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

First, if the perception is that he’s lazy, won’t a Net-centric campaign designed to avoid campaign travel only play into that?

That’s easy to explain…by remaining Net-centric, he’s just keeping his campaign’s carbon footprint way lower than the other candidates…on both sides of the aisle.

Hee.

James on June 4, 2007 at 10:33 AM

I think that they are trying to smash Fred! because they fear him. He will not play their game, he will play his.
The elites who don’t know are an albatross around the neck of America.
I may be one of the limited number of right wing readers, but i pass on the pertinent info to LOTS of people on a daily basis.It’s a combo platter,baby.

bbz123 on June 4, 2007 at 10:34 AM

It’s so crazy that it just might work.

Matticus Finch on June 4, 2007 at 10:34 AM

Any other non-candidates receive this kind of reportage from WSJ or Newsweek prior to announcing a campaign?

The msm are in defensive mode already! RUN FRED!, RUN!

heroyalwhyness on June 4, 2007 at 10:42 AM

Yeah, I’m not sure how smart this is, it will be helpful in the long term for conservativism, because the intarweb is the best way to escape the leftist media, but I don’t know that it’s gonna be a successful move campaign wise.

As you say Allah, not *that* many people are rightosphere junkies, the only thing I can think is that he’s gonna try and totally win the enthusiastic base and cut off the other candidates at the knees by denying them activists who will run the local ground game, so to speak.

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

I may be one of the limited number of right wing readers, but i pass on the pertinent info to LOTS of people on a daily basis.It’s a combo platter,baby.

bbz123 on June 4, 2007 at 10:34 AM

This is EXACTLY what I mean.

Bad Candy on June 4, 2007 at 10:45 AM

You have to get out there and shake hands and kiss a lot of babies to win a nomination. fred needs to plan on having no family life for the next 5-9 years if he really wants this thing.

paulsur on June 4, 2007 at 10:50 AM

If young, dynamic campaign blogger, I’m in the market! And, as everyone knows, I’ve already done tons of research about Fred Thompson!

frankj on June 4, 2007 at 10:51 AM

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.

Nope. Not going to happen. If people have a choice between paying attention to American Idol and Sanjaya, or reading political blogs, which do you think they’ll pick. The vast majority of people who will do both, already do. It’s not unknown that the political blogosphere exists.

I may be one of the limited number of right wing readers, but i pass on the pertinent info to LOTS of people on a daily basis.It’s a combo platter,baby.

bbz123 on June 4, 2007 at 10:34 AM

May be, but you and all of us here can’t pass the news on to hundreds of millions of voters, or at least to the entire right wing. There’s not enough of us. And passing news on, won’t do anything for his fundraising. People aren’t going to just donate their hard-earned money to him, because I tell them his a great candidate.

amerpundit on June 4, 2007 at 10:53 AM

I’m all about Fred!, but how can he expect to win without fairly extensive campaigning trips? This worries me. The President has to be willing to spend time away from his family. It’s to important a job not to.

But besides that, I like how he’s doing things different. We’ve had the same stuff from every political campaign for decades and we always end up with the same crap no matter who’s elected, no matter what office. I want to vote for someone who doesn’t do things the same annoying way. That, coupled with agreeing with almost everything he says, gets my vote.

Privatestock on June 4, 2007 at 10:55 AM

We’ve had the same stuff from every political campaign for decades and we always end up with the same crap no matter who’s elected, no matter what office.

With the exception of Reagan, you’re right.

amerpundit on June 4, 2007 at 10:58 AM

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”?

Washington Outsider is about attitude more than actually being an outsider, I think. People recognize the soul devouring effect that DC has on people, and they want to send people who haven’t had theirs removed by DC’s influence yet.

You can see it in a lot of the candidates, you try to identify with them as real people, but there’s nothing there, there’s a bizarre hollowness, and not something they were born with.

Bad Candy on June 4, 2007 at 10:59 AM

I can’t imagine he’s not going to run at least a semblance of a traditional campaign. I can’t believe anyone thinks you can win on the net alone.

Farmer_Joe on June 4, 2007 at 11:03 AM

“and its not something they were born with”, meaning they weren’t born with that bizarre hollowness.

Bad Candy on June 4, 2007 at 11:04 AM

bbz123 on June 4, 2007 at 10:34 AM

I regularly email links from Hot Air and MM’s site to friends and family who have neither the time nor inclination to follow politics as I do. One thing I do know is that a lot of the support for the current top tier is an inch deep and if Fred hits the gate running he has a very good chance of winning the nomination.

Bill C on June 4, 2007 at 11:06 AM

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”?

