Fred Thompson has a Ball in Alabama
Posted by BrianState Rep. Mike Ball, that is.
Presidential campaign newcomer Fred Thompson is moving faster than any other candidate to attract well-known Alabama Republicans who want to be his delegates to the Republican National Convention.
Thompson’s delegates include one former John McCain supporter.
“He seems to be in touch with common folks. He’s down to earth,” said Rep. Mike Ball, R-Huntsville, who had been Madison County chairman for McCain.
The Alabama Republican Party opened qualifying last month for people who want to be elected delegates for a candidate at the party convention next September. While it’s still early in the qualifying process, more people have signed up to be Thompson delegates than all other candidates combined.
Besides Waggoner and Ball, people who have signed up to run as Thompson delegates include: state Sens. Larry Dixon of Montgomery and Hank Erwin of Montevallo; state Reps. Jay Love and Greg Wren, both of Montgomery; and former state Republican Party Chairman Elbert Peters of Huntsville.
Ball was wise to jump ship from McCain’s campaign and Cam Ward should do the same. But I personally don’t think Thompson is the horse to win the election. I think he can win the primary, but I don’t see him winning the general election. The anti Iraq war sentiment is just too strong for a candidate who will be viewed as Bush redux. Additionally, I don’t believe Thompson’s conservative bona fides are enough to really excite lethargic voters. He supported the McCain-Feingold assault on political speech and he isn’t looking like the savior of social conservatives with his sporadic church attendance and spotty memory about one of the biggest causes célèbres for social conservatives of the last five years, the Terri Shiavo case.
I personally believe that the two most likely Republicans to win in the general election are Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee - two substantially differing candidates. Paul’s principled opposition to the Iraq War would cut the legs out from under any Democrat candidate. The Republican faithful would almost certainly vote for him over Clinton/Obama/Edwards and he would also pick up a sizable portion of libertarian and moderate Democrats who oppose the war, but don’t want to have to put a big government Democrat in office. Even though Paul wouldn’t be an advocate for imposing certain religious policies, he is a devout Christian who vehemently opposes abortion and has been faithfully married to just one woman. Apply that conservative litmus test to the other Republican candidates.
Huckabee offers an altogether different dynamic. He would never be confused with Paul on questions concerning the size and scope of government, but he is a rock solid social conservative who could undoubtedly spark that segment of the base more than any other candidate. But he has two other things going for him that I think give him an advantage: humor and a big idea. Huckabee’s comfortable, kind demeanor and sharp wit are viciously effective at disarming opposition. His down to earth personality and background would also serve to blunt the class warfare tactics that Democrats would use effectively against a big money candidate like Romney. Huckabee’s big idea is the FairTax. Every candidate needs an issue that excites voters and I think this is one. It’s infectious. Once you learn the particulars of it you realize that it is a “no brainer” that will dramatically shift the balance of power in this country from politicians and their lobbyists to average Americans.
Other than Paul (who champions the novel concept of freedom) and Huckabee, no Republican candidate has offered any big ideas. Don’t forget that Newt Gingrich ushered in the Republican Revolution not by meekly mouthing safe Republican talking points and playing defense against the Democrats, but by boldly proposing ideas that energized voters. Such a move is essential, in my opinion, to keeping a Republican in the White House after Bush goes back to Crawford.
Related content:
September 16th, 2007 at 6:18 pm
I must be right if I’m on the same side as Mike Ball.
I went to Fred’s Homecoming in Lawrenceburg TN (saw Elbert and Mrs. Melba, got a cool ballcap and some Fred08 stickers). The place was packed (IMO 8,000 but I’ve seen crowd estimates of 15,000). Lots of ‘Welcome Home Fred’ signs. Lawrenceburg is proud of Fred, I drove through there a year or so ago and they had signs back then saying ‘home of Sen. Thompson’.
John Rich (Big and Rich) was the emcee, Reps. Zach Wamp and Marsha Blackburn spoke, then Lt. Gov. Ramsey, then Sen. Howard Baker introduced Fred.
