Fred’s Net-centric campaign: Good news for us or bad news for him?

posted at 10:28 am on June 4, 2007 by Allahpundit

The response to Michael Moore tipped their hand that they were going to go Net-heavy but now we’ve got not one but two reports confirming it. The first was Newsweek’s hit-and-run about Fred’s alleged laziness and now the WSJ chimes in:

Yet a late start and signs that Mr. Thompson may adopt an unconventional campaign style — limiting in-person appearances by making extensive use of blogging and online video — could crimp the television actor’s ability to raise money over the long haul. He has suggested he isn’t enamored of leaving his family for long stretches of campaign travel. The question is whether an Internet campaign will help him raise money quickly or leave big donors cold…

[I]n a hint of what could become a problem with an Internet-heavy strategy, [Rep. Zach] Wamp said Mr. Thompson fielded a number of questions about his platform in the conference call last week on positions that the candidate has already sketched out.

“The money people aren’t bloggers and activists, so they didn’t know Fred has spoken extensively about many of these issues, such as immigration,” Mr. Wamp said. “So I broke in and told them it’s all collected on our Web site, and they should go and take a look.”

I hope I’m not breaking any news here for the Thompson campaign but, er, there really aren’t a lot of right-wing blog readers. Strictly speaking, there aren’t a lot of left-wing blog readers either, but there are more of them than there are of us and they’re vastly superior in fundraising. If Fred’s relying on the online grassroots to put him over the top, he may come to find the grass is distressingly thin. Or … will he end up growing the grass? Forcing Republican voters (and especially “money people”) to pay more attention to what’s going on online is all to the good for conservative blog readership. It may not win him the nomination but it’ll win us all some extra traffic and influence. Long may he run.

Two exit questions per the Newsweek piece. First, if the perception is that he’s lazy, won’t a Net-centric campaign designed to avoid campaign travel only play into that? And second, how exactly is a guy who started in D.C. as an advisor during the Watergate hearings, spent eight years as a senator and almost 20 more as a lobbyist, and has all sorts of ex-senators and Beltway types advising him going to run as a “Washington outsider”?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

This I see as a weakness for Mitt! being the richest candidate in the field and his links to big business. But his experience seems to be a benefit rather than a millstone around his neck.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 2:27 PM

Talk about groupies… wow. Flip Flop Mitt’s problem isn’t that he’s rich or a successful businessman, it’s that he’s a Play-Doh candidate, shifting positions based on the election he’s running for. No one (possibly including Mitt himself) really knows what his true positions are.

His record has been that of an anti-gun, pro-choice, pro-illegal alien, Big Government “moderate”. He’s only recently flipped on his abortion and immigration stance in trying to convince people he’s suddenly become a conservative after running for Governor and the Senate as a “moderate” (read: RINO) but from the debates it’s clear he still holds his anti-gun, Big Government views. We already have a “compassionate” Big Government “Conservative”, and that isn’t working out so well.

In the unlikely event that Romney wins the nomination, he’ll revert back to his default RINO position so fast you’d not even recognize him as the same man. There’s really little difference between Rudy and Romney, except Rudy is simply more consistant about his beliefs- not that I’d vote for either of them in the primaries or general election.

Hollowpoint on June 4, 2007 at 3:53 PM

Hollowpoint on June 4, 2007 at 3:53 PM

Who is a MITT! groupie? You REALLLLLLY need to wipe that freddie boy glaze off your eyes and see reality. But if I remember right, you were the single issue 2nd amendment litmus test guy right? Look up Ross Perot and how your type of thinking got us 8 years of Clinton and opened the door for 8 years of Hillary. Please, don’t do conservatives any favors.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 4:02 PM

csdeven,

This is a vetting process

You wouldn’t know an old fashioned vetting process if it ate you alive, what you are doing isnt vetting, its called smearing and lynching.

Now why don’t you talk about that red pick-up that Fred actually bought from his FATHER again? You know the one he still owns….Oh yea that’s right Fred isn’t allowed to own a pick-up because he rides in limo’s and is a Washington insider…….You are so full of hypocritical sh!t……

That’s right don’t let that REAL facts get in the way of your lynching boy……..

doriangrey on June 4, 2007 at 4:08 PM

doriangrey on June 4, 2007 at 4:08 PM

Awwwww. Do you need a shoulder to cry on? Is it just going to be so tough for fred? to explain his fakery that you have to be his shill? Tell you what, go get your signed pair of fred? skivvy’s off the wall and snuggle up with them for an hour or so. I’m sure you’ll feel better. :-)

Does it REALLY matter where he got the pickup? All that matters is he bought it to fake out potential supporters. You want to be faked out. I don’t. It. Is. That. Simple.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 4:14 PM

Who is a MITT! groupie? You REALLLLLLY need to wipe that freddie boy glaze off your eyes and see reality. But if I remember right, you were the single issue 2nd amendment litmus test guy right? Look up Ross Perot and how your type of thinking got us 8 years of Clinton and opened the door for 8 years of Hillary. Please, don’t do conservatives any favors.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 4:02 PM

Again, stop pretending to be a conservative- you clearly aren’t. At best, you’re yet another “moderate”, worshipping a RINO like FlipFlop Mitt and mindlessly and dishonorably bashing (going so low as to bring his wife into it) the most conservative of the front-runners, suggesting you’re a Flipper Mitt groupie.

I’m not a single-issue voter, but upholding the intent of the 2nd Amendment is important to me. Combine Flipper Mitt’s lack of appreciation for the 2nd Amendment with his other non-conservative views and past, and there’s no way I could vote for him. In elections past perhaps, but not with the Republican Party self-destructing under Bush.

