Fred Thompson for President!

Good luck, cmg. Thompson would make as good of a GOP sacrificial lamb in the November 2008 election as any of the other candidates. He has connections with the American Enterprise Institute so the neo-"conservatives" will certainly like him.

However, I still think that Giuliani will win the GOP nod. The Republican base appears to have put social issues on the backburner for 2008.

 

:tear: Definitely, Fox News Network has chosen Giuliani for the nod.This is as staged as Pro-Wrasslin.

 

Any takers on Mitt as a veep? Seems like a "safe" choice.

 

While I certainly don't agree with Mormonism, church mouse guy, it seems a bit dishonest to suggest that anyone- religion aside- could purchase a public office. That's always been one of the more disconnected accusations against wealth. Look at the only billionaire to date to have filed, Perot. Is there anything less than a token candidate? Also, in 2000 Forbes was the wealthiest GOP guy and couldn't crack the Bush/McCain momentum. If Mitt wins it's because people voted for him, not because he bought something.

 

Don't worry, cmg, I figure that Senator Clinton is a shoo-in for the next president of these United States.

 

Yes, my days are rather eventful. Or at least one of them was! Thanks for the welcome, church mouse guy.

I agree with your take on Mism. But not necessarily your take on Mons. I doubt the Mon in question is practicing. Anything. Politically, religiously, you name it. Just look at him. And then look at the other kinda sorta him. But this argument is hypothetical and for all I know you could be right. I doubt it, but it's possible.

BTW, it *isn't* one single donor that has kept anyone in the race. There are limits to donations. Excessively regulated limits. I know because I give. Cite, please?

 

Unless one is self-financed. If one takes away the money that Romney has "loaned" to his campaign it doesn't have much more money in the bank than Ron Paul's does - maybe even less after Romney's expenditures for the Iowa straw poll.

 

Point taken. But still, He is arguably not a "church."

 

No, he is not a church. Personally, I have no problem with a political candidate being a Mormon. My interest is in a candidate's positions, not his religion or lack thereof.

 

Are you saying that Pro-Wrasslin isn't real??????

 

Fred is like the girl you ask to the prom, and she delays giving an answer so long, that you get another date!

 

Not for the Chinese and Hillary.

 

Fred is second in the polls just under guilliani long before he got into the race. It is a good bet that he will get the nomination.

 

Thompson is a boring speaker and has not shown that he has the fire in the belly to win the nomination. His poll standing has been based solely on his role as a gruff DA on "Law & Order". He just won't inspire anywhere near enough support to win the GOP nomination. It wouldn't surprise me to see him drop out of the race before the end of this year.

 

I realize this is just your opinion. But it couldn't be more wrong.

 

Time will tell. Time will tell.

 

People thought Reagan was boring on the campaign trail. Thompson doesn't look like he's blowing a gasket. He doesn't run up and down sidewalks for photo ops. So I guess the Anderson Coopers of the world aren't wild about him. So what?

And about this "late entry" business...in 1995, Colin Powell announced in the Fall of that year that he would not be running. It was referred to as an early decision. Just because Fred hasn't been running since Valentine's Day doesn't bother me one bit. Again, the pundits and hacks aren't happy, but when are they?

We need to evaluate the candidates on their records and stances, and not some arbitrary media-driven yardstick.