The Fredheads have a fever and the only prescription is more … Ron Paul? Update: Paul has more cash on hand than McCain
posted at 1:04 pm on July 6, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
They took a hard look at their options and realized there’s only one Man Who Can Save America, and that’s the capital-p Patriot with two first names and two lips to chap on the collective ass of America’s Truthers.
No, actually, it seems to be some sort of elaborate parody site. An amusing one, too: poke around the forums (here, for example) and note the posts by “Neocon4Fred” and “NeoConsRule”. Exit question: Is “Jason Francis” an actual Fredhead or just a foil for the Pauline hordes?
45-45, by the way, in case you’re keeping track.
Update: Tremble before the fundraising power of the Truther hordes! No, actually, that’s as much a testament to the feebleness of St. John’s campaign as to Paul’s grassroots support. How bad has it gotten? He’s firing staffers in Florida, where the first truly major primary will be held in January.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
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: « Previous 1 2
Guys, arguing about polls at this point may be good for the sake of conversation but much is going to change from now up to election day. I wouldn’t try to be to “quantitative” at this point. And even when it comes time to begin to pay attention to polls just throw away all the national ones. We don’t have a national election.
Zetterson on July 6, 2007 at 5:08 PM
So, who is your boy? Fred may be another Ronald Reagan, but he sure don’t have the track record of Ronald Reagan. I hope he is, but the jury is still out for me.
saiga on July 6, 2007 at 5:09 PM
Now, now….don’t start convincing yourself that I am the only person who is sick of freds? BS and refuse to support him until he grows a pair and gets in the fray. I find it very enlightening that you fred? supporters ignore the fact that fred? actually believes that his poll numbers are a level playing field indication of his viability. fred? is like the AA ball player who brags that he has more home runs than a major leaguer. He sits outside, refusing to take the tough questions in a less than hostile environment. And even in his softball interviews, the interviewer has to lead fred? to the right answer.
BTW, who the heck is Arthur Branch? Dick Morris said that the people who are voting for fred? are really voting for Branch. Is he a possible VP if fred? gets the nod? A influential supporter? A person for the cabinet? Whoever he is, it sounds like he is more important than fred? is. Maybe that’s why I can’t get excited about the guy? Is this a fred? supporter secret and only those who donate get to know who this guy is?
csdeven on July 6, 2007 at 5:10 PM
Hollowpoint,
Once again, it’s the phrase “likely primary voters” that seems to be confusing you. There was a time when Zogby was all the rage, because he got a couple of elections in a row right. His “secret formula” for determining likely voters tuned out to be right for a couple of years, and then things changed. It is a “secret formula”, since they have to guess how likely it is that somebody will vote, and apply weights to the totals depending on the raw data from the poll. For some reason, Rasmussen’s data (and I’m extrapolating here considering the other data) implies that social conservatives are more likely to vote. I’m not sure that applies. The primary map has changed a lot in the past year, and you can expect the profile of the likely primary voter to change with it. Also, the atmosphere is fairly energized, decreasing the traditional conservative advantage in turnout. My guess is that the registered voter numbers may be as good an indicator in this climate as the “likely voters” numbers, which are based upon data from the last few elections. But then again, that’s just a guess. I do trust polls in some ways. They are good at picking up trends, but a lot of data points need to be considered to get a real feeling of what is going on. I guess you could say I trust polls but not one poll, or even a handful of them.
Also:
That’s just stupid.
Big S on July 6, 2007 at 5:14 PM
It certainly does matter. That’s why HA & others are linking to these very polls. ((I’m reminded of AP’s comment about how he liked when Fred! cracked himself up about how much money he’s saving by not announcing just yet.))
Why include someone who hasn’t announced he’s running if it doesn’t matter. It matters in the pocketbook. Some of us hold on to expenditures until the very end. Others serve the dough up as an incentive to get the guy in the ring. If he’s poll numbers weren’t good, no one in his right mind would be donating ANYTHING to Fred! now. But I’ve seen a few people around here claiming they’ve coughed up some cold hard stuff.