Hollowpoint on June 4, 2007 at 4:20 PM

Hollowpoint on June 4, 2007 at 4:20 PM

Awwwww. Am I putting a cramp in your love fest for fred?? Those who don’t rent their hair along with you over a non-candidate isn’t a real conservative? hahaha. Pointing out freddie boys weaknesses is just too much to handle? You want to discuss his wifes breasts, we have a thread for that.

When, a single issue keeps you home on election day, you are a single issue voter. Again, read up on Ross Perot and come back when you’re ready to get real.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 4:30 PM

csdeven,

Do you need a shoulder to cry on?

Na, I just need to be lied to remember, and since I now have you lying your assw off to me I feel realy pretty damn good.

to explain his fakery that you have to be his shill?

The man spent the first half of his life in a town with just a couple thousand people in it, so when he decides to go a politicing in a pick-up truck that makes him a phony eh?

Does it REALLY matter where he got the pickup?

Yes actually it does…….

All that matters is he bought it to fake out potential supporters

Bullsh!t………Thats where the whole issue of where he got it and where and how he grew up come into play. Going back to ones roots is not fakery.

doriangrey on June 4, 2007 at 4:42 PM

doriangrey on June 4, 2007 at 4:42 PM

Shill away, dude, shill away.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 4:44 PM

csdeven,

Shill lynch away, dude, shill lynch away.

Fixt that for ya……..

doriangrey on June 4, 2007 at 4:50 PM

Pointing out freddie boys weaknesses is just too much to handle?

You’re delusional. Debating weaknesses I can handle; Fred (like every other candidate who’s ever run for office) does indeed have weaknesses.

You’re doing nothing of the sort; you’re a stalker-troll who spams every thread remotely about Fred (or even Hillary) with the same tired, substance-free slanderous insults and name-calling, not to mention your utterly contemptable implication that his wife would somehow defile the White House.

It’s obvious what’s happening here- your manlove for Flipper has driven you into a jealous hissy-fit, with an actual conservative like Fred surpassing a slickster RINO wannabe. That you’d rely on insults and innuendo rather than debating legitimate issues or concerns says all that needs to be said.

Seriously, how have you not been banned for trolling yet? What’s the threshold? 100 trolling posts per thread?

Hollowpoint on June 4, 2007 at 4:55 PM

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 4:44 PM

Really must suck having the facts explode in your face like that…….But dont worry I’ll put some ice in my Fred skivies for you, it’ll help the swelling go down, nothing is going to make the mark go away though……

doriangrey on June 4, 2007 at 4:55 PM

Hollowpoint on June 4, 2007 at 4:55 PM

Well, you have to ACTUALLY be a troll. I like how you deal with freddie boys problems by trying to pigeon hole me where you want me to be.

fred? is going to have to answer all the issue’s I have enumerated here many, many, times. But the first thing he has to do is actually BE a candidate. Nuance? It seems so for the fred groupies.

doriangrey on June 4, 2007 at 4:55 PM

hahaha. Sad dude, really sad. fred? is going to have to answer for…..

His poor record in the senate. His failure to make the clinton/china connection. His fake pickup truck. His pro-choice stance. His long, long, record of being a Washington insider and worse yet, a lobbyist for special interests. His absolute zero, nada, nil, no executive experience whatsoever.

Facts, dude. Facts.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 5:15 PM

The first was Newsweek’s hit-and-run about Fred’s alleged laziness and now the WSJ chimes in:

Doesn’t this whole Fred + blogosphere vs. “them” just seem too much like a good ol’ National Enquirer scoop?

Lawrence on June 4, 2007 at 5:42 PM

Facts, dude. Facts.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 5:15 PM

Right, because repeatedly calling someone a fraud and liar definitely makes it true. You’re a mindless troll and have admitted as much- no one is going to believe you’re interested in facts. A jealous, name-calling, petty, irrelevant little man unable or unwilling to discuss matters in an intelligent, civilized, honest or honorable way? Self evident.

Hollowpoint on June 4, 2007 at 5:49 PM

Haven’t even looked but I bet csdeven begins hatin’ in 5…4…3…2…

Bad Candy on June 4, 2007 at 10:43 AM

Heh. CS’s rant was the first thing I scrolled to find. He never disappoints. I’m beginning to believe he has a secret crush on old Fred!

The Ritz on June 4, 2007 at 5:50 PM

Hey AP,

We need an open thread or a topic where the fred? groupies can get me back by bashing “my guy” MITT!. There’s a wonderful news report on some silly prophecy that ought to make all freds? problems magically go away.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 5:52 PM

You STILL got your panties in a twist?

Grow up.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 1:10 PM

Surely you are refering to yourself here . . .

The Ritz on June 4, 2007 at 5:58 PM

The Ritz on June 4, 2007 at 5:50 PM

That’s for me to know. ;-)

Hollowpoint on June 4, 2007 at 5:49 PM

hahaha. His pickup truck schtick was a fraud. His own campaign manager said so.

Unwilling? Lets see, I scrutinize freddie boy and you attack me. I question your one issue attitude that will keep you home on election day and you call me irrelevant. Yeah, dude, you’re making lots of sense. Nuance huh?

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 5:59 PM

Surely you are refering to yourself here . . .
The Ritz on June 4, 2007 at 5:58 PM

What makes you think I am not in control of my feelings? Just because the groupies are severely exercised (as is evident by their language), doesn’t mean I am also. My feelings are that the fred-mania is comical, and the last time I checked, that isn’t getting ones panties in a bunch.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 6:03 PM

He’d lose to Hillary. Rudy wouldn’t.

Halley on June 4, 2007 at 6:05 PM

I don’t recognize you as being around here a lot

You mean I don’t comment a lot. I am around here all the time and have been since I found this blog. I signed on as soon as they opened it up again.

Even so, that doesn’t negate the fact that opinions and facts are two different things. If you want to slog the opinions, just call them that and we’ll be just fine with it. If you want to call a conclusion fact, then we’ll have a larger problem/discussion.