Or be passed off as lazy?

flipflop on June 4, 2007 at 11:07 AM

I would like to know how many people vote based on those pain-in-everyone’s-arses political commercials on tv, and especially based on the volunteers who stand at intesctions waving signs. I don’t think the sign wavers contribute a bit to a campaign, I personally never look at them and consider them a nuisance. And the commercials usually annoy me too much to have any effect on how I’ll vote, in fact I’ve chosen not to vote for people because their tv ads were so annoying. My point is that I think a lot of what political campaigns spend money on is worthless. I’d love to see a decent candidate run without doing all that and see how they do.

But you GOTTA get out on the campaing trail, Fred!!

Privatestock on June 4, 2007 at 11:10 AM

1) By saying that Fred is lazy by making use of the Net as a campaign tool is calling all net users lazy.

2) If Fred is a declared candidate, you can expect that the media coverage of his net campaign will be covered by the MSM the same way that the M Moore challange was covered. i.e. he will make the video, post it, get signifigant buzz on the web. Then the MSM will pick it up and do it’s usual thing in taking short clips and sound bites out of it for thier broadcasts to put thier own spin on it. The benefit here is that anyone can find the orginal source and see the unabridged version…..the MSM is no longer in total control of what we, or the rest of America sees of it’s candidates, at least those who chose to avail themselves of the “new” technology.

3) When the MSM reports that the item was first “aired” on the web, and who aired it, it will force those who may have been online, but reluctant to lean on the web to use the tools they’ve had in front of them all along to debunk the BS the MSM has been spoon feeding them for years. This can only be good for the video sites that carry the videos and the blogs that comment on it.

People may start to understand what the the Matrix© is….

P. James Moriarty on June 4, 2007 at 11:10 AM

Exit answer 1: Perception is (sometimes) reality – the libs won’t examine otherwise & internet Fred! is a definite contact high. Or allusive is intriguing for all.

Either way, the net vett is simply one piece of a larger advertising puzzle. The irritatingly incessant ‘tradional’ stuff will arrive soon enough.

Exit answer 2: Perception is (sometimes) reality.

locomotivebreath1901 on June 4, 2007 at 11:11 AM

I thought Ron Paul was the internet candidate?

jp on June 4, 2007 at 11:12 AM

First, if the perception is that he’s lazy, won’t a Net-centric campaign designed to avoid campaign travel only play into that?

Yes. fred? is lazy and expects that his groupies wont be able to see what he is through the glazed over eyes they view him with.

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”?

Ahhhhh. You underestimate the power of the red pickup truck on the hypnotized. He’ll drag out his pickup, his blue jeans and flannel shirt, spew some folksy wisdom, rehash other candidates (and mine) opinions (days after they announce them), use some misdirection, and the groupies will fall in line behind him swallowing his “Washington outsider” lies, hook, line, and sinker.

I’m afraid the fredites? will find he is riding a bubble and the minute he has to debate qualified experienced candidates, the bubble will pop, his facade will be stripped bare, and the real fred? will have to answer for his record.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 11:13 AM

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

Ain’t no hatin’. Just the facts, and as my granpappy use ta say….”that dog don’t hunt round these parts.”

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 11:15 AM

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

You started counting a little early, but your instincts were dead on. :P

Privatestock on June 4, 2007 at 11:16 AM

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

I guess every blog has it’s troll.

P. James Moriarty on June 4, 2007 at 11:20 AM

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

Dunno why I’m quoting this, but I thought I’d join the fun.

Not trolling, just honing my psychic act….

Bad Candy on June 4, 2007 at 11:22 AM

Well, everybody gets to have their own opinion. That what makes it interesting.

Privatestock on June 4, 2007 at 11:24 AM

Not trolling, just honing my psychic act….

Bad Candy on June 4, 2007 at 11:22 AM

LOL, Doing pretty well at it too….

BTW, it wasn’t you I was refering to, sorry if I wasn’t clear.

P. James Moriarty on June 4, 2007 at 11:29 AM

If young, dynamic campaign blogger, I’m in the market! And, as everyone knows, I’ve already done tons of research about Fred Thompson!

frankj on June 4, 2007 at 10:51 AM

And I’m almost coherent! That puts me ahead of 90% of other bloggers!

frankj on June 4, 2007 at 11:30 AM

Well, everybody gets to have their own opinion. That what makes it interesting.

Privatestock on June 4, 2007 at 11:24 AM

It’s one thing to disent, it’s quite another to take a overhanded tone with the obvious intention to tick people off. It distracts from the debate and wastes bandwidth, such as the last 7 posts. It would help if he made his points without the sarcasm, which I’ve not seen him do yet. I would be intersted to know why Fred elicits such a viseral negative from cs.

P. James Moriarty on June 4, 2007 at 11:34 AM

Everyone that calls them a conservative should be voting for Fred Thompson.

msipes on June 4, 2007 at 11:35 AM

AP,

When are you gonna start using an un-retouched photo of freddie boy?