Fred seems to be trying on Ronald Reagan’s mantle and appealing to Reagan Dems; in Lawrence County (votes local Dem - national GOP) he spoke of national unity and “Common Sense”. His first topic was life (lots of Fred for Life signs). He spoke about strengthening national defense and intelligence!!! He covered 2d Amendment, property rights, taxes, and Federalism. He told of guiding Chief Justice Roberts through the confirmation process and held him as an example of jurists he would appoint. He spoke about welcoming legal immigrants and building a fence. Basically, lots of the conservative points.
He also spoke about how the Iraq War was a central part of the larger war against Islamic fascists. He used his line about how ‘20 year olds in Iraq know more about National Security than people who’ve been in Congress 20 years’.
I was surprised that I didn’t get to see Fred (I don’t know why I thought I’d get to meet him, but I did). I was very surprised that I didn’t even get to see Fred on the two big screens that they had set up (like I said, the place was packed). I watched him from the monitors of the TV press.
I did hear his speech - my impression is that he was choked up by the crowd and the show of support. He gave a good campaign speech.
September 16th, 2007 at 6:32 pm
Thompson got lots of good press from the appearance. I had heard that Garth Brooks and/or Hank Williams, Jr. were going to show up as well.
I’m glad you were able to make it up there and enjoy the crowd.
Don’t get me wrong, Fred would be miles better than any of the Dems. I just have doubts that he can win unless the prevailing mood of the country changes. Who knows, maybe he can be the one to change the mood.
September 16th, 2007 at 6:42 pm
I don’t agree with you on the war - I think that by the time the elections come around, things will be better in Iraq. I think that while the war had some impact on this past election - the GOP got whupped for scandals and spending.
Fred wants to be Reagan redux… His national unity theme might appeal to people sick of beltway partisan politics. I like Gov. Huckabee, but my fave lower tier candidate is Rep. Hunter. You’re right about Newt and needing an actionable platform - I haven’t seen that from Fred or the GOP.
I’d vote for Rep. Paul over any Democrat, but it would be tough for me, and I don’t think he’d win the general election - IMO a lot of the GOP pro-defense base wouldn’t support him.
September 16th, 2007 at 6:54 pm
Hey Brian, I thought I’d be double-posting, kind of a report then opinion.
I read some of the press, a lot of the papers interviewed an anti-war protester - there were five of them (4F, 1M) compared to thousands to see Fred.
About changing the mood - I think that’s where he wants to go. He’s a uniter
Fred’s set himself apart from the rest by not getting in until now - that might have been his plan or I may give him too much credit.
I heard the Bama game on the way up, when I got out of the truck the score was 14-0, when I got back in Bama was losing. I set a ’speed record’ from Hazel Green to Five Points: TWO MINUTES (in football time). Exciting game.
September 16th, 2007 at 7:11 pm
I hope that things in Iraq get better - and not for political reasons. I have friends over there and I’ve already lost one family friend who was KIA while his wife was pregnant with their only child. I’d hate to lose anymore just so we can stand up some dysfunctional government that may elect anti-US Hezbo sympathizers. My speculation isn’t based on hope, but rather the reality we face today.
So do you really think the GOP pro-defense base would vote for a Dem, be it Hillary, Obama, or Pretty Boy, or just sit at home on election day rather than vote for Paul? I doubt it. Paul isn’t anti defense; he is anti offense. And remember that he is one of the few prez candidates who actually served.
Yeah, the Alabama game was exciting – for Alabama fans. I thought for sure that it was going to be another defeat snatched from the jaws of victory just like under Shula. I was positive that when Saban chose to kick a field goal with four minutes left while down by seven points that they would lose. But, no. Saint Nick may very well have mystical powers. Bama played very well and is obviously a good team. BTW, Darren McFadden is an absolute beast.
Auburn on the other hand is in for a long season. I’m glad they got the frosh in to run the option. After the first two games I figured that was about the only type of offense they would be able to run with the personnel they have. They need to work on getting the receivers trained up on blocking – they sure as hell can’t catch - and practice the pitches. A six and five finish might be optimistic at this point.
September 16th, 2007 at 7:30 pm
The MI complex is already backing Hillary and Obama. Labor unions & Hollywood aren’t the only ones filling their 40-50 million dollar coffers.
September 16th, 2007 at 7:33 pm
Bless your friend and his family.
