,


My second point was "she will get gay votes",


and my third point was "get votes of hetero males who love girl on girl action".


I guess that means I know she is a lesb. Or maybe I don't. I am just a moron commenter on AoS.


Posted by: Tushar D at May 30, 2007 09:13 AM (IlgNp)

125

"I don't care who the donks roll out, that would be a formidable team."


I would vote Thompson/Romney in a heartbeat. 


Posted by: Sobek at May 30, 2007 09:13 AM (6GK9U)

126
I want to have Fred!'s baby.


Posted by: Mr Minority at May 30, 2007 09:18 AM (NJi0O)

127 Mr. Minority, that is very liberal of you! But medical science is not that advanced yet.

Posted by: Tushar D at May 30, 2007 09:19 AM (IlgNp)

128 I like the idea of a Thompson/Lieberman "backseat Zionest" ticket. It would be scary enough to get Obama to give up terrorizing people and Osama to quit promoting totalitarian collectivism. And the other way around too! 

Posted by: Tyrtle at May 30, 2007 09:21 AM (fDEs+)

129 Hmmm, few posts, guest bloggers.  As predicted, the Ace's viagra/vodka fueled productive streak has brought The Crash.

Can fluffy kitten posts be far behind?

Posted by: Toby928 at May 30, 2007 09:21 AM (ATbKm)

130 Thompson/Lieberman is a terrible idea. Lieberman is a flaming liberal....

Posted by: Entropy at May 30, 2007 09:21 AM (m6c4H)

131 If liberals were all like Lieberman, Al Qaeda would be voting Republican.

Posted by: Tyrtle at May 30, 2007 09:23 AM (fDEs+)

132 Fred!/Newt, please.

Posted by: taba at May 30, 2007 09:29 AM (lftai)

133 I agree with Entropy, no Lieberman. Plus the guy has no energy.

Posted by: Sinistar at May 30, 2007 09:34 AM (1Wvre)

134 I wonder whether Arnold (not being a born US Citizen) is eligible for a VP slot. If he can deliver CA, Dems are toast.

Posted by: Tushar D at May 30, 2007 09:36 AM (IlgNp)

135

Sinistar, when the ZOG has your back, you don't need energy.


Posted by: Tyrtle at May 30, 2007 09:41 AM (fDEs+)

136 Mr. Minority, that is very liberal of you! But medical science is not that advanced yet.

Ok, I will just settle for Fred!'s wife having my baby!

(disclaimer: Although I am shooting blanks, I will sacrifice myself to keeping trying with her to have a baby)

Posted by: Mr Minority at May 30, 2007 09:43 AM (NJi0O)

137 I wonder whether Arnold (not being a born US Citizen) is eligible for a VP slot.

Nope, since he would be in the direct line of succession to the Presidency.

Posted by: Mr Minority at May 30, 2007 09:44 AM (NJi0O)

138

>>Ok, I will just settle for Fred!'s wife having my baby!


Mr. Minority, I am overwhelmed by your selflessness.


**wipes a tear**


Posted by: Tushar D at May 30, 2007 09:44 AM (IlgNp)

139 No fucking way on Arnold Tushar, we'd be better off with Lieberman. Guy's acting like a liberal democrat anymore, and that wouldn't win him friends in the party, and why would liberals vote for Arnold when they could have the genuine article from Her Thighness, Silky Pony or Obamassiah?


Tyrtle...heh.

Posted by: Sinistar at May 30, 2007 09:45 AM (1Wvre)

140

>>Nope, since he would be in the direct line of succession to the Presidency.


So how long is this direct line of succession? Can he become House Speaker? How about NSAdvisor?


Posted by: Tushar D at May 30, 2007 09:45 AM (IlgNp)

141 Sinistar, I agree with you. My question was purely theoretical.

Posted by: Tushar D at May 30, 2007 09:46 AM (IlgNp)

142

So how long is this direct line of succession?


Well so long as you keep killin presidents, we'll keep appointing new ones basically.


Tushar I think you're 332,736,827th in line for the presidency.


Posted by: Entropy at May 30, 2007 09:47 AM (m6c4H)

143

>>Tushar I think you're 332,736,827th in line for the presidency.


Entropy, I am so happy to hear that. In my own country, I have more than a billion people ahead of me for the post of Prime Minister.


Posted by: Tushar D at May 30, 2007 09:48 AM (IlgNp)

144

Saaaaay, speaking of Perot,....