I’m solidly in Fred’s corner and will be until he’s either nominated or loses to someone else. If it’s Mitt, I’ll be a supporter — based on my perceptions of his record, not assertions of veracity or mudslinging at another candidate.

Tennman on June 4, 2007 at 6:08 PM

csdeven,

Facts, dude. Facts.

You cant even tell what a fact is when its kicking your sorry a$$.

His poor record in the senate

http://www.nytimes.com/cq/2007/05/30/cq_2812.html

“As a general matter, I think Fred Thompson’s career in the Senate demonstrates a guy who does have a pretty strong commitment to limited government, free enterprise and particularly federalist principles,” Toomey told CQPolitics.com.

His failure to make the clinton/china connection

Put the crack-pipe down…….

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

While in the Senate, Thompson served as the chairman of the Committee on Governmental Affairs from 1997 to 2001 and January 20 to June 6, 2001. The committee conducted investigations into allegations that China attempted to influence American politics prior to the 1996 elections (See: campaign finance scandal). During 1997, Thompson was “…largely stymied” during his 1997 U.S. Senate investigations of both Clinton-Gore and GOP campaign fund-raising activities, more particularly with witnesses for the Thompson investigations declining to testify, claiming the right not to incriminate themselves or simply leaving the United States’ jurisdiction.[12]

His fake pickup truck

You mean that one he bought from his dad and still owns???

His pro-choice stance

http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/may/07053109.html

According to the National Right to Life, Thompson boasts a 100% pro-life record in the Senate where he served from 1994 – 2002, and many conservatives have seen Thompson as perhaps the best high profile candidate to represent the pro-life, pro-family, pro-gun, and fiscal conservatives of the Republican Party. This makes Thompson a threat to Gov. Mitt Romney, who until his recent performances at the primary debates, was tied for third with the non-candidate Thompson and has had to campaign on his “conversion” to conservative issues.

Thompson has supported overturning Roe v. Wade calling it “bad law and bad medical science” saying “I don’t think the court ought to wake up one day and make new social policy for the country. It’s contrary to what it’s been the past 200 years.”

So, the FACTS as we all can see are leaving some mighty serious bruises on you.

doriangrey on June 4, 2007 at 6:20 PM

Unwilling? Lets see, I scrutinize freddie boy and you attack me. I question your one issue attitude that will keep you home on election day and you call me irrelevant.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 5:59 PM

You’re a troll. There’s really no point in trying to have a civilized discussion with you- you’ve made that quite clear by ignoring every legitmate point made and responding with shallow innuendo and insults. Act like a bitter, unpleasant, slandering troll, expect to be treated like one.

Now if a reasonable person wants to debate Fred’s (or any other candidates) positions, strengths and weaknesses, I’d take part in kind. You’ve relegated yourself to irrelevant, unreasonable troll status long ago and are thus incapable of contributing to the discussion in a meaningful way.

In the meantime, unless events change my mind, I’ll continue to suggest that Fred is by far the best- if imperfect- candidate of the leading contenders, and that Rudy McRomney are unsuitable candidates to represent the Republican party at this time of ideological turmoil. When the next most conservative leading candidate after Fred is John F’ing McCain… Houston, We Have A Problem.

Hollowpoint on June 4, 2007 at 6:44 PM

Hollowpoint on June 4, 2007 at 6:44 PM

You do realize you are still attacking me right?

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 6:45 PM

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 6:45 PM

You do realize you are still attacking me right?

And yet he is much kinder to you than you have been to either Fred or his wife. If my foot were as far up your a$$ aas your head is you would be coughing up bootlaces right now.

doriangrey on June 4, 2007 at 7:03 PM

I’m solidly in Fred’s corner and will be until he’s either nominated or loses to someone else. If it’s Mitt, I’ll be a supporter — based on my perceptions of his record, not assertions of veracity or mudslinging at another candidate.
Tennman on June 4, 2007 at 6:08 PM

My only point was that I didn’t think you had been around long enough to read my position on freddie boy. Had you, you would know what my position is. Most are well aware, and the reasoned ones have some fun with it. It’s those who refuse to accept criticizm of fred? that continue the crazy talk even after it is explained to them.

I am not in anyone’s corner yet. fred? isn’t even a consideration because he is not a candidate. Nor is Newt for that matter. I will support whatever candidate can beat the dems front runner, be it Rudy, McCain, MITT! or whoever.

Most of the fred? supporters are reasonable, but a few, groupies I call them, have gone into absolute irrational attack mode. I have been so far ahead of the curve on this fred? thing, I think his groupies think I have caused all the media to take up my concerns about freds? record and motivation. hahaha This is of course, absurd! The media are just now saying what I have been saying for weeks. It’s been clear for several weeks the guy talks, talks, talks, and as a conservative, I am not impressed. It’s too much like what the dems do. So, I have been gathering data on fred? so I can properly vet him as a consideration IF he ever gets in. I have enumerated those concerns many times and, what do you know, so is the media.

So, I’m not going to apologize to people who are going bat$hit crazy because I am giving freddie boy the business. They need to grow up.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 7:06 PM

And yet he is much kinder to you than you have been to either Fred or….
doriangrey on June 4, 2007 at 7:03 PM

Ahhhh. Too bad, soooo sad. Such is the life of a non-candidate for president. And again, if you want to discuss his wife, we have a thread for that.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 7:08 PM

csdeven,

Ahhhh. Too bad, soooo sad.

Yes it is but not to worry a visit to your local colorectalsurgeon should be able to clear up that little head up the a$$ problem of yours.

if you want to discuss his wife,

Unlike you I see no reason to slander his wife, or even discuss her for that matter. In fact I find it rather distressing that Allah hasnt banned you for that yet.

doriangrey on June 4, 2007 at 7:35 PM

doriangrey on June 4, 2007 at 7:35 PM

AGAIN, we have a thread for the discussion of freddie boys wife.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 7:41 PM

csdeven,

AGAIN, we have a thread for the discussion of freddie boys wife.