This photo of fred? was very familiar, and then it dawned on me….Poltergeist 2! Maybe that isn’t fair because Kane didn’t have a red pickup truck. ;-)

“God is in, his Holy temple…”

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 11:35 AM

P. James Moriarty on June 4, 2007 at 11:34 AM

Then you just haven’t been paying attention. It’s comical to me that the fred? groupies can’t handle anyone criticizing him. The guy isn’t even a candidate. And every single angry vitriolic response is, well, just silly. really.

The guy is going to have to answer for every single point made in this article, but his groupies just blow it off, claiming his folksy facade is the proof he is genuine. Funny thing is, they criticize Hillary when she does it.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 11:42 AM

And I’m almost coherent! That puts me ahead of 90% of other bloggers!

frankj on June 4, 2007 at 11:30 AM

lol…I had to read. To understand twice it!

Schweggie on June 4, 2007 at 11:42 AM

P. James Moriarty on June 4, 2007 at 11:34 AM

Then you just haven’t been paying attention. It’s comical to me that the fred? groupies can’t handle anyone criticizing him. The guy isn’t even a candidate. And every single angry vitriolic response is, well, just silly. really.

The guy is going to have to answer for every single point made in this article, but his groupies just blow it off, claiming his folksy facade is the proof he is genuine. Funny thing is, they criticize Hillary when she does it.

I mean really guys, aren’t you paying attention to the pundits and their take on fred? and his facade? It ain’t just me. I was just one of the first.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 11:43 AM

Funny thing is, they criticize Hillary when she does it.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 11:42 AM

The number one cause of pilots? Over-correction. When Hillary gets in front of a southern crowd, she goes shamelessly Jethro. Thompson is just being Thompson. Am I so wrong there?

Schweggie on June 4, 2007 at 11:46 AM

csdeven….
OT: surprise on my side… looks like turkey day instead…..hope yours is doing ok.

onT…..As one of the potential Fred!groupies all I can say is he better hurry the heck up and come out with a home run. The net isn’t going to reach into the rank and file. He needs the traditional media and needs to get into faces if he is going to have a chance. Getting nervous in Texas.

Limerick on June 4, 2007 at 11:48 AM

Hey, cs, thanks for the nice Fred! pix. I’ll make it my screen saver and call him Smilin’ Fred!

KelliD on June 4, 2007 at 11:49 AM

And for the record, I think the Net will prove successful for Thompson, particularly as the campaign heats up. Most folks are very casually following 2008, but when things start to heat up, Thompson’s popularity and message will have no problems resonating via www. If the hybrid half campaign trail/half Net-Centric campaign doesn’t go quite as planned, then calibrate.

Schweggie on June 4, 2007 at 11:50 AM

Yes. fred? [insert any Democratic candidate here] is lazy and expects that his [her] groupies wont be able to see what he [she] is through the glazed over eyes they view him [her] with.

There. Fixed that.

wccawa on June 4, 2007 at 11:53 AM

I mean really guys, aren’t you paying attention to the pundits and their take on fred? and his facade? It ain’t just me. I was just one of the first.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 11:43 AM

Only with a huge grain of salt. Unlike others, I don’t insist on being told what to think. But the thread isn’t about the viabillity lf Fred, or you or me, for that matter. The question was about what effect the use of the web would have on a potential campaign and the web itself, an issue you have yet to address. Instead you’ve spent your time slamming Fred (as is your right to do) and making the debate what you want it to be. Sounds rather egocentric to me.

P. James Moriarty on June 4, 2007 at 12:00 PM

Limerick on June 4, 2007 at 11:48 AM

As a potential FRED! supporter myself, I am not happy with his general attitude about this whole thing. It appears that this break with traditional campaigning is just another ruse to convince folks he’s just a good old boy instead of a serious Washington insider.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 12:00 PM

The guy is going to have to answer for every single point made in this article, but his groupies just blow it off, claiming his folksy facade is the proof he is genuine. Funny thing is, they criticize Hillary when she does it.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 11:42 AM

His “folksy facade” has nothing to do with why he’s got my vote. It’s his opinions. If he turns out to be a blowhard we’ll most likely know it before the election and we can simply swith to the usual lesser-of-evils vote. Whether he’s folksy or not means nothing. Whether he’s right or not means everything, and so far he’s the rightest one in the picture.

And when Hillary does it, it’s an obvious act and proof that she considers us all fools.

Privatestock on June 4, 2007 at 12:02 PM

There. Fixed that.

wccawa on June 4, 2007 at 11:53 AM

EXACTLY! Another disturbing fact about fred? is that his name and ANY democrat can be substituted into that sentence.

It’s disturbing!