Sultry Beauty on July 6, 2007 at 5:17 PM
All I know is I don’t want gun control, more taxes, amnesty, or wussy military action when it comes to Jihad. Abortion is bad, but not a show stopper. What gets me is we even have to talk about gay marrage. The rest of the stuff can be offset with other virtues.
saiga on July 6, 2007 at 5:17 PM
Shortcomings aside, Fred is my favored candidate right now. For me it’s almost by default since I don’t consider Rudy, Mitt or McCain to be acceptable candidates- 2nd Amendment issues being a major factor as all three have records of being anti-gun to at least some degree. The other factor being that after 8 years of Bush, I’m not willing to take chances on someone without some conservative street cred.
Thompson has a pretty solid record on 2nd Amendment issues, as would be expected from someone with Federalist leanings.
Hollowpoint on July 6, 2007 at 5:21 PM
(Pssst. District attorney on Law and Order.)
Tennman on July 6, 2007 at 5:29 PM
Big S on July 6, 2007 at 5:14 PM
No confusion here. Just how much of a secret formula do you need to ask people “how likely are you to vote in the primary election”?
That conservatives are more likely to vote in the primaries is historical fact, and backed up by the current polls- there’s no reason to believe that’s changed, and good reason to believe that to be still true.
As for it being “stupid” to suggest someone who supports a RINO over a conservative as being a RINO… you’ve lost me. Those who support Democrats over Republicans tend to be Democrats. Those who support conservatives over moderates tend to be conservatives. And those who support RINOs over conservatives tend to be RINOs.
In any case, there’s 6 months to go before Super Tuesday, and without having even announced Fred has in a relatively short time gone from single digit support to first or second depending on which poll you believe. Unfortunately Rudy could still win it, but Fred’s chances are looking pretty good right about now.
Hollowpoint on July 6, 2007 at 5:30 PM
Hope appears to be a major factor in his support. I give him a good look because some of the jawas, and frankj & various other commenters here like him; but hope is not especially tangible.
Spirit of 1776 on July 6, 2007 at 5:34 PM
I just wish he would announce, already. This waiting is ridiculous.
jdawg on July 6, 2007 at 5:38 PM
csdeven on July 6, 2007 at 5:10 PM
Of course not – you got Fragil in your company. If you prefer her to us, be happy dude. This.Is.A.Free.Country.
On Branch and other rants, if you wouldn’t be so amusing, you’d be infuriating. I’ll still buy you that drink in San Diego, gladly :)
Entelechy on July 6, 2007 at 5:50 PM
Ok, perhaps we are not defining our terms here. What I’m trying to say is that the polls at this moment are not indicative of who is going to be the winner at the end of the primaries. Take a snapshot now. Take a snapshot on election day. I promise you the results of each poll will be far different, ipso facto arguing about the current accuracy is sort of elementary. HA links these polls because it gives us something interesting to discuss and argue about.
National polls do provide some useful elements such as right track/wrong track stats (doesn’t look good for our team right now by the way). They are somewhat helpful when scrutinizing the popularity or unpopularity of individual issues. As for the candidates though they can be very deceiving. Their deception may lead many to throw money at one candidate here or there but they don’t provide much usefullness in determining who is going to win the primaries. History proves that. The reason behind this is the fact that we don’t have a national election. That just is not how our system works.
Zetterson on July 6, 2007 at 5:57 PM
He’s another actor?
csdeven on July 6, 2007 at 6:05 PM
Sorry sweetie, I’ll be buying you that drink. ;-)
csdeven on July 6, 2007 at 6:07 PM
No, he’s as real as you are. :)
Tennman on July 6, 2007 at 6:21 PM
Ok, now I get it. I googled that name and this is the character that freddie boy played.
I agree with Dick and more importantly so does fred?. He himself said he was benefiting from his TV character. It’s clear that fred? is starting to believe his own hype and that is just another strike against his character as a person. That’s sad.
csdeven on July 6, 2007 at 6:29 PM
Hollowpoint,
Your statement that you won’t marginalize people as “RINOs” unless they vote for “RINOs” over conservatives struck me as silly. Whether you like it or not, there are moderates, and dare I say, liberals (libertarians) in the Republican party. The designation of the (R) party as conservatives is a relatively recent phenomenon. Social conservative Republicans make up maybe 30% of the electorate (if that much), so the party needs the others in order to win any kind of majority nationally. Frankly, the more moderate wing of the party gets a bit peeved at the SoCons for always threatening to throw a fit if the nominee doesn’t agree with every one of their collective policy positions. We’re already marginalized within the party, do you really want to chase us off for good? If you really think we’re at a critical point in the country’s history, maybe you should consider building the coalition rather than trying to tear it down. Ever heard of Reagan Democrats? He couldn’t have won without them.
