Fredhead poll Update: A decision coming Tuesday?

posted at 5:18 pm on January 20, 2008 by Bryan

Patrick Ruffini is running the poll, which asks two questions.

#1. If Fred drops out of the race, who will you support?

#2. If Fred drops out and endorses McCain, what impact will that have on your vote?

Before you Fredheads yell at me about this poll, consider that Fred declared that South Carolina was his stand state and he finished third there. Also consider that at some point, people have to start dropping out of the GOP race, and Fred and Huckabee are probably the most likely major candidates to drop out at this point. Huckabee because South Carolina gave him a loss on what amounted to home turf, and Fred because the evidence of Fredmentum is, sadly, scant. Reality’s teeth are getting sharper by the day.

If I had my druthers, Fred would stay in, we would go to a brokered convention and Fred would end up on the ticket. But my druthers don’t seem to be accounting for much these days.

Update: Carl Cameron says there may be a decision coming Tuesday.

As we have previously reported Fred Thomspon is in Tennessee visiting his 90 plus year old mother who is recovering from an illness

There will be no decisions today as Thompson mulls whether to carry on his bid for the presidency but he is expected to say something definitive tomorrow, probably first thing in the morning.

While no one in the campaign will be surprised if he withdraws they have no idea which way he will go and they do have some money if he should decide to continue.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 10 11 12 13

SWEET!

tickleddragon on January 21, 2008 at 12:50 PM

If Fred is still in (I’d like to see how well he does in a closed primary) then I’m still with Fred. If Fred drops out, then I’m supporting Foamy the Squirrel.

Browncoatone on January 21, 2008 at 12:50 PM

To answer Patrick’s questions:

I can’t really say right now what I’ll do by the time the Texas Primary comes around.

1) Even if Fred has dropped out, I may write him in but that will probably depend on how the delegate votes are distributed.

2) My second choice would be Romney over McCain. I’m not really that concerned about McCain being able to implement his McCain-Kennedy Bill because he can’t do that without the Legislature. The way to stop that, regardless of whom in the Whitehouse, is to work to take back the Senate and restore the lost House seats.

For me national security is the primary issue and will continue to be during the next presidential term regardless of who is in the Whitehouse.

We’re in for a long fight against an ideology that wants to destroy us as a Nation. That’s not going away. When it comes down to a choice between Romney and McCain on that issue it seems that McCain gets the nod from the majority of GOP supporters and he’s very successfully ridden the wave of the surge in Iraq by claiming he was right and Rummy was wrong, therefore, McCain was right and Bush was wrong. But I don’t buy into that and I think those that do aren’t acknowledging the fact that it wasn’t just the increase of boots on the ground that turned the tide, it was the COIN strategy developed and implemented by Petraeus. McCain is taking credit and being given credit for a success in Iraq that he did not foresee. Bush (and Rumsfeld) turned Iraq around by sending Petraeus to Ft. Leavenworth after his 1st command in Iraq where he wrote the COIN strategy and then brought him back to implement it. McCain had nothing to do with that. Furthermore, McCain alone stood in the way of the war funding bill last year insisting that his amendment on torture be attached because the “world” would never believe that the USA doesn’t torture captured enemy combatants unless Bush signs the bill forbidding him to do so. That was McCain subverting the authority of the CiC in time of war. Did the ‘world’ change their minds? No, but McCain sure seems to be more concerned about what the ‘world’ thinks than our country’s national security. Now, he says he’s going to close Gitmo on his 1st day in office. I don’t support that and I don’t think most Americans do. Again, he wants to close Gitmo because of ‘world’ opinion. I don’t really care what the world thinks. So when I answer the question of on January 21, 2009 I wake up to find that Musharraf is dead and the radicals in Pakistan are in charge of their nuclear arsenal, I’m afraid that McCain will be more concerned about what the ‘world’ will think and not turn our nuclear arsenal towards Pakistan. I don’t doubt that Fred would and I tend to believe that Mitt would too, but I truly doubt McCain especially when I remember that he was being considered by John Kerry as not only a VP candidate but also the Secretary of Defense in a Kerry Administration.

In addition, I do think the next national priority behind national security is going to be the economy and Romney wins that for me too when I match him up against McCain. I think both will work to hold down pending. I think all the GOP candidates learned that lesson. But I don’t trust McCain on his switch on the Bush tax cuts. I think he would be too concerned about placating the Democrats in a compromise and I don’t think Romney would do that. Actually, my biggest concern about McCain is that he would be too willing to “work with the Democrats” on all the important legislation and selection of judges, especially if Justice Stevens’ seat becomes available during the next term.