AGAIN totally unacceptable topic, take it over to DKoS where you and it obviously belong.

doriangrey on June 4, 2007 at 7:45 PM

Yawnnn….

Ok now, Kos? kiddies?. Play nice while you’re in the sandbox. Move along…

Kokonut on June 4, 2007 at 7:55 PM

I just keep asking myself “If not Fred, then who?”. Of course there are others in the race who have good Conservative creds (Hunter, Tancredo maybe others) but are they really in the race or have they been starved for air? Personally I like everything I’ve seen about Fred Thompson but like most I’m waiting for the substance.

Buzzy on June 4, 2007 at 8:05 PM

My only point was that I didn’t think you had been around long enough to read my position on freddie boy.

If you’ll think back, I was one of the first to dispute your rationale on Fred. But that’s neither here nor there.

Common sense dictates that poking a beehive will get you a lot of activity. But then you get stung. And no beekeper will give you the time of day thereafter.

To paraphrase my hero, “Mental instution, cs; might be something to think about.”

Tennman on June 4, 2007 at 8:15 PM

Tennman on June 4, 2007 at 8:15 PM

Yeah, I vaguely remember that.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 8:34 PM

Anyway, fred? also has to deal with the Bush supporters who are now getting involved with him. For we staunch conservatives, this seems okay on the surface, and we can separate them from Bush, but with the general electorate being soooo disappointed with Bush, it may very well be that when they see ex-Bush people connected with fred? they may just decide to pass for fear of getting another Bush. The people that are going to decide the next president have no desire to spend the time to figure it out. They will just pass.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 8:41 PM

Tennman on June 4, 2007 at 8:15 PM

If you’ll think back, I was one of the first to dispute your rationale on Fred.

Problem is that CS has never actually been rational about Fred; right from the start he has been irrationally attacking Fred with obvious canards strawman and Ad Hominems. He!! In another thread he is actually attacking Fred’s wife, for of all things being young attractive and having big boobs.

doriangrey on June 4, 2007 at 8:42 PM

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 8:41 PM

For we staunch conservativesliberals pretending to be conservatives

There fix’t that for ya……..

doriangrey on June 4, 2007 at 8:44 PM

His poor record in the senate. His failure to make the clinton/china connection. His fake pickup truck. His pro-choice stance. His long, long, record of being a Washington insider and worse yet, a lobbyist for special interests. His absolute zero, nada, nil, no executive experience whatsoever.

Facts, dude. Facts.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 5:15 PM

Fred!’s pro-choice? Gee, that is not going to help him in the primary race. Couple that with his internet campaign, and he will barely get above water in the campaign.

Although I have respect for Fred!, I am wondering whether or not the net campaign is a sign of weakness or lack of funds?

Darnell Clayton on June 4, 2007 at 8:57 PM

It may well be that Fred won’t pull down the big business money what with his stance on illegal immigration and secure the border first call, but is that a bad thing. Can America afford another bought and paid for by big business candidate? Do conservatives want another barely better than the Democrats on the issues that matter to us President? We know that small donor contributions can never equal the amount of money the megacorporations can funnel into a race but we have one thing the big money doesn’t have…. votes. Personally with every csdeven post my support for Fred grows.

Buzzy on June 4, 2007 at 9:11 PM

Darnell Clayton,

Fred!’s pro-choice?

That is just another one of csdevens dishonest canards, Fred is not pro-choice and never has been.

http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/may/07053109.html

According to the National Right to Life, Thompson boasts a 100% pro-life record in the Senate where he served from 1994 – 2002, and many conservatives have seen Thompson as perhaps the best high profile candidate to represent the pro-life, pro-family, pro-gun, and fiscal conservatives of the Republican Party. This makes Thompson a threat to Gov. Mitt Romney, who until his recent performances at the primary debates, was tied for third with the non-candidate Thompson and has had to campaign on his “conversion” to conservative issues.

Thompson has supported overturning Roe v. Wade calling it “bad law and bad medical science” saying “I don’t think the court ought to wake up one day and make new social policy for the country. It’s contrary to what it’s been the past 200 years.”

doriangrey on June 4, 2007 at 9:16 PM

That is just another one of csdevens dishonest canards, Fred is not pro-choice and never has been.

I’ll let freddie boy speak for himself.

July/August 1994

“Government should stay out of it. No public financing. The ultimate decision must be made by the woman. Government should treat its citizens as adults capable of making moral decisions on their own.”

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 9:25 PM

he is actually attacking Fred’s wife, for of all things being young attractive and having big boobs.

I read all of those. Kind of sad, in an Oedipal sort of way.

Tennman on June 4, 2007 at 9:37 PM

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 9:25 PM

Government should stay out of it. No public financing.

Dude you’re pathetic, that is a federalist position, not a pro-choice one. Try looking at his actual voting record. He never voted pro-choice.

Thompson boasts a 100% pro-life record in the Senate where he served from 1994 – 2002,

doriangrey on June 4, 2007 at 9:39 PM

New poll results

28% Giuliani
21% McCain
11% Romney
21% Fred Thompson
8% Gingrich
8% Other
3% Undecided

P. James Moriarty on June 4, 2007 at 9:51 PM

The ultimate decision must be made by the woman.

Pro-choice.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 9:54 PM

Well, that was fun watching the thread degenerate… I guess when I see anything regarding Fred Thompson here on Hot Air, I’ll skim through fast.

major john on June 4, 2007 at 9:57 PM

Mitt? video…pro choice in his own words.