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 12:03 PM

Sounds rather egocentric to me.

P. James Moriarty on June 4, 2007 at 12:00 PM

Really? Who forced you to respond to my comments?

And I did address freds? net campaign. He’s lazy and relying on an invented image to get the nomination.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 12:06 PM

EXACTLY! Another disturbing fact about fred? [insert any democratic candidate here] is that his [her] name and ANY democrat [manure] can be substituted [applied] into that sentence [your garden].

Happy to oblige.

wccawa on June 4, 2007 at 12:10 PM

Only with a huge grain of salt.
P. James Moriarty on June 4, 2007 at 12:00 PM

Why? All they have said is that he hasn’t done anything or answered to anyone yet. That is a fact and you ought to give it 100% credibility. He IS going to have to answer for his record. If he can answer satisfactorily, then he’s got a good chance of shaking up the field.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 12:11 PM

I think Fred should run — but until he signs on the dotted line, folks who contribute should ask for their money back if he hedges. He’s sounding a lot like a home-spun Mitt from what I’ve heard thus far. And I’m supporting Mitt. Fred’s back room dealin’ and lobbying experience reeks of a VP slot …. His forte as the 21st Century Will Rogers can be materialized with a gavel as well as a hoe and ‘baccer stick. The hours might be more to his likin’ — 9-5, Tuesday – Thursday.

Gull on June 4, 2007 at 12:12 PM

Privatestock on June 4, 2007 at 12:02 PM

Well then, you aren’t a groupie are you?

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 12:12 PM

Am I so wrong there?

Schweggie on June 4, 2007 at 11:46 AM

Yes, I think you are. His fake pickup truck schtick is an insult to potential supporters.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 12:14 PM

To Hell with ‘pundits’ it’s the silent majority that Fred appeals to…and they really don’t give a damn what liberals think!

DCJeff on June 4, 2007 at 12:27 PM

As a potential FRED! supporter myself, I am not happy with his general attitude about this whole thing…

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 12:00 PM

Dude, don’t insult our intelligence. After trolling every other thread- whether about Fred or not- calling him a lazy fraud and liar you’ve made it clear that you’re more a potential stalker than supporter. The better his chances have become, the worse your mindless, shallow attacks have become.

Hollowpoint on June 4, 2007 at 12:29 PM

It would help if he made his points without the sarcasm, which I’ve not seen him do yet. I would be intersted to know why Fred elicits such a viseral negative from cs.

P. James Moriarty on June 4, 2007 at 11:34 AM

I suspect he’s worried that Fred will hurt the chances of Hillary getting elected.

Hollowpoint on June 4, 2007 at 12:31 PM

Ahhhhh. You underestimate the power of the red pickup truck horse riding on the hypnotized. He’ll drag out his pickup horse, his blue jeans and flannel shirt, spew some folksy wisdom, rehash other candidates (and mine) opinions (days after they announce them), use some misdirection, and the groupies will fall in line behind him swallowing his “Washington outsider” lies, hook, line, and sinker.

I’m afraid the fredites Reaganites? will find he is riding a bubble and the minute he has to debate qualified experienced candidates, the bubble will pop, his facade will be stripped bare, and the real fred Reagan? will have to answer for his record.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 11:13 AM

Fixed.

P.S. We prefer to be called Fredheads.

Bill C on June 4, 2007 at 12:32 PM

This story by John Fund also talks about the unorthodox campaign he hopes to run.

Slublog on June 4, 2007 at 12:33 PM

It appears that this break with traditional campaigning. . .-csdeven @ 12:00 PM

The early start to the ’08 presidential nomination campaigns is anything but traditional.

heroyalwhyness on June 4, 2007 at 12:34 PM

Yes, I think you are. His fake pickup truck schtick is an insult to potential supporters.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 12:14 PM

I don’t recall the Senator riding around in a red pickup during this 2008 Presidential race. Links?
I have seen Hillary morph into several different dialects to date however, during this campaign.

Schweggie on June 4, 2007 at 12:34 PM

Does anyone know what Fred!’s official website is or will be?

dc84123 on June 4, 2007 at 12:35 PM

I long ago learned to check comment signatures and skip over anything signed csdeven.

Franklin Hill on June 4, 2007 at 12:35 PM

Darn. Should read this way:

Ahhhhh. You underestimate the power of the red pickup truck horse riding on the hypnotized. He’ll drag out his pickup horse, his blue jeans and flannel shirt, spew some folksy wisdom, rehash other candidates (and mine) opinions (days after they announce them), use some misdirection, and the groupies will fall in line behind him swallowing his “Washington outsider” lies, hook, line, and sinker.