Texas Gal on January 21, 2008 at 12:51 PM

FRED/FOAMY 08!

tickleddragon on January 21, 2008 at 12:51 PM

malan89 on January 21, 2008 at 12:50 PM

In this case, I hope you’re right. Mitt is prime rib compared to McCain.

MadisonConservative on January 21, 2008 at 12:51 PM

Buy Danish on January 21, 2008 at 12:43 PM

Looks like the devotees are back in force “Captain Irony”. guess I’ll see you in another thread sometime.

Best regards from “Captain Troll”

Bradky on January 21, 2008 at 12:49 PM

Yes, you two are a couple of Band of Brother candidates.
(and look, you’ve passed more gas)

geckomon on January 21, 2008 at 12:51 PM

must shall

Er, strike “must.” It’s a loose paraphrase of a passage from 1 Timothy, I believe.

fourstringfuror on January 21, 2008 at 12:52 PM

In this case, I hope you’re right. Mitt is prime rib compared to McCain.

MadisonConservative on January 21, 2008 at 12:51 PM

Agreed, on that.

tickleddragon on January 21, 2008 at 12:52 PM

If Fred drops out, then I’m supporting Foamy the Squirrel.

I don’t see what’s so funny about that. It’s just some random guy ranting. Tossing around the F-bomb and making your voice sound higher does not make something funny.

malan89 on January 21, 2008 at 12:53 PM

I would love to see everyone go here: speak out vote matchanswer the questions on the issues, then post the results. After answering my positions on the issues it listed me perfectly to my top 3 candidates. I would be curious to know if others feel it is accurate in who they are voting for. Thoughts?

lan astaslem on January 21, 2008 at 12:54 PM

geckomon on January 21, 2008 at 12:45 PM

You are quite preoccupied with topics that involve poopy talk aren’t you? How very Pre-K.

MadisonConservative on January 21, 2008 at 12:47 PM

I made no error by paraphrasing you, as there is no discernible difference between saying that McCain “wants” to do something he won’t do versus saying he “would” do something he won’t do.

Maybe I’ll call you Madame MadisonC since you’re peddling your skills as a psychic.

Buy Danish on January 21, 2008 at 12:54 PM

I don’t see what’s so funny about that. It’s just some random guy ranting. Tossing around the F-bomb and making your voice sound higher does not make something funny.

malan89 on January 21, 2008 at 12:53 PM

It’s just a joke, Hon.

tickleddragon on January 21, 2008 at 12:55 PM

I only think a small, small percentage of uneducated evangelicals wouldn’t vote for somebody because he is a Mormon.

Unfortunately, with as close as the elections have been in recent years that small percentage may very well mean Mitt’s defeat in the general election.

Icky prediction: Romney (eventually) pulls the Republican nomination. Hillary (by virtue of more super delegates) pulls the Democratic nod. Mayor Bloomberg enters the race under the Unity Party and pulls more votes from Mitt than from the Beast, leaving us with Evita the Marxist for president.

Browncoatone on January 21, 2008 at 12:55 PM

there is no discernible difference between saying that McCain “wants” to do something he won’t do versus saying he “would” do something he won’t do.

Buy Danish on January 21, 2008 at 12:54 PM

Except your paraphrase claimed I said what he “wouldn’t” do.

Figured you were a moral relativist.

MadisonConservative on January 21, 2008 at 12:56 PM

windansea on January 21, 2008 at 12:39 PM

Evangelical conservative is the same as any other conservative. Against big government and high taxes, favors less government spending. Supporting life and the family are also hallmarks of the conservative movement. Let’s just say that ALL christians are basically evangelicals.

myamphibian on January 21, 2008 at 12:57 PM

I’m gonna start taking bets that we can push this sucker to 2000 posts.

MadisonConservative on January 21, 2008 at 12:58 PM

I would love to see everyone go here: speak out vote matchanswer the questions on the issues, then post the results. After answering my positions on the issues it listed me perfectly to my top 3 candidates. I would be curious to know if others feel it is accurate in who they are voting for. Thoughts?

lan astaslem on January 21, 2008 at 12:54 PM

My results. I don’t think any quiz can accurately gauge who you support, but here ya go.

malan89 on January 21, 2008 at 12:58 PM

You are quite preoccupied with topics that involve poopy talk aren’t you? How very Pre-K.
Buy Danish on January 21, 2008 at 12:54 PM

Looking thru prisms much?

geckomon on January 21, 2008 at 12:59 PM

Let me know when y’all are done arguing. I’d like to talk about Fred Thompson one of these days.

fourstringfuror on January 21, 2008 at 12:59 PM

Evangelical conservative is the same as any other conservative

Don’t make me take a trip to Theresville.