P. James Moriarty on June 4, 2007 at 10:04 PM

If the Republican Primary were today, would you vote for… Rudy Giuliani? John McCain? Mitt Romney? Fred Thompson? Newt Gingrich? Or some other Republican?

It’s really sad when 29% of CA primary voters would cast a vote for non-candidates. It’s disturbing, because freddie boy and Newt haven’t had to answer for their records, and that reveals those numbers as specious at best. Comparing actual candidates that have braved the gauntlet to those who wont is not at all scientific.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 10:04 PM

Hey cs, if Fred were Mormon like Mitt would you consider him a “real” candidate? Remember, Fred is (going to be) running for President not Bishop.

Mojave Mark on June 4, 2007 at 10:05 PM

Well, that was fun watching the thread degenerate… I guess when I see anything regarding Fred Thompson here on Hot Air, I’ll skim through fast.
major john on June 4, 2007 at 9:57 PM

That’s too bad because most of the fred? groupies are reasonable and we have some fun with it. The people that decided to start the personal attacks don’t usually take over like this. I think the medias recent, and vociferous, scrutiny of fred? has ruffled some feathers.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 10:22 PM

Mojave Mark on June 4, 2007 at 10:05 PM

What does being a mormon have to do with it? If fred? were to announce, or even announce that he was FOR SURE going to announce, then he could be considered to be viable. But as long as he plays this silly game, he deserves no parity with those who have exhibited the courage to answer the tough questions in unfriendly environments.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 10:25 PM

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 9:54 PM

Pro-choice.

Government should stay out of it. No public financing.

Federalist…….

Thompson boasts a 100% pro-life record in the Senate where he served from 1994 – 2002,

Pro-life………

Government should treat its citizens as adults capable of making moral decisions on their own.”

Federalist…….

Thompson has supported overturning Roe v. Wade

Pro-life……….

100% pro-life record in the Senate where he served from 1994 – 2002

Obviously is and always has been PRO-LIFE…..

we have some fun with it.

No we have been making fun of you, nobody is laughing with you, everybody is laughing at you…..

or even announce that he was FOR SURE going to announce,

He already did that…………

http://tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070530/NEWS0206/70530009

I can’t remember exactly the point that I said, ‘I’m going to do this,‘ ” Thompson says, his 6-foot, 6-inch frame sprawled comfortably across a couch in a hotel suite. “But when I did, the thing that occurred to me: ‘I’m going to tell people that I am thinking about it and see what kind of reaction I get to it.’ ”

His late start carries some problems but also “certain advantages,” he says. “Nobody has maxed out to me” in contributions, he notes, and using the Internet already “has allowed me to be in the hunt, so to speak, without spending a dime.”

But sadly some of the less bright but tremendously dishonest among us (csdevens) can’t even follow simple statements……..

doriangrey on June 4, 2007 at 10:44 PM

He failed to make the Clinton/China connection.
csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 1:59 PM

I think you need to do a bit more research. Did he fail to “get” Clinton? Yes. He most assuredly did not fail to make the connection. In fact, he was one of the first to do so.

Connie on June 4, 2007 at 11:09 PM

Two exit questions per the Newsweek piece. First, if the perception is that he’s lazy, won’t a Net-centric campaign designed to avoid campaign travel only play into that? And second, how exactly is a guy who started in D.C. as an advisor during the Watergate hearings, spent eight years as a senator and almost 20 more as a lobbyist, and has all sorts of ex-senators and Beltway types advising him going to run as a “Washington outsider”?

Can one threadjack the subject back to the exit questions? Sorry but I skipped the CSdeven take all jello wrestling in the bed of the red pickup truck marathon…(which was blasting out the country song “Watermelon Crawl” to describe Fred’s move to announce ;) )
1. I think it does add to that rep for being lazy
2. I don’t see how he is going to pass himself off as an outsider. The last insiders who won the WH were George Bush sr. and LBJ. Everyone else has been a governor. Nixon was VP for eight years which kind of made him an insider although he took an 8 year sabbatical after the 1960 election.

As for a netcentric campaign, call me a skeptic at this point in time. Dean thought he had a winning strategy and it collapsed on him. As AP pointed out the blogosphere is just not that heavily populated yet. Personal opinion is that the debates will be what makes him take off or flop.

Bradky on June 4, 2007 at 11:13 PM

But as long as he plays this silly game, he deserves no parity with those who have exhibited the courage to answer the tough questions in unfriendly environments.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 10:25 PM

The polls say it’s not a silly game. And what Fred Thompson has done with his extra time has been to get to know us and to talk to us. You know, “We, the People?” There’s nothing wrong with spending time reading and responding to what we are saying, instead of just spewing out what your consultants tell you they think we want to hear. Thompson is refreshing. After he says something, you don’t find yourself saying, “but what do you really mean, Fred?”

It will be interesting to see how he does in debates with other candidates, but just because the others didn’t think to take advantage of the medium in the same way, doesn’t mean he’s lazy. It may be mean he’s a heck of a lot smarter.

Connie on June 4, 2007 at 11:22 PM

For the love of cheese, people, ignore csdeven. He’s a troll. The only way to make trolls go away is to ignore them.

As for Fred, the telling bit to me is the claim that he “he isn’t enamored of leaving his family for long stretches of campaign travel.” I’m sure he isn’t. But I tend to think that if he really wanted the presidency, he’d endure it anyway. So I’m left considering two possiblities; He isn’t actually particularly hungry for it, or maybe (and this is pure conjecture) he’s masking for a consideration that arises from his health condition (not that it’s gotten worse, simply that it isn’t ameniable to a heavy travel schedule). I genuinely like him, but neither one of those things builds a great deal of confidence in me that he can win the nomination.