I’m afraid the fredites Reaganites? will find he is riding a bubble and the minute he has to debate qualified experienced candidates, the bubble will pop, his facade will be stripped bare, and the real fred Reagan? will have to answer for his record.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 11:13 AM

Bill C on June 4, 2007 at 12:36 PM

I can’t imagine he’s not going to run at least a semblance of a traditional campaign. I can’t believe anyone thinks you can win on the net alone.

Farmer_Joe on June 4, 2007 at 11:03 AM

I can’t imagine it either, but I think there’s a lot of people who’ve misinterpreted his strategy as one relying almost solely on the Internet rather than using it as an enhancement to his campaign.

It’s entirely possible he won’t spend as much time kissing babies as some of the other candidates, but given the numerous appearances he’s already made I can’t see him just “phoning it in” and skipping the traditional campaign tactics altogether.

Just making a strong presence on the Internet with many numerous articles posted is unconventional in itself, regardless of how much traditional campaigning he does.

Hollowpoint on June 4, 2007 at 12:39 PM

Does anyone know what Fred!’s official website is or will be?
dc84123 on June 4, 2007 at 12:35 PM

For the time being it is “Candidate Intent” — reruns Tue at 9 p.m. Eastern.

Bradky on June 4, 2007 at 12:44 PM

I think Allah is being a bit unfair here when it comes to Fred!’s focus on becoming more “net-centric.” Once he officially announces his candidacy we will see whether the ‘YouTube Effect’ or ‘Internet effect’ will be a big factor or not in Fred!’s cash raising efforts. YouTube didn’t exist when Deano was around. I think at this day and age there has to be a balance of some kind…traveling and meeting people and tapping into the power of the internet. The question is, how much and which one should Fred! focus more on?

Kokonut on June 4, 2007 at 12:52 PM

Work smarter, not harder!

SouthernGent on June 4, 2007 at 12:56 PM

The question is, how much and which one should Fred! focus more on?
Kokonut on June 4, 2007 at 12:52 PM

I think one can augment the other. If someone on Thompson’s staff records all of his stump speeches, uploading them to YouTube or iFilm would be a relatively cheap and easy way to generate buzz.

Also, if another candidate says something wrong or negative about Thompson, he could do what he did with Moore and put a video response out for easy viewing, and send the video to his email list.

The web provides a number of possibilities for communicating with potential voters and supporters. It will be interesting to see how the Thompson campaign uses the tools available.

Slublog on June 4, 2007 at 12:57 PM

I was going to make a joke about not being able to find today’s Vent, but then it turned out I really couldn’t find today’s Vent.

I’m happy seeing Fred though.

saint kansas on June 4, 2007 at 1:07 PM

Hollowpoint on June 4, 2007 at 12:29 PM

You STILL got your panties in a twist?

Grow up.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 1:10 PM

I don’t recall the Senator riding around in a red pickup during this 2008 Presidential race. Links?
Schweggie on June 4, 2007 at 12:34 PM

He can’t because he isn’t a candidate, but he surely did during his senate run. What’s comical is the fred?heads think the fakery is a badge of honor.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 1:13 PM

Bill C on June 4, 2007 at 12:36 PM

NOW you’re gonna compare fred? to Reagan? Blasphemy. Reagan never faked anyone out. Never had anyone ride his horse back to the stable. Reagan was what he always was. fred? is a Washington lobbyist and actor more than he is a public servant.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 1:18 PM

I honestly don’t think Thompson’s going to run an internet-based campaign. I think he’ll run a traditional one, but possibly with more emphasis on the internet.

amerpundit on June 4, 2007 at 1:21 PM

You STILL got your panties in a twist?

Grow up.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 1:10 PM

Oh the irony. Project much, troll?

You post over a dozen times in this thread alone, with scores (maybe hundreds) more in other treads, each one consisting of little more than repeating the same insults and name calling while admitting you’re intentionally trying to antagonize Fred’s supporters and potential supporters… but I’m the one who needs to grow up and has has his “panties in a twist”.

Having read the tripe posted at the Daily Kos or the Huffington Post, I can say you’d be right at home there. Hell, you could copy and paste 90% of your Hot Air comments directly and they’d eat it up.

Hollowpoint on June 4, 2007 at 1:22 PM

I think it’s good if Fred plays the internet…like the Michael Moore YouTube video. Spot on. But he does also need to campaign the traditional way. He can’t take his family with him, or they can’t fly out to visit him every so often? I don’t know how old his children are, actually. Doesn’t he have one young one and the others are older? I guess that would be a factor in his willingness to leave.