Perot + Mineral Rights + Barnett Shale.  You'd be unconcerned about the immigration debate, too. 


The Perot Factor was NAFTA, the incumbent president's support for it, the unpopularity of Bush's version of NAFTA among the voting public, a lack of viable altnerative to vote for (Clenis), and the fact that it was a major campaign issue.  By my view McCain is in the incumbent position, NAFTA is now the very unpopular McCain Amnesty Plan 2007, The Fred and Mitt are the Perots, and the Dims still hold that lack of viable alternative card and as it stands now, this Immigration plan won't be a major campaign issue (still an issue, but not The Issue in the Presidential debates).  So if McCain runs Independent, he won't suck that much O2 from the GOP because he isn't really a viable alternative to the GOP (but would be for all the Blue Dog Dems out there who'd otherwise have to vote for Hillary!)


Posted by: blogRot at May 30, 2007 09:49 AM (EKMxC)

145 The Constitution says that the same requirements for POTUS are also for the VP, so Arnold can't run until there is a Constitutional Ammendment allowing it.

Posted by: blogRot at May 30, 2007 09:52 AM (EKMxC)

146

http://www.jburgd12.k12.il.us/jjhs/Wbt/exetopic/Esuccess.htm


If the member who would logically succeed to the presidency is less than 35, the presidency passes to the next eligible member.


I assume it would work similarly if you appointed a foreign-born person to a secretary position.



Vice President
Speaker of the House
President Pro Tempore of the Senate
Secretary of State
Secretary of the Treasury
Secretary of Defense
Attorney General
Secretary of the Interior
Secretary of Agriculture
Secretary of Commerce
Secretary of Labor
Secretary of Health and Human Services
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
Secretary of Transportation
Secretary of Energy
Secretary of Education
Secretary of the Veterans Affairs
Secretary of Homeland Security

If George Bush, Dick Cheney, Nancy Pelosi, Robert Byrd (Yes, Byrd is 4th in line), Condi Rice, Henry Paulson, and Robert Gates all die simultaneously Alberto Gonzales will be president.


Posted by: Entropy at May 30, 2007 09:55 AM (m6c4H)

147 Where the fuck is Ace? Is he out on a hobo hunt?

Posted by: Sinistar at May 30, 2007 09:56 AM (1Wvre)

148 Nope, since he would be in the direct line of succession to the Presidency.

This of course will come as news to Henry Kissinger who was 3rd in line (when Agnew resigned there was no VP for awhile, so succession was Speaker of the House, President Pro-tempore then Henry as Sec. State) though ineligible to serve. I don't have time to unpack my old college text book but the theory was he would just be skipped if it came to that.

There's no qualification in the Constitution for Vice President, only the President (except that they come from different states). There doesn't seem to be any reason why Arnold couldn't be elected VP and then skipped if the need arose but it seems politically untenable, especially given Fred's medical history.



Posted by: Drew at May 30, 2007 09:57 AM (gNyUT)

149 The Constitution says that the same requirements for POTUS are also for the VP,

blogRot ,

Where does it say that?  I am not being snarky, it's an honest question. I know some people think it's implied but there's nothing specific in the Constitution is there?


Posted by: Drew at May 30, 2007 10:01 AM (gNyUT)

150 If the people don't all die at the same time, it doesn't follow the order of succession. If a VP dies, a president appoints a new one with congressional approval, it doesn't just go to the speaker of the house. If a president dies, VP becomes president, appoints a new VP. Again - doesn't go to the speaker.

Posted by: Entropy at May 30, 2007 10:01 AM (m6c4H)

151 If the candidate for VP isn't eligible to be president, what's the selling point for having that candidate on the ticket in the first place? Couldn't we just nominate them to the official mascot or something instead? 

Posted by: Tyrtle at May 30, 2007 10:02 AM (fDEs+)

152

 what's the selling point for having that candidate on the ticket in the first place?


He's a really really really excellent tie-breaking voter?


Posted by: Entropy at May 30, 2007 10:03 AM (m6c4H)

153 blogRot,

You are right, the damn XII Amendment.

But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President
shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.

Forgot about that.


Posted by: Drew at May 30, 2007 10:03 AM (gNyUT)

154 so Arnold can't run until there is a Constitutional Ammendment allowing it.
Thank G-d for that! He'd be truly challenged trying to deliver CA...I'm not sure the Dems have been sufficiently wooed by him, and a what remains of the Republican party quite reasonably thinks he's a traitor*.