It’s just a joke, Hon.

tickleddragon on January 21, 2008 at 12:55 PM

I get that and IMHO it isn’t very funny.

malan89 on January 21, 2008 at 1:00 PM

Mad, I’d love to help push the thread to 2000, but I’ve GOT to get away from this computer.

I was just checking in when I got sucked into the negativity. (thanks again fsf for pulliing me out.)

Y’all have a wonderful day, and I’ll see you again in a while.

tickleddragon on January 21, 2008 at 1:01 PM

THIS IS SOOO TRUE!
Subject: Fwd: Democracy time-line

About the time our original thirteen states adopted their new constitution in 1787, Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinburgh , had this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some 2,000 years earlier:

“A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always vote for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.”

“The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations from the beginning of history has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, those nations always progressed through the following sequence:

1. From bondage to spiritual faith;

2. From spiritual faith to great courage;

3. From courage to liberty;

4. From liberty to abundance;

5. From abundance to complacency;

6. From complacency to apathy;

7. From apathy to dependence;

8. From dependence back into bondage”

Professor Joseph Olson of Hamline University School of Law, St. Paul , Minnesota , points out some interesting facts concerning the 2000 Presidential election:

Population of counties won by: Gore: 127 million; Bush: 43 million

Square miles of land won by: Gore: 580,000; Bush: 2,427,000

States won by: Gore: 19; Bush: 29

Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by:

Gore: 13.2; Bush: 2.1

Professor Olson adds: “In aggregate, the map of the territory Bush won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of this great country. Gore’s territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in government-owned tenements and living off various forms of government welfare…”

Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the “complacency and apathy” phase of Professor Tyler’s definition of democracy, with some forty percent of the nation’s population already having reached the “governmental dependency” phase.

If Congress grants amnesty and citizenship to twenty million criminal invaders called illegals and they vote, then goodbye to the USA in fewer than five years.

Pass this along to help everyone realize just how much is at stake, knowing that apathy is the greatest danger to our freedom.

kcd on January 21, 2008 at 1:01 PM

malan89 on January 21, 2008 at 1:00 PM

I got that. But what can you say? Different strokes, Love.

Ciao!

tickleddragon on January 21, 2008 at 1:01 PM

My results. I don’t think any quiz can accurately gauge who you support, but here ya go.

malan89 on January 21, 2008 at 12:58 PM

Hmmm.

SECOND LOOK AT JOHN COX!

MadisonConservative on January 21, 2008 at 1:02 PM

kcd on January 21, 2008 at 1:01 PM

I get enough e-mail passarounds in my inbox. I don’t need somebody posting them to comment threads.

malan89 on January 21, 2008 at 1:02 PM

MadisonConservative on January 21, 2008 at 12:56 PM

Sheesh. I said he wouldn’t do it because it is kooky to think that he would! The paraphrase was over the use of the word “want” versus “would”.

You are doing a great job of getting tangled up in a brier patch. Maybe Farmer Fred will come and rescue you.

Buy Danish on January 21, 2008 at 1:02 PM

I don’t see what’s so funny about that. It’s just some random guy ranting. Tossing around the F-bomb and making your voice sound higher does not make something funny.

malan89 on January 21, 2008 at 12:53 PM

Actually, I just like Foamy’s position on the issues. Better than the grab the guns, pro abortion, higher taxes, nanny state, open borders, cross dressing, and flip flopping that I see with the rest of the Republican field.

Browncoatone on January 21, 2008 at 1:03 PM

MC sez: Spite, meet my nose.
csdeven on January 21, 2008 at 12:06 PM

You’ve said that 20 or 30 times and I still don’t know what the hell you’re trying to say.

MadisonConservative on January 21, 2008 at 12:11 PM

No $hit. Tell the group something we don’t know.

The clue for you is in this comment by you after having the concept of “the lesser of two evils” explained several times.

Great logic. You either have to vote for a socialist republican, vote for a dem and be labeled a socialist, or not vote at all and be labeled a socialist.

You are in stage 4 of kubler-ross.

csdeven on January 21, 2008 at 1:03 PM

Texas Gal on January 21, 2008 at 12:51 PM

Texas, thanks for the cogent, adult argument. I like your thinking. Frankly, I had forgotten that Kerry was considering the Mav for a running mate. And I wasn’t aware that McCain said he would close Gitmo on his first day of his presidency.