I just don’t think that Paul will energize the defense base. It could be projection - he doesn’t energize me. I’d have a hard time campaigning for him.
Machs nix, whoever wins the election will have a war on their hands like it or not and no matter where our troops are. I’d rather have our troops where the bad guys -are-, rather than here. I haven’t seen any indication that Ron Paul would make a good wartime leader. Certainly none of the Dems would.
I think it’s ironic that Hillary would leave more troops in Iraq than Ron Paul.
September 16th, 2007 at 7:42 pm
Hey Matt. Got a link to an article?
September 16th, 2007 at 7:49 pm
As we’ve discussed offline, the Dems - including Hillary - seem to want to decrease drops in accordance to what the polls say. Force protection capability is directly proportional to troop levels. Leaving a reduced number of troops in a hostile environment will lead to a higher casualty rate. Hardly a pro-military position. At least with Paul’s approach Iraq won’t be covered in US blood because of poll driven troop levels.
September 16th, 2007 at 8:40 pm
Right on. Your troop levels comment almost sounds pro-surge - I think if we’d ’surged’ at the beginning we’d be better off. Maybe we could get McCain and Paul to share war and domestic policy like Spartan kings
September 16th, 2007 at 9:22 pm
I’m still trying to understand how any Republican could ever support the assault on the First Amendment that McCain-Feingold is. Then again, I left the GOP years ago because many issues such as this.
September 16th, 2007 at 9:47 pm
Stephen, that’s why McCain would be the ‘war’ king…
IMO politicians get caught up thinking that they have to do something - anything - to address an issue, and their principles get clouded by the prospect of a deal (which isn’t so principled - but one can rationalize it). M-F and immigration are why I don’t support McCain’s candidacy.
Almost Breaking News - former AAMU President Alan Keyes announced his GOP candidacy for POTUS. I’ve eaten lunch with him a few times - we worked in the same building in Rosslyn and ate at the building’s deli (some radio studio was there, Ollie North worked there too, also had lunch with him). Memory says Keyes is a nice guy, good conversations.
September 16th, 2007 at 10:01 pm
Reactionary — I’ve met Keyes and was a Ollie North Arlington Co. coordinator (my first campaign position, talk about trial by fire) during his Senate bid. Which Rosslyn building? (I’ve worked in and out of DC for years.)
My opinion is that a politician who continually rationalizes legislation (anyone can make a mistake once or twice on some minor issue — co-sponsorship of a major bill doesn’t qualify as an unwitting mistake, though) which isn’t principled has disqualified himself for future political bids.
I knew about the Keyes bid, but (for the moment, at least) think it is receiving the amount of media coverage it deserves.
And for the record, Roll Tide!
September 17th, 2007 at 8:24 am
The potential electability of a candidate is something to consider, and because so many uninformed voters go by name recognition, charisma, or the way a candidate looks and speaks, Thompson would seem to be electable.
Among things I look for in a candidate are a record of adhering to the constitution, of conservatism, and of working to maintain the sovereignty of our country. When I see fine people with conservative credentials support a candidate who is a member of the Council on Foreign relations (and who professes to not be aware of its goals) it worries me, and makes me think that they may not be aware that their candidate is a member of the CFR, or else, not aware that the CFR has goals of creating the North American Union by the year 2010 and eventually a “One World” government.
I would like to see Thompson resign from the CFR and denounce its goals, but perhaps he thinks that would cost him a great deal of support.
September 17th, 2007 at 9:37 am
Stephen, I lived in DC twice (Capitol Hill and Kalorama), for total of about five years. The building was beside Rosslyn Metro, on the Key Bridge side. I also worked in a Rosslyn building over the Safeway. Plus, Crystal City, Federal Center, and a little bit at Tyson’s Corner.
I campaigned for Anthony Williams for Mayor.
Don, I wonder if belonging to the CFR means approving of their reports - there are some disagreeable people at CFR (Madeliene Albright and Paul Krugman come to mind). Anytime someone starts talking about giving up some of our sovereignty I get nervous.
September 17th, 2007 at 10:38 am
Reactionary, the short answer to your wondering is “No”. However, as a member of the CFR, Thompson should have been aware of its agenda, and should certainly know by now. Unless he approves of it he should resign from the CFR and denounce its agenda. There’s a stench emanating from the CFR that may be difficult to wash off if you stay in it too long.