*Either that or his brains were sucked out by Uncle Teddy while he was sleeping..

Posted by: X_LA_Native at May 30, 2007 10:06 AM (Cl7j6)

155

If George Bush, Dick Cheney, Nancy Pelosi, Robert Byrd (Yes, Byrd is 4th in line), Condi Rice, Henry Paulson, and Robert Gates all die simultaneously Alberto Gonzales will be president.'


I have a feeling we'd hold a special election before we got to Byrd.


Posted by: adolfo_velasquez at May 30, 2007 10:07 AM (z92JF)

156 The same requirements for President apply for those that would succeed him..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_line_of_succession

Posted by: Mr Minority at May 30, 2007 10:08 AM (NJi0O)

157

He's a really really really excellent tie-breaking voter?


Couldn't we just nominate Vanna White then? Or the go-daddy girl? Or better yet, Fred's wife? 


Posted by: Tyrtle at May 30, 2007 10:11 AM (fDEs+)

158 Hmm...did the nutroots hunt down Ace or something?

Posted by: Sinistar at May 30, 2007 10:11 AM (1Wvre)

159 The Go-Daddy girl is looking like Jacko these days from what I've seen. She needs to stay away from the plastic surgeon...

Posted by: Sinistar at May 30, 2007 10:12 AM (1Wvre)

160

You have to admit though, President Byrd would be hillarious.


You ever hear that guys addresses to the senate every week where he gets all weepy and talks about how good a buddy he is with Ted Stevens, but not a drinking buddy, because he doesn't drink, not that there's anything wrong with drinking for the people who choose to drink but he's not the type that chooses to do those sorts of things and neither is his good friend Ted Stevens who he loves as a friend.


Posted by: Entropy at May 30, 2007 10:15 AM (m6c4H)

161

Hmm...did the nutroots hunt down Ace or something?


Nah, he's just stuck in the closet.


Allah's too busy mourning the departure of Rosie to let him out.


Posted by: Iblis at May 30, 2007 10:16 AM (9221z)

162

arggg... can't find it at the moment.  I remember the hooplah way back when Arnold got Gov, and the Clenis was exploring a way for a third term, and somebody posted the sections (and I think there was an actual House bill to start the ammendment process as well).


Give me a few and i'll get all Legal


Posted by: blogRot at May 30, 2007 10:18 AM (EKMxC)

163 blogRot...

You were right, it's the XII Amendment (see my comment #157 above).



Posted by: Drew at May 30, 2007 10:20 AM (gNyUT)

164 argg...  should've refreshed first.  Yeah, Ammendment 12.  Its always a good refresher to reread the Constitution ever now and then, though.

Posted by: blogRot at May 30, 2007 10:26 AM (EKMxC)

165  The only thing that can stop Fred is amnesty.

Posted by: someone at May 30, 2007 10:27 AM (LS1TS)

166 Its always a good refresher to reread the Constitution ever now and then, though.

I couldn't agree more.  Now if we could only convince Justices Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer, Stevens and sometimes (well most times) Kennedy of that very simple but powerful concept....

Posted by: Drew at May 30, 2007 10:29 AM (gNyUT)

167

"Its always a good refresher to reread the Constitution ever now and then, though."


Tell that to Ruth Bader Ginsburg.


Posted by: Sobek at May 30, 2007 10:31 AM (6GK9U)

168 The only thing that can stop Fred is amnesty.

He's agin it I think.

Posted by: Toby928 at May 30, 2007 10:36 AM (ATbKm)

169 Toby:  I mean the general cratering of party support and turnout that's bound to happen if this thing passes.

Posted by: someone at May 30, 2007 10:40 AM (LS1TS)

170 the general cratering of party support

Good point, but if this could slag Fred even though he has come out strongly against it, we're hosed anyway.

I won't think about that until it happens.


Posted by: Toby928 at May 30, 2007 10:43 AM (ATbKm)

171 *Either that or his brains were sucked out by Uncle Teddy while he was sleeping..

Only if Arnold's skull looked like a rocks glass.

Posted by: IllTemperedCur at May 30, 2007 10:49 AM (tVbxd)

172 This gives some evidence of what I have been saying here a while: starting later than the absurdly early in guys so far will not hurt Fred in the slightest.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at May 30, 2007 10:51 AM (wmgz8)

173

I agree with Christopher with regard to his delayed entrance, but I do think at this point he's now waited too long. His coy status is starting to wear thin on people and with primaries starting in September he is running out of time.


