12/19/2007

14 Responses to “Beldar Endorses Fred Thompson”

1. What states does Fred take that put him at 270+?

   I think he loses NM and Colorado off the bat and he goes down for the count in Ohio. He puts zero blue states in play, allowing the Dems to focus on a handful of states.
   Rudy has the best chance of drawing left of center dems because he is moderate.

   But if Obama pulls off the upset he could be almost unstoppable. The underdog that whipped Hillary and the bright shining star of the media. He would clobber Thompson and beat Rudy fairly handily.

   voiceofreason (6fb228) — 12/19/2007 @ 8:26 pm

   
   

2. He’s too old and doesn’t have the health and energy — is he running to please Jeri?

   I don’t know, but I don’t see how he can do it.

   Christoph (92b8f7) — 12/19/2007 @ 8:29 pm

   
   

3. “He’s too old and doesn’t have the health and energy…”

   As someone who was an adult a long time before 1980 (and can still remember), isn’t that what they were saying about one Ronald Wilson Reagan?

   Another Drew (8018ee) — 12/19/2007 @ 8:58 pm

   
   

4. isn’t that what they were saying about one Ronald Wilson Reagan?

   There is no comparison between the two. Reagan’s credentials were long established when he was elected. He had run in 76 and was considering it in 68.

   Fred is no Reagan.

   voiceofreason (6fb228) — 12/19/2007 @ 9:01 pm

   
   

5. Another Drew, Reagan at least during his first campaign had far more energy, worked harder, and was healthier (not clearing his throat constantly for example) than Reagan.

   They mostly attracted his age, not his health. It’s not so much that Thompson is objectively old… it’s that he’s unhealthy for his advanced age.

   Christoph (92b8f7) — 12/19/2007 @ 9:03 pm

   
   

6. *than Fred.

   Christoph (92b8f7) — 12/19/2007 @ 9:03 pm

   
   

7. Patterico, as always, thanks for the link.

   In my post, I did discuss Thompson’s motivation, but not his age or health as such. I respectfully submit that those are very different issues.

   To see exactly how shallow and insipid has been much of the “he’s lazy” punditry, read this hit-piece by Roger Simon on The Politico. It’s so biased, it’s practically self-fisking. Then ask yourself: Who chose Roger Simon to decide what the “appropriate” or “necessary” standards of motivation and energy level? Simon’s practically sputtering, “Who does Thompson think he is, refusing to put on a silly fire-chief hat and refusing to take a long walk on a cold day with a dozen Iowans?” Well, the answer is: a serious guy who’s already a nationally known face and name (in part from his political career, in part from his acting), who values his dignity (cf. Michael Dukakis in the tanker’s helmet or John Kerry in the clean suit), and who’s obviously decided he has better things to do than pretend to be running for local dog-catcher when there’s not a crowd. Who does Simon think he is? I respectfully submit that Thompson’s failure to follow Simon’s preconceptions as to how he ought to campaign says something good about Thompson and not so good about Simon. One of them is impressed by pandering; the other refuses to play that game.

   For those echoing Simon’s comments here or elsewhere, tell the truth: Is Fred’s “fire in the belly” problem something you first thought about when you read or heard some pundit muse about it, or something that you concluded based on close observation yourself? (I rather suspect the former.)

   Born August 14, 1942, Thompson’s a pre-Boomer who’s currently 65 years old. He looks his age. He’s had, and disclosed, some specific health problems; the fact that no one here has actually commented on those makes me wonder how deeply those making negative pronouncements have actually looked into specifics. McCain, born August 29, 1936, is 71. Giuliani, born May 28, 1944, is 63. McCain and Giuliani have also had, and disclosed, some specific health problems.

   Romney — born March 12, 1947, currently age 60 — is a genuine first-wave boomer, as is Hillary Clinton (dob October 26, 1947, also age 60).

   Obama and Edwards, compared to all of these candidates, are (to borrow a phrase from “My Cousin Vinny”) two yutes born in the 1950s. In fact, I would go so far as to call them two callow yutes.