Scary man. I hope the conservative base wakes up and smells the coffee!

Tennman on January 21, 2008 at 1:03 PM

Didn’t they just take a poll which said that 57% of Christians wouldn’t vote for a Mormon? Other posters who have been evangelicals echoed that sentiment. I like Mitt, but I think his faith would hurt him too much.

MadisonConservative on January 21, 2008 at 12:44 PM

I must comment. I was in Michigan when Romney’s father was governor. I do not remember any backlash to his religion and that was before political correctness, when church bells rang loud and the Bible Belt was greatly feared by outsiders. That is why I suspect the polls on this. I do not even remember political opponents using the religion after the Romney’s dad was in office.

Here is a clue: where is the history of backlash against Mitt Romney’s Mormonism in the state of Massachusetts?

Religious people supporting Huckabee will sound alarms because they want Huck to win.

Some religious people not supporting Huckabee will reject Romney.

But MSM polls warning us of Romney’s terrible burden are to be trusted like a rattlesnake hiding in your boot.

entagor on January 21, 2008 at 1:04 PM

SECOND LOOK AT JOHN COX!

MadisonConservative on January 21, 2008 at 1:02 PM

How did they even find a place to gather that guy’s positons?

malan89 on January 21, 2008 at 1:04 PM

You are in stage 4 of kubler-ross.

csdeven on January 21, 2008 at 1:03 PM

Claim all you want, but that is the choice you put up. You label someone a socialist for refusing to vote. And they call Ronulans nuts…

MadisonConservative on January 21, 2008 at 1:04 PM

kcd on January 21, 2008 at 1:01 PM

Interesting. Post a source or link. That is if it’s not another email.

geckomon on January 21, 2008 at 1:05 PM

where is the history of backlash against Mitt Romney’s Mormonism in the state of Massachusetts?

I see your point, but their aren’t any evangelical megachurches in Boston.

malan89 on January 21, 2008 at 1:05 PM

SECOND LOOK AT JOHN COX!

MadisonConservative on January 21, 2008 at 1:02 PM

Ditto.

fourstringfuror on January 21, 2008 at 1:05 PM

Let’s just say that ALL christians are basically evangelicals.

hardly

brak on January 21, 2008 at 1:06 PM

I see your point, but their there (sorry about that) aren’t any evangelical megachurches in Boston.

malan89 on January 21, 2008 at 1:05 PM

malan89 on January 21, 2008 at 1:06 PM

kcd on January 21, 2008 at 1:01 PM

I give you an nice pass this time….

but where in the heel did you get that link?

Link please……

Thank you.

Mcguyver on January 21, 2008 at 1:06 PM

csdeven on January 21, 2008 at 1:03 PM

Incorrect. Your analogy only holds true if MC actually cast a vote for a democrat.

You are just spinning all the ways that you want your analogy to fit.

geckomon on January 21, 2008 at 1:07 PM

kcd on January 21, 2008 at 1:01 PM

Snopes on this guy’s passaround.

malan89 on January 21, 2008 at 1:08 PM

Obama up on Hillary ten points in SC…wow.

malan89 on January 21, 2008 at 1:09 PM

Looking thru prisms much?

geckomon on January 21, 2008 at 12:59 PM

Nope, just looking at your gross comments. Like this:

You crap em out like diarrhea.
Spew all you want, it’s your mess.
geckomon on January 21, 2008 at 11:26 AM

Buy Danish on January 21, 2008 at 1:09 PM

Looking thru prisms much?

geckomon on January 21, 2008 at 12:59 PM

She is an utter psycho, dude. She creates dossiers on every poster who deigns to disagree with her, and carries over everything from all time in order to discredit her opponent.

I’m thinking she’s a scientologist.

MadisonConservative on January 21, 2008 at 1:12 PM

mind-numbed zealot,
tickleddragon on January 21, 2008 at 12:13 PM

No one thinks you’re a mind numbed zealot. But you are clearly in denial because Fred is done and you refuse to accept it. I would expect a lessening of the Fred worship in light of his total failure as a candidate.

Remember the claim by some that this behavior by Fred was explained as “waiting in the weeds”? Talk about denial. And here we are just a few months later and it’s obvious that this was not a “waiting in the weeds” strategy. He had no passion to win the race and I think he actually believed the hype that he would just be coronated the conservative nominee.