Blacklake on June 4, 2007 at 11:35 PM

Connie on June 4, 2007 at 11:09 PM

fred? failed and that is his record.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 11:36 PM

The polls say it’s not a silly game. And what Fred Thompson has done with his extra time has been to get to know us and to talk to us.

Do you understand that the polls are comparing people who are engaged, whereas fred? is not? That is not an accurate way to judge candidates equally. fred? doesn’t have any issues exposed to the light of day to be challenged on and everyone else does.

You have a link to a blog where he will answer questions from me or others?

It will be interesting to see how he does in debates with other candidates, but just because the others didn’t think to take advantage of the medium in the same way, doesn’t mean he’s lazy. It may be mean he’s a heck of a lot smarter.t 11:22 PM

It will be interesting, IF he ever gets in. The laziness factor is from his senate days and this internet stuff just strengthens that perception. THIS is the first issue of his that has been exposed to the light of day and EVERYONE is hammering him on it. We’ll see how he reacts.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 11:52 PM

Bradky on June 4, 2007 at 11:13 PM

Dean thought he had a winning strategy and it collapsed on him.

Dean did have a winning strategy, it wasnt Deans strategy that flopped, it was Deans primal scream at a voter on camera that killed Dean…..

doriangrey on June 4, 2007 at 11:58 PM

Connie on June 4, 2007 at 11:09 PM

I think you need to do a bit more research

Ha ha ha, csdevens never lets mere facts slow him down, and when you confront him w3ith those facts he just ignores them and starts ranting about something else.

doriangrey on June 5, 2007 at 12:01 AM

doriangrey on June 4, 2007 at 11:58 PM

It sealed the deal but according to Wikipedia he was going down for the count before the scream. Arguably his strategy failed him before the scream. I agree the scream pretty much put him out for keeps.

“On January 19, 2004, Dean’s campaign suffered a blow when a last-minute surge by rivals John Kerry and John Edwards led to an embarrassing third-place defeat for Dean in the 2004 Iowa Democratic caucuses, representing the first votes cast in primary season. Dean had been a strong contender for weeks in advance in that state, battling with Dick Gephardt for first place in the polls. To the surprise of the Dean and Gephardt campaigns, Dean finished third in Iowa behind Kerry and John Edwards, with Gephardt finishing fourth.”

Bradky on June 5, 2007 at 12:03 AM

Oh and he was talking to a crowd, not an individual voter.

Bradky on June 5, 2007 at 12:04 AM

If you want him elected, you will pay.

Egfrow on June 5, 2007 at 2:39 AM

Blogger: User Profile: Egfrow
Egfrow. Age: 22; Gender: Male; Astrological Sign: Pisces; Zodiac Year: Ox; Industry: Technology; Occupation: Digital Dude; Location: East Coast : United …
http://www.blogger.com/profile/17136605674227597471 – 7k – Supplemental Result – Cached – Similar pages – Note this
Epinions.com – egfrow’s profile
egfrow trusts:. none yet. egfrow is trusted by:. none yet. Web of Trust. Trust egfrow … About egfrow. Epinions.com ID:, egfrow. Member Since:, Nov 11 ’01 …
http://www.epinions.com/user-egfrow – 21k – Supplemental Result – Cached – Similar pages – Note this

Connie on June 5, 2007 at 2:57 AM

Egfrow on June 5, 2007 at 2:39 AM

Wow…you’re almost as famous as csdeven. But at least he’s a GOE. Tacky, but GOE.

Connie on June 5, 2007 at 3:00 AM

csdeven:

has to deal with the Bush supporters who are now getting involved with him.

Are you f’n serious?! I was going to ignore your posts, but that’s just laughable. Yeah, of course–anyone who supported Bush MUST NOT support anyone! Sit out the 2008 election!
(You wish!)
hahahahahahaahaa

bamapachyderm on June 5, 2007 at 3:18 AM

Dean thought he had a winning strategy and it collapsed on him. As AP pointed out the blogosphere is just not that heavily populated yet. Personal opinion is that the debates will be what makes him take off or flop.

Bradky on June 4, 2007 at 11:13 PM

Ditto that. I don’t think using teh innertubes indicates laziness, though. Of course, what matters is what the stupid media thinks. I think it indicates interest in what the grassroots (as opposed to the nutroots) are saying; a good link to the voting public.
That said, UGH. I hope he isn’t too heavily involved in the internets. It’s loaded with landmines (aka loud-mouthed, spoiled amateurs who will end up embarrassing him sooner or later. I seriously doubt he’d invest that much time in the internet, anyway. Even if he wanted to, I would hope his advisers/handlers/whatevers would set him straight. I personally don’t care about the conservative blogosphere getting a boost; I care about the right candidate being elected.
And frankly, the conservative blogosphere, of which I am a part, doesn’t really deserve any favors, IMHO. We SUCK at fundraising, organization, and using available technology, as a whole, and I’m tired of trying when most people just have excuses why they can’t donate, plan, or act. Sign an online petition? No problem. Write a blog post? Yay. Cough up $20 to help keep a GOP majority or support a worthy political candidate? Blasphemy! (How many of the people here have pledged to never donate?) Why should Fred Thompson or anyone else come to the conservative blogosphere for support?
I hope he knows what he’s in for, ’cause 2008 isn’t going to be easy for any Republican–and it won’t be because of the laughable Dummocrat candidates.

bamapachyderm on June 5, 2007 at 3:37 AM

Connie,

How do you know I’m not?

Egfrow on June 5, 2007 at 4:03 AM

Very smart and willy people or genious can be at first glance contrued as lazy. Ya see, they don’t require much effort to shine above mediocrity. Even a half effort by a brilliant person can be percieved as luck or lazy.

This all reminds me of the nay-sayers that said Google was going to be a dud because no one goes bublic with auctioned off shares to the public. You need a brokerage firm to take you public.