   In fact, except for his (suspicious) ungreyed hair, Ronald Reagan looked his age in the 1976, 1980, and 1984 campaigns, and he certainly didn’t try to keep the pace that Romney has this year either. His opponents tried hard to make his age and even his mental state into an issue in all three years — ending, of course, with his masterful capping of the issue in the 1984 debate with poor young Mondale. (If you’re below age 45 yourself, I respectfully suggest you’re not a very credible first-hand witness for purposes of this comparison.)

   Of the major GOP candidates, Romney is the most obviously energetic — he’s been burning calories and his personal bankroll in Iowa and New Hampshire for months, doing exactly the sort of “retail, granular politics” that pundits like Roger Simon seem to think is a prerequisite for being taken seriously. Perhaps the voters in those two states, and early primary states, will really cast their ballots based on who’s kissed their babies most recently — in which case Romney should win big-time. But I tend to think that’s a crock, an anachronism, and that it will be more of a crock in this year’s front-end loaded and compressed primaries than ever before.

   I suppose it’s possible that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad might challenge the next president to decide the fate of the Middle East through single combat. Frank J., the conservative blogger who’s probably most obsessed with literal hand-to-hand combat among politicians, is convinced that Thompson would win that fight.

   Beldar (8e82bf) — 12/20/2007 @ 12:36 am

   
   

8. A correction: Obama’s dob is August 4, 1961, so he’s even more of a yute than I had recalled.

   Beldar (8e82bf) — 12/20/2007 @ 12:39 am

   
   

9. Thompson seemed less healthy to me and many other people than any of the other candidates at the debates. This, coupled with his lower energy campaign leads me to the opinions I express above.

   Christoph (92b8f7) — 12/20/2007 @ 12:43 am

   
   

10. Unemcumbered by knowledge, the pundits speak freely.

    Are there people who lay in bed at night thinking, “It was a good day: I pushed the “Fred is lazy” narrative along a bit more today.”?

    No matter your politics, you must give Fred his due: his refusal to perform like a trained seal on the campaign does impart a basic sense of dignity to the process. As do his seemingly glib responses to unserious questions and his view that everyone else started the campaign too early.

    The sophistry of the chattering classes this presidential election cycle leaves me cold. Just because blowhards have a computer and an Internet connection and now have the ability to share their water cooler philosophy with the world does not make it valuable.

    Everyone needs to stop and listen. Look at the positions of the candidates. Are these positions consistent with their actions? Fred sure isn’t “lazy” when it comes to thinking about solutions to the problems of the day, and I would say he has been pretty consistent on the application of his positions.

    If “lazy” and “fire in the belly” are the only knocks on what Fred offers, I’d say he is sitting pretty well. We shall see if the electorate can see past the process to the content. Pundits just talk, voters vote.

    Michael F (dea883) — 12/20/2007 @ 4:23 am

    
    

11. Michael F: Precisely, and well said.

    I appreciate all of the points Beldar The Great made in his endorsement, which encapsulate my feelings toward Fred, Rudy, Mitt and McCain exactly. I further shared Beldar’s recent disgust with Huckabee’s Bush-bashing pandering.

    “Mind you, it’s not that I actively distrust Romney [I include Guiliani, McCain, and the rest of the GOP field here], but rather simply that I trust Fred more.”

    Absolutely, and for all the reasons expressed.

    EHeavenlyGads (17aca7) — 12/20/2007 @ 6:02 am

    
    

12. In fact, except for his (suspicious) ungreyed hair, Ronald Reagan looked his age

    Beldar, I don’t recall who said it, but it was once said that “Reagan’s hair went prematurely orange…”

    Scott Jacobs (425810) — 12/20/2007 @ 6:35 am

    
    

13. He’s running for the second seat, unless the candidates ahead of him completely fall apart.

    M. Scott Eiland (113229) — 12/20/2007 @ 9:50 am

    
    

14. thompson is an empty suit, and he’s sinking like an anchor in the polls. rudy would be the strongest republican candidate in the final, his offputting rep for authoritariansm in nyc balanced by the positive of three wives on his resume. as long as their tenures don’t overlap, multiple wives are great training for conflict resolution. i’m for ron paul this time around, and i think he’s gonna surprise you.

    assistant devil's advocate (4efa79) — 12/20/2007 @ 12:28 pm