This is what Fred is and the stubborn hanging on by the Fredheads is admirable, but clearly not based in any real examination of said facts. Some would call that zealotry. I think it is simply an understandable reluctance to accept the inevitable.

csdeven on January 21, 2008 at 1:12 PM

Buy Danish on January 21, 2008 at 1:09 PM

I apologize. . . that you aren’t able to conceptualize an out of control, waste material regurgitation analogy. To you, it’s just a poop joke. That is being pre-K.

Come back when you can participate with advanced thought process.

geckomon on January 21, 2008 at 1:13 PM

I give you an nice pass this time….

but where in the heel did you get that link?

Link please……

Thank you.

Mcguyver on January 21, 2008 at 1:06 PM

Sorry Mcguyver, no link. Got that from a friend in the Marine corp. I don’t post things like that usually, but I had been reading childish arguments on this post for about 15 minutes, thought we needed to be reminded what is at stake here.

kcd on January 21, 2008 at 1:16 PM

I’m thinking she’s a scientologist.

And we’re all SPs. KSW, baby, KSW.

BTW, Johnny Damon is stumping for Rudy in Florida.

malan89 on January 21, 2008 at 1:16 PM

“I liked Fred but he did a lousy job campaigning and just didn’t catch on as I hoped. Oh well, as Fred said the country is what is most important so let’s fight the good fight for the party nominee”

But I’m not holding my breath….

Bradky on January 21, 2008 at 12:16 PM

To be fair many have, but you’re right, we have many who just refuse to see it.

csdeven on January 21, 2008 at 1:16 PM

I’m thinking she’s a scientologist.

MadisonConservative on January 21, 2008 at 1:12 PM

Stop jumping on the couch BD.

geckomon on January 21, 2008 at 1:17 PM

MadisonConservative on January 21, 2008 at 1:12 PM

Lol. More kooky statements from you! I created a “dossier” on geckoman?

You all it a dossier if I take a comment from this thread, and refer to it? What are the kook rules, MadameC?

Is this it?

History always begins this morning for liberals; it begins with every new comment for you.

Buy Danish on January 21, 2008 at 1:17 PM

Link please…

I posted a link to the Snopes article on it a few posts up.

malan89 on January 21, 2008 at 1:17 PM

I repeat, for the umpteenth time, the GOP cares about staying in office, not about what is best for the country. Just because they have a nominee does not mean they are a good candidate for president.

McCain would prove this.

MadisonConservative on January 21, 2008 at 1:18 PM

Every American voter needs to watch this!

Browncoatone on January 21, 2008 at 1:18 PM

I don’t see what’s so funny about that. It’s just some random guy ranting. Tossing around the F-bomb and making your voice sound higher does not make something funny.

malan89 on January 21, 2008 at 12:53 PM

Because Foamy speaks the wisdom of the ages.

It is not funny because he says the f word. It is funny because it is a squirrel that has more intelligence and perception than your typical P.C. politician.

He is the “Oracle of Foamphi”

TheSitRep on January 21, 2008 at 1:18 PM

Let’s just say that ALL christians are basically evangelicals.

This entirely depends on your definition of evangelism. Let’s not forget what the word means – “good news” (as delivered by a messenger – hence “angel.”)

By virtue of the Great Commission, all Christians are commanded to evangelize (Jesus even gives examples). Sharing the good news of Christ is something all Christians are asked to do.

However, the word “Evangelical” was created by some media snob somewhere along the way and applied in a very poor manner, as an adjective to describe less ‘mainstream’ Christians.

In short, there is a big difference between an evangelical Christian (oxymoronic, if you think about it) and an Evangelical. Unfortunately, nearly all the media, and a great many commenters here, will never learn the difference.

fourstringfuror on January 21, 2008 at 1:19 PM

Buy Danish on January 21, 2008 at 1:17 PM

As well as me, Entelechy, r2b, and all the others whom you have dragged old grievances into thread over.

Don’t worry. Xenu won’t get you. LRH will save your ass for only $100K.

MadisonConservative on January 21, 2008 at 1:20 PM

Come back when you can participate with advanced thought process.

geckomon on January 21, 2008 at 1:13 PM

You think that discussing diarrhea in gross detail indicates an advanced thought process?

Dude. I’m speechless. But not for long!

/later.

Buy Danish on January 21, 2008 at 1:20 PM

I’m speechless.

Buy Danish on January 21, 2008 at 1:20 PM

If you were, the site would be better.