Big S on July 6, 2007 at 6:41 PM
I know it seems impossible anyone could be this mind-bogglingly stupid, but did you know there are actually retards out there who assume he’s achieved this because of a bit part he played in a marginally popular TV show?
As crazy as it sounds, the moonbats are utterly convinced it’s everyone else BESIDES them who don’t understand the difference between fantasy and reality.
They were wrong in 1980. And I’d say the odds are pretty darned high they’re wrong this time too.
logis on July 6, 2007 at 6:48 PM
Sure. They’re called “conservatives.” And Reagan couldn’t have gotten elected, and he couldn’t have governed effectively, without us.
We just had six years of being able to support a RINO when we agreed with right around half of what he said. We weren’t perfect at it, but it was a damned hard job. We have more than earned the right to make sure that never happens again.
Now, since the 2006 elections, George Bush is a lame duck so we have no political stake in him. But, hey, look at the bright side: Bush still has all that tremendous “moderate support” he’s built up by being so wonderfully flexible.
Now, how’s that working out for him?
Newsflash: There is not now, there never has been, and there never will be such a thing as “moderate support” or “moderate opposition.” Both of those phrases are oxymorons. People with no coherent political opinion will always be followers – nothing else is possible. And trying to pretend otherwise will accomplish nothing.
logis on July 6, 2007 at 7:07 PM
Big S on July 6, 2007 at 6:41 PM
Conservative and social conservative aren’t necessarily the same thing- one can be a social moderate yet still a conservative in my view.
However, I don’t view Rudy as reliably conservative, even excluding his social views. He’s a RINO… or “moderate” if you prefer.
Bush is a social conservative, but otherwise a moderate, and therein lies the trouble- he’s not a true conservative. I’m not willing to risk another “moderate” like Rudy to push amnesty and big government down our throats.
Hollowpoint on July 6, 2007 at 7:27 PM
Yeah, I’ve seen the threads on the lefty blogs- they’re scared of him while also deriding him as an empty suit who his supporters are simply star-struck by because of his acting career. Projection from the style over substance lefty crowd I guess.
Hollowpoint on July 6, 2007 at 7:32 PM
logis on July 6, 2007 at 7:07 PM
Not everyone who voted for Reagan was a conservative. However, I do agree with you that a coalition is needed.
So Bush is a RINO? I don’t think we’ll have a more conservative President that Bush in 2009.
Many moderates do have coherent political philosophies, conservative on some issues and liberal on others. For instance, since guns and gay marriage have almost nothing to do with one another, one can have any combination of pro/con and still be consistent. We just like to pick and choose on an issue by issue basis, rather than sticking to some party platform. Who, again, are the followers?
Big S on July 6, 2007 at 7:33 PM
Right now, I need a DAM border fence. PERIOD. They (the illegals) have already ran me and my family out of one home. Only one person in this race for sure…. 110% of his soul will get the job done. That’s why Tom Tancredo got my donation and I’m hoping to send more after Iowa..
Legions on July 6, 2007 at 7:39 PM
You do realize that is what freddie boy thinks also. On the Leno show he bragged that his part in that TV show was why he was so popular. I wonder if fred? knows he is mind-bogglingly stupid?
csdeven on July 6, 2007 at 7:39 PM
Legions on July 6, 2007 at 7:39 PM
I like Tancredo as well, but I fear he’s seen as too much of a single-issue candidate, and I doubt he’ll make it through the primaries.
jdawg on July 6, 2007 at 7:42 PM
I view him as a reliable conservative on defense and terrorism, economic issues (including taxes), health care and welfare issues, education, crime and public decency, and numerous international policy areas.
I view him as moderate to liberal on immigration, gun control, abortion, and gay rights.
If you haven’t lived in New York City, and watched his battles with the liberal establishment here, you might not appreciate his attitude, but rest assured that he would not accommodate leftist silliness if he were President.
The general formula for most of his positions is more liberty plus more security. There has been some friction between these two priorities Re: gun control in the past, but overall, I don’t think that disqualifies him as a Republican.