W/e, I’ll support Fred anyways and I’m frickn Canadian!

emmaline1138 on June 4, 2007 at 1:39 PM

NOW you’re gonna compare fred? to Reagan? Blasphemy. Reagan never faked anyone out. Never had anyone ride his horse back to the stable. Reagan was what he always was. fred? is a Washington lobbyist and actor more than he is a public servant.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 1:18 PM

I am old enough, barely, to remember the criticisms of Reagan and they sound a lot like what you have said about Fred. Because Reagan had a pleasant personality, used humor, and was an actor he was accused of being an empty suit. Both men are powerful politicians because they can get their messages across without sounding angry. I also believe that Fred is a true believer and that can’t be said for certain about any of the three top tier candaidates at this point.

Please lay off the insults. Due to the immigration bill a lot of nerves are raw and we don’t need this kind of thing.

Bill C on June 4, 2007 at 1:41 PM

What’s more, this isn’t just about right-wing, left-wing bloggers, or readers out there. We KNOW that the MSM reads a lot of these right and left-wing blogs. They cannot afford not to. What better way for the MSM to advertise Fred!’s latest internet video reply a la Michael Moore?
I think that the strategy of becoming more “net-centric” deserve to be looked into more. Numerous possibilities abound.

Kokonut on June 4, 2007 at 1:45 PM

First, if the perception is that he’s lazy, won’t a Net-centric campaign designed to avoid campaign travel only play into that?

Fairly or unfairly, it will feed that perception. Fred needs to do some traditional campaigning if he wants it.

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”?

In concert with the above, it’s a matter of perception. Fred’s being out of Washington and out of politics for the last 4.5 years certainly helps that. The manner in which he communicates also fuels that, as he talks in a common sense manner that doesn’t waffle and doesn’t sound all focus-group tested, and more importantly, in a way that resonates. If turns out that he’s on the right side of the big issues with the conservative base (and the early returns there are promising, most notably on immigration), that perception will gain even more momentum.

thirteen28 on June 4, 2007 at 1:53 PM

As far as Fred’s background is concerned I invite his critics to take a ride through Lawrenceburg,Tennessee. It’s STILL a small,rural,southern town…not that far from Fred’s current home just outside of Nashville.Fred is a true southerner and Tennessean unlike Al Goracle. You can take the boy out of the country but you can’t take the country out of the boy…Fred’s no-nonsense no bullshit approach is very genuine…much like myself and many others grew up around…and it’s nice to hear it again. I’m originally from the same area that Fred grew up in…I’ve lived in New York…and now live in Washington,D.C. I still (and always will!)have a southern accent and still have the values that were passed on to me. Does putting on a suit and attending events in DC make me a fraud?-I think not.It’s foolish to say Fred is’nt authentic…sounds like a Hillary lover wanting to focus the attention on someone else…

DCJeff on June 4, 2007 at 1:55 PM

Please lay off the insults. Due to the immigration bill a lot of nerves are raw and we don’t need this kind of thing.
Bill C on June 4, 2007 at 1:41 PM

My suggestion is for you to control yourself and not respond if you are afraid you’re going to say something you regret.

I am old enough to remember the Reagan years and he never had to, or more importantly, never tried to fake out his base. Among other serious weaknesses, fred? will have to answer for that.

He IS a washington insider, as is his wife. He is pro-choice. He is lazy. He failed to make the Clinton/China connection. He has a very weak senate record. He was a lobbyist for many years. THAT is a serious problem. He was WELL KNOWN as a Washington playboy for many years. THAT could be a potential problem with evangelicals if there are any skeletons in his closet. He has ZERO, nil, nada, no exectutive experience whatsoever.

Put all that up against Rudy, McCain, or Mitt!, and you can see that all fred? has is rhetoric. That works on a sound stage and in closed door meetings manipulating elected officials for special interest groups, but I really doubt regular old americans are going to find that appealing.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 1:59 PM

I’m not sure I agree with the aforementioned Fox news poll concerning conservatives and blogs.

Like bbz123 on June 4, 2007 at 10:34 AM, I share information I get from the ‘net with other conservatives. Given that the ‘net and talk radio is where many, if not most, conservatives go to information that isn’t leftwing MSM talking points, I think that if Thompson is planning to run a net-centric campaign, it might be hugely successful, not just to get the nomination but in the general election as well.

As in other elections, the MSM is going to work overtime to smear whom ever the Republicans nominate. They are going to lie outrageously (calling Dan Rather, calling Dan Rather!) in an attempt to influence the election their way. The election coverage will be biased and pro liberal/Democrat.

Look back at the campaigns starting, say, in 1992 where the press went out of their way to publish the most unflattering photos of Bush 41, Dole, and George W, whenever they could. They and their broadcast colleagues gleefully used their ability to be “gatekeepers” to advance their candidates. Sometimes it worked. Sometimes it failed, BUT THEY ALWAYS TRIED IT.