MadisonConservative on January 21, 2008 at 1:23 PM

Buy Danish on January 21, 2008 at 1:20 PM

Stuck.

geckomon on January 21, 2008 at 1:23 PM

MadisonConservative on January 21, 2008 at 1:20 PM

I am grievance free, Madame, but if you make an idiotic, kooky, vile, hypocritical, or gross comment I under no obligation to remain silent about it.

I might add that for someone who claims to value free speech, you do a poor job of showing it.

Tant pis.

Buy Danish on January 21, 2008 at 1:24 PM

You think that discussing diarrhea in gross detail indicates an advanced thought process?

Dude. I’m speechless. But not for long!

/later.

Buy Danish on January 21, 2008 at 1:20 PM

Weak analysis: She thinks I was discussing diarrhea in detail. BD you are incapable of being honest.

geckomon on January 21, 2008 at 1:25 PM

Buy Danish on January 21, 2008 at 1:24 PM

Here’s another one:

Artificial outrage!

geckomon on January 21, 2008 at 1:26 PM

fourstringfuror on January 21, 2008 at 1:19 PM

To clarify, so as not to start a theological argument, The Great Commission is not only a command, it’s something that Christians will want to do, out of love and respect for their Savior.

Anyway, the point of my post was Evangelicals, as defined by the weak-stream media, do not exist. It is merely an attempt to marginalize a large segment of society by creating a name for them. Once you objectify someone (or several someones) it because much easier to denigrate them.

fourstringfuror on January 21, 2008 at 1:26 PM

Buy Danish on January 21, 2008 at 1:24 PM

Thought you were speechless. So now can I call you out on that every post as a liar?

Thing is, I won’t. It’s the kind of thing you would do.

MadisonConservative on January 21, 2008 at 1:26 PM

Texas, thanks for the cogent, adult argument. I like your thinking. Frankly, I had forgotten that Kerry was considering the Mav for a running mate. And I wasn’t aware that McCain said he would close Gitmo on his first day of his presidency.
Scary man. I hope the conservative base wakes up and smells the coffee!
Tennman on January 21, 2008 at 1:03 PM

I would hope so too Tennman, but I’m not witnessing it and that scares me!

What will McCain really do about Iran?

And do any of the McCain supporters have any idea who his likely VP choice would actually be? It’s going to have to be someone young enough to step into his shoes.

Frankly, I’ve got strong concerns about the McCain-Huckabee lovefest that is emerging today.

Texas Gal on January 21, 2008 at 1:27 PM

MadisonConservative on January 21, 2008 at 1:26 PM

Overwhelming evidence.

geckomon on January 21, 2008 at 1:28 PM

I was just telling a friend about the suggestion that Fred had entered the race with the intention to become buddy McCain’s VP running mate, and he had a great insight.

My Friend said that would explain a lot, because Fred would serve as a spoiler. Fred’s split the conservative votes with Huckabee in North Carolina giving it to McCain

Mccain 33
Huck 30
Thompson 16

Hmmmm

entagor on January 21, 2008 at 1:32 PM

oops

My Friend said that would explain a lot, because Fred would serve as a spoiler. Fred’s split the conservative votes with Huckabee in North South Carolina giving it to McCain

sorry

entagor on January 21, 2008 at 1:33 PM

Texas Gal on January 21, 2008 at 1:27 PM

I think ChrisM on January 21, 2008 at 12:36 PM Had a grounding statement about the Republican primaries as of today.

geckomon on January 21, 2008 at 1:34 PM

Every American voter needs to watch this!

Browncoatone on January 21, 2008 at 1:18 PM

Wow that was cool.

Man, that guy is the master of the “Old Shool Power Point”!

TheSitRep on January 21, 2008 at 1:36 PM

Tossing around the F-bomb and making your voice sound higher does not make something funny.

malan89 on January 21, 2008 at 12:53 PM

I have to agree. The foamy the squirrel rant was disturbing. I listened to 25 seconds or so. Did it get any better?

csdeven on January 21, 2008 at 1:37 PM

csdeven on January 21, 2008 at 1:37 PM

I was not amused as well. Don’t know what a Foamy Squirrel is and from that, don’t care to.

geckomon on January 21, 2008 at 1:40 PM

Mayor Bloomberg enters the race under the Unity Party and pulls more votes from Mitt than from the Beast, leaving us with Evita the Marxist for president.

Browncoatone on January 21, 2008 at 12:55 PM

That’s interesting. Which rep candidate would prevent it?

csdeven on January 21, 2008 at 1:41 PM

fourstringfuror on January 21, 2008 at 1:26 PM

Exactly! And that is an important distinction to make. I think the media will stop at nothing to divide conservatives . But they misunderestimate us.