September 17th, 2007 at 1:55 pm
He seems like an interesting candidate to watch but i am not sure that he can pull off this win. I need to know a little bit more about him to really have a sense of what his chances are but he definitely adds one more factor into the 2008 election mix!! However i think he is doing really well considering his late entry. well at least according to this website i found!!
http://www.2008presidentialpoll.com/campaign-article/fred-thompsons-election-site/17-Sep-07
September 17th, 2007 at 2:51 pm
You hit the nail on the head with Mike Huckabee, he does have BIG IDEAS and does deflat the liberals opposition when he speaks. He CAN beat Hillary(she knows it) but I wish he would go after Hillary more regarding issues. Forget Fred Thompson, he has no passion behind what he says, his tour bus says that he is appealing to the 60 and up crowd. There are too many candidates which dilute the vote to much and Rudy Giuliani thinks he will win with his 25 to 29% lead that’s why he wasn’t at the Iowa StrawPoll- America we don’t need Giuliani. He might have passion but he is way too left(conservatively speaking)!
September 17th, 2007 at 3:26 pm
And Huckabee is on to something very good for the USA — to bad it’s so easy to demagogue and requires some thought and analysis on the part of the voter…..
Top Ten Economic Benefits of the Fair Tax Legislative Package HR25/S25:
1. Consumption tax supported by Alan Greenspan and 75 other Economists and Economic Professors. They all support a consumption tax as better for America than an income tax.
2. Removes the most regressive tax on the poor and middle class- the payroll tax. Provides a broader based tax for Social Security and Medicare. The Fair Tax also replaces the personal and business income tax, AMT(Alternative Minimum Tax), death tax, capital gains tax and investment taxes.
3. Removes business income and payroll taxes resulting in a drop in prices by 10 to 15%. Saves an estimated $250 to $400 Billion annually in unproductive tax compliance costs.
4. Eliminates the cumbersome IRS Tax code and replaces it with a National Sales tax of 30%(income tax equivalent of 23%). With price drop consumers pay about the same. Under the arcahic Income and payroll tax a middle class family had to earn a gross pay of $148 to bring $100 Home. Under the Fair Tax you bring $148 dollars home and with a minimum 10% price drop that same $100 of Goods costs you $90. Add the Sales Tax your new total is $117. You net $31 extra.
5. Fights outsourcing; increases Manufacturing and business growth back in America. Boosts Economic Growth an estimated 6 to 10% in the first year. Increased job growth.
6. Reduces the trade deficit because exports will not pay the sales tax and be 10 to 15% cheaper for sale overseas. Leveling playing field with low wage countries. (Unions should support)
7. US shores will be the most competitive corporate tax -free zone not the Bahamas. Corporate headquarters and many other businesses can return to US soil and be more competitive. Investment capital will flow and American Based business and jobs will grow.
8. Average working families take home 100% of their paychecks, no Federal income tax or payroll deductions. Average family of 4 making $50,000/yr takes home $5,000 more.
9. Families have more Spendable income for Health Insurance, Childcare, College tuition, and Private retirement Savings accounts. It’s their choice for their family. “Ownership”
10. Fair Tax package is revenue neutral and Progressive with a Prebate of Sales tax up to the Poverty line of spending. Family of 4 gets $492/m. Couple receives $367/m. No receipts no complicated filing for refunds. A refillable monthly debit card to cover Sales tax on all purchases up to the poverty line of Spending - Family of 4 HHS sets in 2005 at $25,660- Prebate is $492/m
The Fair Tax is revenue neutral, progressive and fair. Net tax rate for the Poor at the poverty line is 0%, for the middle class at twice the poverty line is 11.5%; for 4 times poverty line 17.2% and the more you spend your net rate is between 20 and 23%.
September 27th, 2007 at 1:35 pm
Fred, Fred, where’s your cred?
Will you let me keep my bread?
FairTax, Yes! ‘er FairTax, No!
Just another politico?
Hope for tax reform, I see,
Will be voting HUCKABEE!
http://snipr.com/scrapthecode