Blog @ MoreWhat.com

Republican candidate Fred Thompson has announced he is quitting his bid for the U.S. presidency.

The television actor and former senator from Tennessee said in a statement Tuesday that he has withdrawn his candidacy.  He did not say if he would endorse any of his rivals. Thompson entered the contest with high expectations that his television career and Republican establishment credentials would propel him to an early lead.

But he failed to finish higher than third in any of the contests to choose the Republican presidential nominee.  On Saturday, he finished third in South Carolina, which he had said he needed to win.

Meanwhile, Illinois Senator Barack Obama and New York Senator Hillary Clinton are back campaigning in the close race for the Democratic presidential nomination, a day after clashing in a televised debate.

Obama holds a small lead over Clinton in South Carolina, which has the next Democratic Party primary in the state-by-state nomination process.  Black voters in the state are expected to account for more than half of the vote tally, and their support for Obama is expected to be a key factor in Saturday’s poll.

In a heated debate Monday, the two traded accusations about their record as lawyers. Obama also said former President Bill Clinton, an important figure in the Democratic party and Senator Clinton’s husband, was misrepresenting Obama’s record as a legislator.

Republican Party candidates are holding events in Florida ahead of their party’s next primary on January 29.

The contenders from both parties are hoping to build momentum before the critical primaries and caucuses on so-called Super Tuesday, February 5 when 22 states hold presidential nominating contests.
By VOA News

fun headlines on the Clinton campaign…..

from WaPo’s The Trail…
By Anne E. Kornblut
MANCHESTER, N.H

Several outside allies — John Podesta, James Carville and Paul Begala, all of whom served as advisers to former president Bill Clinton — all were mentioned as possible additions to her team of strategists, but each denied that they were being brought in on Tuesday.

Senior Clinton advisers were hunkered down at her hotel in Concord. None of her top campaign officials has traveled with her on the road in recent days, leaving the candidate to largely crisscross the campaign trail with her daughter, Chelsea, and aide Huma Abedin by her side.

The un-fun part was the broadcast network media distancing themselves from the constant talk of an upset in NH and favoring Clinton over others in their candidate focus pieces on the evening news. But then no one ever said the media was unbiased. This blog is biased in that content unfavorable to Hillary Rodham Clinton and others will be posted since too often the main stream, well funded, media glosses over or completely omits any scrutiny of candidates like Clinton. And if they care to dispute that statement they are more than welcome to contact this blog to discuss the matter and any rebuttal will be published. But they won’t.

More fun Clinton headlines…..

Movement In The Clinton World
Atlantic Online - Jan 6, 2008
Reines joines the rarified ranks of such luminaries as Sidney Blumenthal and Huma Abedin and Karen Hicks. Reines is a favorite quotemeister of reporters but …

Gee Wally, there’s that name again, Huma Abedin. Wasn’t there some sort of tabloid story about candidate Clinton and her? If they won’t scrutinize the substantial and glaring hypocrisy and misdeeds of the Clinton Clan, maybe the media can produce a story about Clinton and Abedin for readers. The way the masses absorb stories about Lohan and Spears, etc., they could sell plenty of ads with it.

Huma Abedin
New York Observer, NY - Dec 18, 2007
And there was, of course, Huma Abedin! “The Wallflowers did four songs and they were amazing,” she told The Observer. read more »

Wow, there’s a story with the title of ‘Huma Abedin’ (popular girl).

Fearless fashionista
Louisville Courier-Journal, KY - Jan 3, 2008
Bosworth’s fellow fab femmes include Venus Williams and Hillary Clinton’s unflappable — and unbelievably stunning — aide Huma Abedin. …

Oops, no wonder there are so many stories about Huma Abedin. She was the search term after appearing in several results in Google News for the search term ‘clinton’.

Some of the other headlines in results for search term ‘clinton’ featured the Clinton campaign downplaying the Hillary Tears episode of the Clinton Soap Opera. Then there is one in which the title states that someone still won’t vote for Clinton. It gets better as the union endorsements in Nevada go to Obama.

Sorry Fox, this blog is sort of taking the liberty of posting this entire excerpt but at least the link is provided….

Now some fresh pickings from the Political Grapevine:

Emotional Advantage?

Many political observers are saying that Hillary Clinton’s tear-up during a campaign event Monday may have helped to humanize her - and may have swayed New Hampshire voters — especially women — giving Clinton the votes she needed to beat Barack Obama.