Rudy McRomney et. al. did get in way way too earlier. But Thompson is waiting too late now. The best time would have been like....last week or the week before, and now we're moving further from optimal. It is a cause for concern that he doesn't have a full campaign running yet.


Posted by: Entropy at May 30, 2007 10:54 AM (m6c4H)

174 Are there primaries starting in September? 

What the hell?

Why?  I'm a political junkie and all, but that's insane.

Posted by: Slublog at May 30, 2007 10:58 AM (R8+nJ)

175

Nawp...apparently I was wrong. Damned if I didn't hear that in the news...


Anyway looks like they don't start till January.


Posted by: Entropy at May 30, 2007 11:08 AM (m6c4H)

176

The Republicans don't need a rightwinger like Fred Thompson. We need a moderate like Rudy Guiliani or a real Conservative like Ron Paul.


I am a lifelong Republican and I voted for Reagan, so you know that you can trust what I say.


Posted by: AoS reader/C-Span caller at May 30, 2007 11:09 AM (DqKLf)

177 Nawp...apparently I was wrong. Damned if I didn't hear that in the news...
Anyway looks like they don't start till January.

Whew.  I was ready to go off on one of my anti-NH primary rants.

Posted by: Slublog at May 30, 2007 11:19 AM (R8+nJ)

178 I agree with Christopher with regard to his delayed entrance, but I do think at this point he's now waited too long. His coy status is starting to wear thin on people and with primaries starting in September he is running out of time.


Nah. His waiting will benefit him, people are already getting sick of the present candidates, wait til November. Of next year. Fred is avoiding that saturation.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at May 30, 2007 11:31 AM (wmgz8)

179 we're hosed anyway

Yup.

Barring some sense appearing in Congress, anyway.

Posted by: someone at May 30, 2007 11:35 AM (LS1TS)

180

my third point was "get votes of hetero males who love girl on girl action"


Yeah but many will want visual proof that Mary Cheney is a lesbian.  Perhaps a video demonstration for the hetero male voters? 


Posted by: John at May 30, 2007 11:48 AM (QC96i)

181

I want to have Fred!'s baby


Interesting.  Going for the gay vote early, eh Mr. Minority?


Posted by: John at May 30, 2007 11:49 AM (QC96i)

182

Thompson/Lieberman is a terrible idea. Lieberman is a flaming liberal....


True, but he is a defense hawk and would be VP, not Prez.  If the GOP wants to win in 2008 after Bush they are going to have to take some risks.  Lieberman might have enough Joe-mentum left to bring in enough Indies and Dems to push the ticket over the top.  Of course this is assuming that Thompson is the genuine article and that Joe would even take the Veep slot on the GOP ticket.


Posted by: John at May 30, 2007 11:52 AM (QC96i)

183

You have to admit though, President Byrd would be hillarious.


Now that would interesting for dealing with North Korea and Iran.  In sucha  case direct negotiations may be a good idea since a President Byrd would be our secret strategy to win by boring them to death.  Just imagein how many hours the State of the Union would take...


Posted by: John at May 30, 2007 11:57 AM (QC96i)

184 "If the GOP wants to win in 2008 after Bush they are going to have to take some risks."

How about, you know, being conservative.  I know -- wild-ass idea, right?  It would be a nice change, though.

Posted by: someone at May 30, 2007 12:09 PM (LS1TS)

185

How about, you know, being conservative.  I know -- wild-ass idea, right?  It would be a nice change, though.


Such a stroke of genius may actually work, but hard to say with a pissed off electorate.  It could be that Bush fatigue may sway enough Indies and Dems to vote Dem or third-party.  Then there are the factions of the GOP that are not very happy at the moment.  Too soon really to tell.


Posted by: John at May 30, 2007 12:19 PM (QC96i)

186 Interesting.  Going for the gay vote early, eh Mr. Minority?

Think it will work?

Posted by: Mr Minority at May 30, 2007 12:25 PM (NJi0O)

187

Problem is, the commenter’s here do not fit into the typical average Joe American voter demographic, which is what wins these things. The overall trend I see is that as long as they have a good economy, lower taxes, less hassles from the gov, they are happy and not looking to get overly involved about abortion/gun control/social issues... ect. They are going to pick who feels good and looks good (will not screw with my day to day personal life)or ( this one can't possibly be as bad as that last asshole that got voted in) based on some pretty shallow reasoning. That’s what predominate thought said when we elected Bush, on the whole we were not thrilled about him but he was the lesser of the evils at the time. Now that we have experienced just what extent that lesser evil had in store for us IMHO it's going to take a superstar polished, poised, good communicator and slick packaging to get the base charged up. Also all those qualities have the added bene of giving the swing voters wood as well.