Fred/Rudy 08

myamphibian on January 21, 2008 at 1:42 PM

Fred’s proven that he can win using one-on-one tactics and moving through the grassroots.

If he stays in, he needs another stellar debate performance and the netroots and grassroots are gonna have to hammer in Florida.

Sir Andrew on January 21, 2008 at 1:43 PM

csdeven on January 21, 2008 at 1:41 PM

Does the Bloomberg factor still have momentum?

geckomon on January 21, 2008 at 1:43 PM

Let me know when y’all are done arguing. I’d like to talk about Fred Thompson one of these days.

fourstringfuror on January 21, 2008 at 12:59 PM

Start talking. They don’t control this thread.

csdeven on January 21, 2008 at 1:44 PM

lan astaslem on January 21, 2008 at 12:54 PM

*sigh* Here we go again. It was over a year ago when I originally complained about this “bug” in HotAir’s nickname selection process — when this other “lan astaslem” first showed up. I have changed my nickname to include capital letters — to help lessen the confusion. I have begged that something be done about this, to no avail. So, “other lan astaslem” — would you please, please consider changing your nickname so that there are not two of us here? I don’t have any beef with your comments or anything, but I really hate logging on here and seeing my “name” next to something I did not say. Thank you!

Lan Astaslem on January 21, 2008 at 1:45 PM

Maybe I’ll call you Madame MadisonC since you’re peddling your skills as a psychic.–Buy Danish on January 21, 2008 at 12:54 PM

This from the gal who bases her opinion on her opinion and refers to a classical conservative as a moonbat. LOL

There are 50 states in this union.

To those who prefer Thompson’s candidacy, chest your value cards in this high stakes primary game. Don’t rush the timing for considerations. The leverage point now is to support the conservative platform that is yours.

maverick muse on January 21, 2008 at 1:45 PM

lan astaslem on January 21, 2008 at 12:54 PM

BTW, thanks for the link to the quiz. Interesting… and it turned out pretty much the way I expected!

Lan Astaslem on January 21, 2008 at 1:48 PM

Your analogy only holds true if MC actually cast a vote for a democrat.

You are just spinning all the ways that you want your analogy to fit.

geckomon on January 21, 2008 at 1:07 PM

Keep telling yourself that.

csdeven on January 21, 2008 at 1:50 PM

kcd on January 21, 2008 at 1:16 PM

Thanks a bunch!

I got the link. I have recorded it on one of my blogs for posterity.

Mcguyver on January 21, 2008 at 1:51 PM

Keep telling yourself that.

csdeven on January 21, 2008 at 1:50 PM

You can do better than that. I’m really rooting for you. How do you explain me then?

How am I spiteful?

geckomon on January 21, 2008 at 1:52 PM

Every American voter needs to watch this!

Browncoatone on January 21, 2008 at 1:18 PM

Good vid. Scary, though.

Start talking. TheyWe don’t control this thread.

csdeven on January 21, 2008 at 1:44 PM

Get off the pedestal.

MadisonConservative on January 21, 2008 at 1:56 PM

I took this quiz.
I’m a little mad. I scored 35 which sucks because I hate Bob Dole.

CABE on January 21, 2008 at 1:57 PM

think ChrisM on January 21, 2008 at 12:36 PM Had a grounding statement about the Republican primaries as of today.

geckomon on January 21, 2008 at 1:34 PM

Thanks for the link, too many comments on this thread to read thur all of them.

Chris might be right, but you have to factor in the momentum that has been created by the moving of some primary/caucus dates. That was their intent in moving their dates and now with 24/7 cable news cycles .. I’m afraid those two impacts need to be factored in.

Texas Gal on January 21, 2008 at 2:00 PM

I took this quiz.
I’m a little mad. I scored 35 which sucks because I hate Bob Dole.

CABE on January 21, 2008 at 1:57 PM

You gotta be kidding me…

Which do you trust more:

The Pentagon or
The U.S. Postal Service?

The executive branch or
The legislative branch?

The FBI or
The IRS?

I can’t answer these.

MadisonConservative on January 21, 2008 at 2:04 PM

Texas Gal on January 21, 2008 at 2:00 PM

Strategies need to be implemented. Kinda like the advent of the televised debate. Say, the polished look of Kennedy to the ghostly look of Nixon.