It’s 2007. The MSM no longer has a monopoly on information. They are no longer the gatekeepers. People ARE turning to other sources of information than ABCCBSNBC and CNN. Their viewership and circulation is down, their “demographic” is aging as younger viewers/readers are turning to the ‘net and those who watch cable news are finding Fox (not CNN) as the “most trusted name in news”.

Limbaugh has, what? 20 million listeners. Conservatives now own the AM radio band with talk radio.

If whomever the Repblicans nominate wants to get his message out, uncensored, he could do a lot worse than run a net-centric campaign.

georgej on June 4, 2007 at 2:05 PM

Does putting on a suit and attending events in DC make me a fraud?-I think not.It’s foolish to say Fred is’nt authentic…sounds like a Hillary lover wanting to focus the attention on someone else…

DCJeff on June 4, 2007 at 1:55 PM

The more important question that fred? will have to answer is…..

does taking off your suit and putting on blue jeans, flannel shirts, and a fake pickup make a guy a fraud. Especially when he drives away from his rally’s, his aide drives it home and he jumps in a limo and heads over to The Caucus Room for ceegars and brandy.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 2:06 PM

He has ZERO, nil, nada, no exectutive experience whatsoever.

After the past few presidents we’ve had, I’m beginning to wonder whether executive experience is really all that it’s cracked up to be. Other than Reagan, all of our recent presidents with “executive experience” – George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George HW Bush (CIA head) and Jimmy Carter all had executive experience.

Look how well that worked out for them.

Oh, and John McCain doesn’t have any executive experience, either. Shouldn’t that disqualify him?

Slublog on June 4, 2007 at 2:06 PM

Pah. That comment didn’t work out at all. Let’s try that first paragraph again:

Other than Reagan, all of our recent presidents with “executive experience” – George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George HW Bush (CIA head) and Jimmy Carter – have been disappointments.

Slublog on June 4, 2007 at 2:08 PM

The headline will be…Thompson yet to announce…What is he trying to hide.

tomas on June 4, 2007 at 2:18 PM

georgej on June 4, 2007 at 2:05 PM

I don’t know about that georgej. Most of the net savvy people I know are mostly undecideds spending their time on youtube, myspace, etc. They like the anti-establishment air and flourish in, as you say, uncensored information. I think most conservatives are getting their info from credible sites and have no real access to those independents. Talk radio is ours, but the net is decidedly liberal. Most people fred? is going to reach are conservatives who demand substance and not emotional happy talk. Regardless of which way these conservatives break, the regular american is going to decide the presidency and that has to be done face to face, with traditional proven campaign practices.

I think once fred? has to actually perform as a real candidate, he’s going to find himself lacking and his early supporters will leave for a stronger candidate with better credentials and experience.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 2:18 PM

CS I’m just saying that I believe his beliefs and background are real. I could do without the pick-up truck stuff myself. But even with a different approach it’s still politics and trying to get elected.

DCJeff on June 4, 2007 at 2:23 PM

He IS a washington insider, as is his wife. He is pro-choice. He is lazy. He failed to make the Clinton/China connection. He has a very weak senate record. He was a lobbyist for many years. THAT is a serious problem. He was WELL KNOWN as a Washington playboy for many years. THAT could be a potential problem with evangelicals if there are any skeletons in his closet. He has ZERO, nil, nada, no exectutive experience whatsoever.

cs, if you really want to persuade us, maybe you ought to figure out that there is a difference between opinion/conclusion and fact.

For the most part, your posts are replete with conclusions based on percieved, yet unproven, facts. The only facts you recite are colored by conclusions anyway. He was known for having been a man about town during his Senate years. Why not? Are you opposed to single men dating beautiful women?

He hasn’t had executive experience in government. That is a far cry from saying he has no executive experience in life. Look at Jimmy Carter and tell me that his executive experience was the defining factor of his presidency. We’ve all had good bosses and really bad bosses. Executive experience can be a plus, but you know what? We don’t hatch them from eggs. The job and the way the job is executed, defines the man.

Your other derogatory claims about authenticity are, again, conclusory statements based upon opinion: yours. If you want to discuss your feelings, please tell us that they are and we can all get touchy feely togther.

In the meantime, ignorance is bliss, so in my opinion, your bliss must be profound.

Tennman on June 4, 2007 at 2:25 PM

Oh, and John McCain doesn’t have any executive experience, either. Shouldn’t that disqualify him?

Slublog on June 4, 2007 at 2:06 PM

I can’t even get to that point with McCain because of his other issues, but all things being equal, and regardless of any executive experience as a Naval officer, he has the same problem.

As far as executives go, Bush, in spite of all his problems, has not screwed the economy.

I don’t know if people are gun shy of executive types, but I have not seen any criticisms of any of those presidents that centered around their experience as executives. Bush’s problem, like most politicians, is the cronyism and the selling out to big business. 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.