Big S on July 6, 2007 at 7:55 PM
Either way w/b wonderful. I’d be the best drink I ever had, as I’m not that fond of them.
Entelechy on July 6, 2007 at 7:56 PM
“I think people have underestimated the number of people in this country who are interested in a freedom message”
You know, for a guy whos waaay out there, he’s right. His freedom message may take it a bit far, but i think he’s on to something here. Alot of typically apolitical citizens casually agree with SOME of what he says. Especially the youth.
Now what you have is a message, albeit an underdeveloped one, with a) a small but HARDCORE diehard base, b) an apolitical mass who in passing tends to agree with a libertarian slant, and c) a slow meltdown of the peoples trust in the 2 party system.
Now of course Paul isnt a candidate who could do anything serious, but its a powerful message at a time when something like 65% of Americans think a 3rd party could do good here. Someone should ask the official libertarian party how they plan on developing this, now that we kno Paul can raise a couple mil.
ernesto on July 6, 2007 at 8:00 PM
I’m a supporter of Mr. Thompson and I have never seen Law and Order. What is the total number of average viewers for the show anyway? I doubt that number by itself would be enough support to win the primaries. I thought it was a liberal show.
Rose on July 6, 2007 at 9:08 PM
I like Tancredo as well, but I fear he’s seen as too much of a single-issue candidate, and I doubt he’ll make it through the primaries.
jdawg on July 6, 2007 at 7:42 PM
jdawg…I agree with you….. how can I not agree with a brother at arms,.. yet I feel that this one issue can cover and solve most of the other problems we are facing as a nation..and putting together a good cabinet,..and he’ll do just fine..
Legions on July 6, 2007 at 9:21 PM
Even after six years of constant ginning, some moonbats have STILL not reached this level of apoplectic bile toward George Bush. And now it’s happened within just a couple of months with Fred Thompson.
I’ve often wondered whether, deep down inside, any of the moonbats knew that their handlers had absolutely no intention of wasting all of that time and money, and the plan had always been to transfer the scent as soon as a new conservative front-runner came about.
Obviously, even now it, would do no good to ask. But it doesn’t really matter anyway. Whether or not they know is irrelevant; I’m convinced they don’t even have the capacity to care why they’re feeling what they’re feeling.
logis on July 6, 2007 at 9:59 PM
True enough, but the fact remains that fred? has reached that level in describing himself. He brags on the fact that his TV character is what lots of people are supporting him for.
How do you square that with your accusation here:
Take it up with fred? dude. He’s the one who is suckling that teat.
csdeven on July 6, 2007 at 10:16 PM
OK, a little help here: somebody said this guy once typed something (on a different subject) that didn’t sound like something a deranged third-grader would say.
I’m going to have to ask for a link to that. Sorry, but I find it just a tiny bit hard to believe this has NOTHING to do with a head injury and/or or chemical imbalance.
Otherwise, it’s asking a bit much for me to believe that a more-or-less ordinary person instantly turns into this gibbering pile of spasmodic reflex at the mere mention of one name, but not for any other reason.
Just not buying it here.
logis on July 6, 2007 at 10:57 PM
I had the pleasure of meeting Fred at the Commonwealth Gala in Richmond Virginia on June 2nd. He is a powerful presence, and he gave a great sppech that got everyone on their feet several times. For those of you who doubt Fred, go see him in person and your worries will be allieved, I promise.
VolMagic on July 7, 2007 at 12:30 AM
logis on July 6, 2007 at 10:57 PM
That might’ve been me. Csdeven does post good common conservative sense on other threads. She just doesn’t like Fred.
VolMagic on July 7, 2007 at 12:32 AM
Still not ready for the adult table are you? Look up the word “recalcitrant”. Take.it.to.heart.
csdeven on July 7, 2007 at 1:52 AM
It means “disobediant.” So, now what? The act of proving that I know how to speak English will now magically make you stop being an egomaniacal sociopath?
Or, wait a minute…. The nutjob is trying to say that I’m not doing what he tells me to, and that somehow makes me a “child?”
Yikes.
Vol, consider my request for that link expired. There is no way you’re ever proving that point now. Don’t even bother trying.
logis on July 7, 2007 at 2:16 AM
That poor pooch!
aengus on July 7, 2007 at 3:21 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2