Now it’s the Quick Draw McGraw/ instant soundbite strategy.

geckomon on January 21, 2008 at 2:05 PM

geckomon on January 21, 2008 at 1:52 PM

Here is how I see it. A protest vote (or no a vote)against the GOP is the same as a vote for the dems. This gives Hillary two liberal activist justices on the SCOTUS. This will do more damage to her conservative values than anything a so-called RINO would do. Except for HuckaGibot. He is a liberal.

csdeven on January 21, 2008 at 2:05 PM

I’m afraid those two impacts need to be factored in.

Texas Gal on January 21, 2008 at 2:00 PM

I’m not suggesting we ignore the momentum/media buzz from the first contests, I simply wanted to remind everyone that the Republican primary race is just about to begin.
I really hope Fred can stay in long enough to be tested in a Republican only contest, and no, I don’t think he will win Florida, but I believe he will spank the hell out of Mullahbee.

ChrisM on January 21, 2008 at 2:07 PM

MadisonConservative on January 21, 2008 at 2:04 PM

The questions were unbalanced.

There was a True or False question: “The religious right is a threat to our political system.” If I put True it would have affected my score and made me more liberal. I just think Huckabee supporters are a threat to our system. That shouldn’t make me liberal.

CABE on January 21, 2008 at 2:10 PM

Here is how I see it. A protest vote (or no a vote)against the GOP is the same as a vote for the dems.

csdeven on January 21, 2008 at 2:05 PM

Precisely(I struck out what seemed to be a typo). That’s frightening.

MadisonConservative on January 21, 2008 at 2:10 PM

FRED SHOULD SKIP FLORIDA AND HIT SUPER DUPER TUESDAY BIG.
ONE MORE SHOT FOR A TRUE CONSERVATIVE.
FREDHEADS WOULD BACK THAT BIG TIME.

jimmer on January 21, 2008 at 2:19 PM

How about just letting us vote for Fred that is who we want ?

William Amos on January 21, 2008 at 2:22 PM

i say Fed stay in till the end and use your delegates to get CONSERVATIVE values into the party agenda

William Amos on January 21, 2008 at 2:23 PM

Get off the pedestal.

MadisonConservative on January 21, 2008 at 1:56 PM

Grow up and control yourself.

csdeven on January 21, 2008 at 2:26 PM

Grow up and control yourself.

csdeven on January 21, 2008 at 2:26 PM

Cute. I’ve pointed out your “Vote Republican no matter what or you’re a socialist” logic, and it’s annoyed you? Then I point out that you exclude yourself from this bit of ad hominem that you have been taking part in, and you respond by taking another part in it?

Very cute. Do you do children’s parties?

MadisonConservative on January 21, 2008 at 2:28 PM

Texas Gal on January 21, 2008 at 12:51 PM

Great reminder of why McCain doesn’t deserve a vote. He’s great on some things, like refusing to throw in the towel on Iraq. But that’s destroyed by all the other ways he undercut the president in a time of war. All of which looked to be geared towards making himself appeal to moderates and liberals when he ran for president. I have no use for someone who lets his ambition to be president undermine the good of the country.

tom on January 21, 2008 at 2:28 PM

Now it’s the Quick Draw McGraw/ instant soundbite strategy.
geckomon on January 21, 2008 at 2:05 PM

You got that RI G H T ! … :-(

I’m not suggesting we ignore the momentum/media buzz from the first contests, I simply wanted to remind everyone that the Republican primary race is just about to begin.
I really hope Fred can stay in long enough to be tested in a Republican only contest, and no, I don’t think he will win Florida, but I believe he will spank the hell out of Mullahbee.
ChrisM on January 21, 2008 at 2:07 PM

Don’t get me wrong Chris, I do think you are right about Fred staying in long enough to be in a Republican only contest. I’ve said before, somewhere around here, that I think Fred will do great in Texas, if he can stay in that long.

As to FL, like you, I don’t look for Fred to do very much. However, I do know a lot of staunch conservatives in FL who are very upset about the illegal problem. On the other hand, they did elect Jeb Bush who wears his religion on his sleeve just like Huckabee. So I’m not counting him out down there. Then there are the snowbirds who will probably go to Rudy. That’s what makes FL such a key state it’s diversity.

I want Fred to stay in at least until Super Tuesday!

Texas Gal on January 21, 2008 at 2:31 PM

csdeven on January 21, 2008 at 2:26 PM

Hmmm… a paragon of comment self control.

ChrisM on January 21, 2008 at 2:32 PM

Comment pages: 1 10 11 12 13