 " Losers whine about their best. Winners go home and fuck the prom queen."


Posted by: Tres at May 30, 2007 12:27 PM (ScVon)

188

Think it will work?


Maybe as long as there are no pictures.  I mean after all, Thompson ain't exactly Brad Pitt.


Posted by: John at May 30, 2007 12:41 PM (QC96i)

189 I want to have Fred!'s baby.

Too late.  Fred! ass-raped Michael Moore with another one of those big ol' stogies he showed us in that video, and now Michael's expecting.


Posted by: OregonMuse at May 30, 2007 01:01 PM (efWVJ)

190 Linking to The Politico is like debating Ron Paul. Even if you are right, you are still retarded.

Posted by: Mike at May 30, 2007 01:56 PM (NnpEK)

191 I'd have to vote against Thompson just on principle then, Oregon.  Anyone who has seen Michael Moore naked, let alone diddled him even with phallic-type objects, cannot be sane afterwards.

Posted by: John at May 30, 2007 01:58 PM (QC96i)

192 Back to the whole Fred/[veep] thing.  There aren't any Pennsylvanians who would actually help take the state, let alone give any help outside it.  Biggest profile R's in PA are Santorum (lost big-time, has filthy substance named after him), Toomey (ticked off the party folks challenging Specter), AttyGen Corbett (prob run for Gov next time), Bruce "Almighty" Castor, Bill the-yogic-flyer Scranton.  A butched-up Todd Platts might take PA but would ruin a nat'l ticket.

How's about some state that's between two regions, or outlying a particular region?  Virginia, Florida (the least-"southern" southern state), Colorado? 

Veep Romney also gives a Michigan kick, yes?

Posted by: Sockless Joe at May 30, 2007 02:40 PM (dmyNW)

193 I wonder how Dick Wolf is gonna feel knowing that his L&O shows starring Fred are going to be constantly showing in reruns all during the election season, basically acting as on-going campaign ads?

Posted by: wiserbud at May 30, 2007 03:06 PM (hp0Gj)

194 I wonder how Dick Wolf is gonna feel knowing that his L&O shows
starring Fred are going to be constantly showing in reruns all during
the election season, basically acting as on-going campaign ads?


If Fred! starts actively campaigning, I'll bet they'll stop showing the reruns.


Posted by: OregonMuse at May 30, 2007 03:35 PM (wQTRu)

195 If Fred! starts actively campaigning, I'll bet they'll stop showing the reruns.

At least the ones with him.  But they've got - what?  50 years of episodes or something?

Posted by: Slublog at May 30, 2007 03:38 PM (O5JE4)

196 Law and Order is the second longest running show presently on television, after the Simpsons. It's due to reach the amazing 400 episode barrier soon after the Simpsons, but I think it probably will stay on longer than the cartoon does, ultimately.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at May 30, 2007 04:43 PM (wmgz8)

197 400 episodes?

The show has gone downhill for me since Jerry Orbach died.  It's not the same.

Posted by: Slublog at May 31, 2007 03:19 AM (R8+nJ)

198 I'd love to see a Fred/Rudy ticket, a Fred/Mitt ticket (Even if Mitt's a religious-testing bastich) or, even better, a Fred/Bolton ticket.

Of course, that last could create a cascade overload of sheer Awesome that would tear space-time asunder.

Posted by: MegaTroopX at June 02, 2007 12:08 PM (eOJxr)

199 Oooh, I know!

Fred/Cheney.

Discuss.

Posted by: MegaTroopX at June 02, 2007 12:11 PM (eOJxr)

200 The only thing that can stop Fred is amnesty.

The only thing that can stop amnesty is Fred!

Posted by: MegaTroopX at June 02, 2007 12:36 PM (eOJxr)

201 Now that would interesting for dealing with North Korea and Iran. Breaking news!

Posted by: tropikal meyve at June 06, 2011 12:54 AM (COK1W)

202 it's very nice article... thanks
bornova

Posted by: tropikal at July 09, 2011 09:12 PM (5w90c)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
163kb generated in CPU 0.41, elapsed 1.593 seconds.
62 queries taking 1.3881 seconds, 438 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.