Now as far as the perception the amount of money raised being directly correlated to the chances of getting elected is a bunch of crap. Small resources in the hands of a determined and innovative human can achieve un-measurable potential. Is this Fred? I don’t know. But some of the criticism is basic a complete denial of the possilbe.

Egfrow on June 5, 2007 at 4:19 AM

Let me see….do I write a check to the RNC (who calls me a bigot for not going along with Bush’s illegal alien amnesty thing), do I write a check to any of the Republican frontrunners (who at some point in their careers have gone whole-heartedly against some issues that I am whole-heartedly for), or do I write a check to a true conservative (Thompson)? This is a tough one!

lynnv on June 5, 2007 at 8:22 AM

Are you f’n serious?! I was going to ignore your posts, but that’s just laughable. Yeah, of course–anyone who supported Bush MUST NOT support anyone! Sit out the 2008 election!
(You wish!)
hahahahahahaahaa

bamapachyderm on June 5, 2007 at 3:18 AM

Yeah, that isn’t what I was trying to say. fred? has many former bush aides going over to his campaign and for many people, that could be an issue for them. If they feel that fred? will become another Bush, they will opt for a different candidate.

csdeven on June 5, 2007 at 8:49 AM

Very smart and willy people or genious can be at first glance contrued as lazy. Ya see, they don’t require much effort to shine above mediocrity. Even a half effort by a brilliant person can be percieved as luck or lazy.
Egfrow on June 5, 2007 at 4:19 AM

The problem fred? has is that the laziness is an ongoing theme for him and he hasn’t done anything spectacular to leave the impression that he is brilliant. But, we may find out soon enough. IF he decides to get in, he will have to expose himself to the same scrutiny the rest of the candidates have. That’s when the real fred? will be seen.

csdeven on June 5, 2007 at 8:56 AM

Per Rasmussen Fred is polling 2nd while Rudy slips to 23%. Ron Paul nowhere in sight. CSD, you are starting to sound more than just slightly trollish and desperate too.

Buzzy on June 5, 2007 at 9:29 AM

CSD, you are starting to sound more than just slightly trollish and desperate too.
Buzzy on June 5, 2007 at 9:29 AM

Why? Because I don’t have my lips planted on freddie boys rear end? Since when does any conservative have to agree with what other conservatives say about a non-candidate with a questionable record and zero experience? Well, I’m no troll and you sound like a moron for even suggesting it.

csdeven on June 5, 2007 at 9:41 AM

But his experience seems to be a benefit rather than a millstone around his neck.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 2:27 PM

What experiences would those be? They would have to be really fantastic to counter his record.

Mitt’s positions:

Pro abortion:
From his own mouth, Video

Pro “morning after pill”:
Here, and here

Pro gay “rights”:
“Romney: I’ll be better than Ted for gay rights.”

Against Boy Scout ban on gay troop leaders:
Boston Globe article

Pro same-sex marrage:
Romney administration ordered Justices of Peace to perform homosexual “marriages” when asked – or be fired!

Pro gun control:
“He [Romney] is a supporter of the federal assault weapons ban.”
- Romney 2002 campaign website

Regarding the Brady Bill which required waiting periods to buy a handgun, Romney stated, “I don’t think [the waiting period] will have a massive effect on crime but I think it will have a positive effect.”
- Boston Herald, 8/1/1994

Pro Kennedy-style “Universal Health Care”
The main supporter and cheerleader of Romney’s health plan has been, interestingly, the Heritage Foundation. However, there would appear to be just a bit of a conflict of interest in that. According to news reports, Romney’s charitable foundation recently donated $25,000 to the Heritage Foundation. And Heritage Foundation helped Romney research and write his health plan.
- Boston Globe, 8/17//2006

Poor party leadership:

Romney pledged to build the Massachusetts Republican Party, but in fact he did almost nothing. During his tenure there were two elections for the entire Legislature (2004 and 2006). In each election the Republicans lost seats. Republicans now hold the fewest seats in the Legislature since the Civil War.

The party’s slide has been so precipitous that Republicans yesterday did not contest 130 of 200 legislative seats, fielded a challenger in only three of 10 congressional districts, and put up fewer candidates for statewide office (three) than the Green-Rainbow Party (four).
- Boston Globe, 11/8/2006

“The Massachusetts Republican Party died last Tuesday. The cause of death: failed leadership. The party is survived by a few leftover legislators and a handful of county officials and grassroots activists who have been ignored for years. Services will be public and a mass exodus of taxpayers will follow. In lieu of flowers, send messages to New Hampshire Republican voters warning them about a certain presidential candidate named Romney.”
- Boston Herald, 11/12/2006

You’re not about the issues, just about trolling against FRED!

P. James Moriarty on June 5, 2007 at 11:09 AM

P. James Moriarty on June 5, 2007 at 11:09 AM

hahaha! Cry me a river you big crybaby! This is a fred? thread and even as you are trying to hijack it into a personal attack on me, and now on MITT! (because you can’t stand hearing truth about freddie boy), most of us are trying to stay on topic. So if anyone is a troll, it’s you.

freddie boy is a faker and a Washington insider. He has a reputation for being lazy and he wont discuss issues without a prepared speech or in an environment his manager would pick. He has a weak senate record and has zero executive experience. He is pro-choice. Period. If you can’t stand reading that, go away and spare the group your incessant whining about me and attempted thread hijacking.

csdeven on June 5, 2007 at 11:44 AM

The thread was about the effect of a net-centric campaign, you “hijacked” the thread to slam Fred!, have stated that you have made it your cause to do so,

but when I first started this little cause of mine,
csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 2:40 PM

and have been refuted on all points, including on you’re candidates positions. If you were so concerned about the Pro-choice issue (Freds! position is a federalist one, not pro abortion) then you wouldn’t come within a mile of Mitt, as I have shown.

