The GOP South Carolina primaries are over, Fred Thompson came in a distant third place, and he hasn't dropped out of the race...yet. South Carolina was supposed to be Thompson's last stand, the push he needed to gain the conservative base support and propel him through Super Tuesday. That strategy now seems more like a forgotten tale.
The word on the wind is that Ol' Fred Thompson plans to move on to compete in Florida on January 29th, but as for now he's visiting his ailing mother, perhaps contemplating his campaign--we hope. Some think that his South Carolina concession speech (that wasn't) could have been a farewell indication--we hope:
Thompson's speech Saturday night sounded like a farewell address with many comments about the campaign in the past tense."We'll always stand together," he told a small crowd. "We have traveled a very special road together."
Earlier in the day, Thompson was in a relaxed, almost jovial mood. At one point, he grasped the shoulders of a national network reporter to point him in the right direction for a short news conference.
"We've been doing what we want to do, saying what we want to say," Thompson told reporters.
Ok, Fred, now it's time to say: "We're done."
One of the rumors floating around on the 'net, however, is that Thompson and McCain are now in it together, grabbing votes for Thompson from the Huckabee camp, hence pushing McCain to the front. If this is actually a McCain-Thompson conspiracy, then it's working, if not, then Thompson is still nabbing a chunk of votes that most likely would go to Huckabee. Meanwhile, FredHeads who pushed for Thompson to run in the first place are bleeding into other campaigns, particularly Huckabee's. I am one of those people. As some of you may remember, I was stoked to see Fred Thompson finally, officially running for president--I thought to myself, "Ah, finally a guy who is rather conservative, who has somewhat of a chance of winning, and who isn't Romney is finally putting in his bid." I never gave Huckabee a second thought: he was an also-ran with good intentions but had no chance.
Let's just say that Fred's lack of enthusiasm and energy left me bored, unexcited, and ready to write in Stephen Colbert. That's when my cousin introduced me to Mike Huckabee, who has since then gained traction and surged to a top-tier candidacy. Now Fred Thompson is a dead weight who can't win and is just getting irritating.
Please, Fred, do something else with your time. Maybe like, join up with Law & Order again?
-Cydney
Cross-posted on The Celebrity.
As a supporter of Romney-Giuliani in any order, I feel they are swiping votes from my guys.
At some point, we need to have two or three slug it out and then the final two.
From 'net' talk, there is no one preferred candidate. So, in my opinion, the attention should be directed to a consensus candidate we all can go along with. If we continue to have a half dozen candidates, we may wake up with buyers' remorse soon.
Oh, my 'net' sources say Thompson has a news conference scheduled for tomorrow. It is either a GOTV speech or a concession speech.
The headline is Huckabee: McCain lover; Mitt killer
Posted by: swatter on January 21, 2008 02:03 PMNot by winning the most delegates prior to convention, of course, but winning AT convention, yes. If McCain and Romney cannot be consensus candidates (and since many Republicans hate them, that is possible) and because Guiliani and Huckabee and Paul cannot win the nomination at convention (because we know that there's no way that could happen at convention without splitting the party), that leaves Thompson.
Frankly, I do not respect calls for one candidate to "drop out" because he is "taking votes" from "my guy." That's not how politics works. You have to earn each and every vote. No vote belongs to you. Bush can't blame Perot, Gore can't blame Nader, and Rossi can't blame whatshername.
I love democracy, and I want EVERY candidate to stay in it until the end, as long as they are having SOME sort of impact. This is why I wanted Duncan Hunter to drop out (despite my strong admiration for his policies and views) and why I want Paul and Huckabee and Giuliani to stay in (despite my belief -- and hope -- that they cannot win).
Posted by: pudge on January 21, 2008 05:27 PMAs an example, you have McGavick and his party competitors. There was a ton of pressure to have McGavick appointed, er, anointed as the party nominee. It left a lot of hard feelings.
But, I do wish it were not so. But, other than the backroom politics and inherent shenanigans at the convention that is like to occur if the field is not winnowed down, Rs will end up with buyers' remorse at the end of the day.
What is your solution, pudge? Fight it out in the backrooms?
And on a personal note, again, you have taken me out of context. I was reporting the poor election results for Huckabee and Thompson and the effects it would have on their candidacies as found on the 'net. The comment on "my guy" and taking votes HAS TO BE taken with the comments before it. Thank you!!:(
Posted by: swatter on January 22, 2008 09:13 AMOn the other hand- Huckabee is an idiot and a liar, so now I just may sit the presidential election out because there are no conservatives running. If we're gonna have a leftist as President then it might as well be Hillary and SHE can take the blame for the mess the left will bring about.
Posted by: John425 on January 22, 2008 09:35 AMYou misinterpreted what I said. What I said is that one candidate "taking votes" from another is not how politics works. You do not own, or have any rights, to any vote. A vote cannot be "taken" from one candidate, because it did not belong to that candidate. This is what I meant.
What is your solution, pudge? Fight it out in the backrooms?
I already gave you my solution: democracy. That would be the OPPOSITE of fighting it out in back rooms.
And on a personal note, again, you have taken me out of context. I was reporting the poor election results for Huckabee and Thompson and the effects it would have on their candidacies as found on the 'net. The comment on "my guy" and taking votes HAS TO BE taken with the comments before it. Thank you!!:(
I don't see how that changes things. Again, votes cannot possibly be swiped from anyone, because they do not belong to anyone until they are cast.
Posted by: pudge on January 23, 2008 09:13 AMAnd the naive comment still stands.
Posted by: swatter on January 23, 2008 01:53 PMPudge, I understand your point about democracy and that no one "takes" votes from another, but it's politics, and when a candidate drops, his supporters will (most likely) drift toward a different candidate. It's the nature of the game.
I'm trying to figure out who you really DO want to win, pudge. McCain? He seems to be the only guy left for you, as far as I can tell.
Well, it sure looks like Fred doesn't have any chance in winning the nomination now that he's DROPPED OUT as of yesterday.
This doesn't mean, however, that anyone wasted their money or energy on him--he had a message, and it was heard. He was an active part of (most of) the debates, and did have quite a chunk of support. I just don't think he could have pulled it off.
John425:
I must disagree with you here. Huckabee is far from an idiot, and I'd like you to point out to me where he's a liar (and don't use the theology degree one...it's moot). Also, I'd have a hard time NOT calling the guy a conservative--Duncan Hunter just officially endorsed him. I don't get it...is it because he raised taxes *GASP!* to fix roads and education because was under judicial mandate to do so? Oh no...tax me never!!
Posted by: Cydney on January 23, 2008 11:33 PMCydney: nothing's changed. Fred first, then McCain or Romney.
I must implore you, though...please, please, PLEASE...if you're not going to vote for Huckabee (I'm pretty sure you won't from our conversations), PLEASE vote for McCain.
:D
Posted by: Cydney on January 25, 2008 03:47 PM