Just my two cents.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 2:27 PM

DCJeff on June 4, 2007 at 2:23 PM

I too believe he is a conservative, but there’s more to it than conservative talking points. I think conservative values SPEAK to americans when they are articulated in a way that inspires. No need for pickups, even as a political ploy.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 2:33 PM

As far as executives go, Bush, in spite of all his problems, has not screwed the economy.

Until recently, anyway. I fear his immigration proposal will cause some economic upheaval.

Slublog on June 4, 2007 at 2:34 PM

cs, if you really want to persuade us, maybe you ought to figure out that there is a difference between opinion/conclusion and fact.
Tennman on June 4, 2007 at 2:25 PM

I don’t recognize you as being around here a lot, but when I first started this little cause of mine, I linked to many articles etc that backed up my claims. Sure some are opinion, but so is 90% of the fred?heads points, so what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. I am not silly enough to think that anyone can get one ounce of reality into the opinions of those who are hypnotized by fred?. That is not my goal. I am merely commenting on the fred?-mania.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 2:40 PM

I guess the meeting and greeting stuff is important but I’ve never voted for a candidate that I shook hands with (except for one state representative who came to my door who I was going to vote for anyway). Do people really vote for someone just because they shook their hand?

Rose on June 4, 2007 at 2:41 PM

Until recently, anyway. I fear his immigration proposal will cause some economic upheaval.

Slublog on June 4, 2007 at 2:34 PM

Have you ever made a phone call when you were so pissed that you had to clench your teeth and explain that you were doing the best you could do to remain calm? I’ve made three of those calls to the White House over this immigration nonsense.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 2:42 PM

Now that Fred? has (un)officially declared himself a candidate (to my knowledge he has to file the paper work-someone correct me if I’m wrong) I will now retire the phrase Fred? and resort to call him Fred!.

Note to Fred! Fans: AP (and unfortunately the MSM) are right about this one. Most of my friends don’t receive their political fix from the net, and many of them have never heard of Fred! (which is not a good thing IMHO)

If Fred! doesn’t get off his anatomy and “tour the country,” we may be saluting Mitt! in the GOP primary (which is a good thing for csdeven and I).

Exit Question: Should the GOP launch a new round of debates to include Fred!, or should Fred! challenge the GOP runners to one-on-one debates (at least Mitt!, McCain and Rudy!)?

Darnell Clayton on June 4, 2007 at 2:44 PM

Exit Question: Should the GOP launch a new round of debates to include Fred!, or should Fred! challenge the GOP runners to one-on-one debates (at least Mitt!, McCain and Rudy!)?

Darnell Clayton on June 4, 2007 at 2:44 PM

I don’t expect any of the candidates to welcome fred? with open arms until he braves the gauntlet like the rest of them have.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 3:18 PM

Darnell,

Never heard of Fred! ?

Remember when the MSM reported the polls where Fred! was either in the top three or four as a non-candidate? And now according to Real Clear Politics Poll Average shows that Fred! is #3, ahead of Romney who is #4.

http://time-blog.com/real_clear_politics/2007/06/the_daily_2008_60.html

And Fred! is just barely getting warmed up as a non-candidate.

Kokonut on June 4, 2007 at 3:18 PM

I guess the meeting and greeting stuff is important but I’ve never voted for a candidate that I shook hands with (except for one state representative who came to my door who I was going to vote for anyway). Do people really vote for someone just because they shook their hand?

Rose on June 4, 2007 at 2:41 PM

I don’t think it’s that a candidate shook someone’s hand, but that they showed up and made an impression. An appearance generates local media coverage, speeches get quoted and played on the evening news, etc. Then there’s the “what about us” factor- if a candidate doesn’t come to a given state, people might view that as a snub, but appreciate it when a candidate takes the time to address them.

Also keep in mind that not many people typically vote in the primaries, at least in comparison to the general election. It’s usually the more politically active who vote in the primaries, and these are the people more likely to want to see a candidate in person before voting.

Hollowpoint on June 4, 2007 at 3:35 PM

csdeven-
If you put as much effort into being for something as you do into trying to run Senator Thompson down, you might have something in your life feel good about. Wouldn’t that be nice? I feel like I’m talking to one of my parolees here.
Do good things instead of complaining….blah blah blah.
Probably about as effective too.

TBinSTL on June 4, 2007 at 3:38 PM

TBinSTL on June 4, 2007 at 3:38 PM

You can remove your foot from your mouth anytime now. This is a vetting process, not the coronation of a Washington insider who lies to his supporters.

You should be glad that freddie boys facade is being challenged. It might save you some embarrassment later and, more importantly, get us the best nominee possible to win the White House in 08.

csdeven on June 4, 2007 at 3:47 PM

Comment pages: 1 2