I’ll say it again, you aren’t about the issues or about commenting on the original point of the thread, just against Fred!

P. James Moriarty on June 5, 2007 at 11:55 AM

Slublog on June 5, 2007 at 12:08 PM

Sniff, sniff. You’re breaking my heart.

csdeven on June 5, 2007 at 12:19 PM

Slublog on June 5, 2007 at 12:08 PM

csdeven on June 5, 2007 at 12:19 PM

Sorry Slublog, that wasn’t for you. A preview feature would be reaaaaal nice.

P. James Moriarty on June 5, 2007 at 11:55 AM

Sniff, sniff. You’re breaking my heart.

P. James Moriarty on June 5, 2007 at 11:55 AM

csdeven on June 5, 2007 at 3:16 PM

csdeven on June 5, 2007 at 9:41 AM

Well, I’m no a troll and you sound like a moron crybaby for even suggesting pointing it out it.

Now your statement accurately reflects the facts…….

doriangrey on June 5, 2007 at 3:52 PM

P. James Moriarty on June 5, 2007 at 11:55 AM

I’ll say it again, you aren’t about the issues or about commenting on the original point of the thread, just against Fred!

Everybody here with an IQ higher than Rosie O’Donnell figured that out a long time ago.

doriangrey on June 5, 2007 at 3:54 PM

Everybody here with an IQ higher than Rosie O’Donnell figured that out a long time ago.

doriangrey on June 5, 2007 at 3:54 PM

LOL, true. One thing I will say though, it certainly drives up the hitcount.

P. James Moriarty on June 5, 2007 at 3:58 PM

P. James Moriarty on June 5, 2007 at 3:58 PM

The funny part is seeing cs claim he is doing it just to watch the fred groupies get their panties in a wad. When just based upon the vitriol and volume of his posting not only are his panties in a wad but Fred must have personally given him the atomic wedgie from hell. He!! You would almost think the Jeri must have been his girlfriend that Fred stole away……

doriangrey on June 5, 2007 at 4:05 PM

csdeven, I’m on a business trip and might be in your neck of the woods – dogs are…and I’d be happy to be a “fredonite” or whatever you coined us to be.

I don’t have time to read all comments, much to my regret, but I did see a bit of the csdeven horror-fighting, including that ugly picture, which I know would nothing but amuse Fred.

More on the thread topic and the exist questions:

- I wish most of us could accomplish as much as this guy did in a life, being this lazy. Do. Not. Be. Fooled. I heard him address the very issue, exactly this way.

- He didn’t say he’d use the blogs exclusively, just more so. This and other blogs will benefit greatly.

- He will go to the people, and collect tons from them, in small amounts, while also hitting the big doners, because…

- He is an outsider and an insider; outsider because he came, he served, and he had the decency to go home (something very few are capable of doing, once they get that power bug); an insider for lobbying and all other connections, serving, loyering, etc.

Obvious reasons why this man will be more than a groupies’ love affair, or let’s say infatuation – the NBC, csdeven and Bradky are the few trying hard to be against him, or to find fault where there really isn’t any which can be too much substantiated. The ‘lazy’ will backfire soon and you will be accused of something ugly.

To you csedeven, I will have a great glass of wine tonight, over dinner, listening to those dogs bark…yes, indeed.

Entelechy on June 5, 2007 at 7:27 PM

Entelechy on June 5, 2007 at 7:27 PM

I’m in the Northwest. Well, I like groupies, but others have used fred?heads. Both are completely appropriate until he actually becomes a candidate.

You probably ought not go over to the debate thread, because so far, IMO, freds? appearance on H&C is sickening display of cowardice and gall.

And by the way, fred? just announced he is pro-choice (Much like Rudy is), and tried to disavow his answer on a questionnaire while I have a quote of him confirming his answer on said questionnaire. He just admitted he flip-flopped on his Clinton impeachment votes.

csdeven on June 5, 2007 at 9:31 PM

Obvious reasons why this man will be more than a groupies’ love affair, or let’s say infatuation – the NBC, csdeven and Bradky are the few trying hard to be against him, or to find fault where there really isn’t any which can be too much substantiated. The ‘lazy’ will backfire soon and you will be accused of something ugly.

To you csedeven, I will have a great glass of wine tonight, over dinner, listening to those dogs bark…yes, indeed.

Entelechy on June 5, 2007 at 7:27 PM

Trying hard to be against him? I simply answered the exit question in regards to the internet and made the observation that I felt the debates would be where he makes it or not…

Joking about his truck was just that…

As fred might say “Ya’ll need to git a sense of humor – this is going to be a long ride”

Bradky on June 5, 2007 at 11:49 PM

Bradky on June 5, 2007 at 11:49 PM

Trying hard to be against him?

Hmmm, I’m not quite sure where Entelechy got that. My impression is that you are more reserved regarding Fred, as opposed to csdevens who is activly opposed to Fred.

doriangrey on June 6, 2007 at 11:03 AM

doriangrey on June 6, 2007 at 11:03 AM

Pretty much yes. The debates won’t get real interesting until they have thinned the herd a little. Personal opinion is that it will come down to Romney and Rudy vying for the prize with Fred pulling third.

If I lived in CS’s neck of the woods and drove a red pickup I might be a little worried about getting involved in a road rage incident!

Bradky on June 6, 2007 at 12:55 PM

I hope I’m not breaking any news here for the Thompson campaign but, er, there really aren’t a lot of right-wing blog readers

According to sitemeter HotAir averages 125K per day. That’s one site. That ain’t chickenfeed. Better, the visitors to the blogs talk, because they are the most politically active. Commenters on blogs are a miniscule portion of the audience. Don’t underestimate the reach of the blogosphere.

HerrMorgenholz on June 6, 2007 at 7:18 PM

Comment pages: 1 2