But some skeptics question the spontaneity of the emotional moment. Take a look at an interview with the TV program “Access Hollywood” done Sunday — was this a subtle preview of things to come? Again that interview was done Sunday, and the emotional moment in the diner was Monday.

Reporters covering the campaign say to their knowledge — Hillary had never cried in public on the campaign trail before that Monday event — and had never talked about crying before that “Access Hollywood” interview Sunday.

Meanwhile the woman who asked the question that precipitated Senator Clinton’s tear-up says she believes the emotional response was sincere — but —she voted for Barack Obama anyway!

Not like it would take a great deal of convincing for most people to accept Tiny Tears Hillary was a fake like the rest of her campaign. It is too bad for the feminine gender that the first actual candidate for President from the same gender had to be Hillary Rodham Clinton. You could pick an example from many other women that would have been a compelling choice but they may not have been available or interested. It also may not reflect well on women that some of them should look so desperate for a woman President to accept HRC or her bogus attempt to convince the public she is human. It was as bogus as the excuse that trying to look like a man brings criticism of Clinton as well as looking like a woman. The reason that is bogus points to the real problem. It’s not whether HRC has masculine or feminine qualities. The absence of honesty and integrity would be the problem.

Hillary Rodham Clinton is strictly a political animal and not a very good one at that. Reflect on the baggage and the scandals. Especially the most relevant like the withheld First Lady docs and campaign irregularities like Norman Hsu or the dishwashers. As long as your at it, the planted questions in the audience and the inability to answer the driver’s license for illegals question in the debate. And again, her resume’ she claims to be 35 years of experience includes one failed health care initiative in her husband’s first term and 18 minor public laws most of which are sentimental like naming buildings, authorizing displays and the like. Ask her to name three things she has done, SPECIFICALLY, that qualify her to be President. She hasn’t named ONE yet. She uses vague terms or phrases like ‘worked on’ or ‘fought for’ when describing her accomplishments That is because she has none.

And if you look a little closer you will notice that Barack Obama and John Edwards have no accomplishments that qualify them for President either. Senator John Kerry was the last Dems nominee. Al Gore was before that. Two terms of Hillary’s husband and before that Jimmy Carter. What does this party have to offer?

The GOP has better liberal candidates, Rudy Giuliani or Mike Huckabee or John McCain. Of course a smarter voter would select either Mitt Romney or Fred Thompson.

Other good news while typing this post, ABC’s Nightline announced Bill Richardson intends to withdraw from the 2008 Presidential race tomorrow. And the final note of this post is that the DNC is still afraid of Mitt Romney. Why do you suppose so much attack flak was aimed at his campaign? And then he is further criticized for his campaign tactics when all his ads do is point ot the flaws of his rivals to counter their criticism of him. Funny how politics works.

P.S. Kathy at Conservative Thoughts has an impressive chart of candidates on the issues and a commentary that offers a prediction that this blog’s choice, Mitt Romney will likely face HRC in the general. And that is what scares the DNC. That Mitt Romney would face HRC in the general. You gotta love it.

There was noise about Thompson dropping out if a 15% third place was not met in Iowa. With Huckabee outperforming Romney for first credited to social conservatives or the religious right, Thompson’s third place finish or tie with John McCain has done what was expected in Iowa. Change the discussion from polling to real voting. Thompson is apparently not giving up. Regardless of your choice for President, that is a good thing. Too many dropping out too soon does not allow the process to work as well. The more votes that determine who continues should ultimately provide a better choice of leadership. More citizens will have spoken and therefore more people will have had a say in who becomes President. That is after the power and influence has decided from what pool we are allowed to select a candidate.

Thompson Says Campaign Will Continue
By NAFEESA SYEED

But he waited until September — some say too long — to enter the race, then followed with a series of dispassionate campaign events. The most recent polls showed him in the high single digits or low teens, and just last week Thompson said he wasn’t consumed by presidential ambition.

Not too many people really talking about the Thompson strategy from earlier in the year. Did he wait too long? Has he not convinced voters his heart is in it? Is it the unfortunate reality that lots of time and money are required to grab the attention and market the personality? Whatever your assessment of Fred’s effort to date, it is reasonable to think the waiting through last summer was a strategy or circumstance that did not work well in this particular campaign season. But then it’s not over yet either.

The following reference may explain the earlier item about Fred dropping out after Iowa.

Fred Thompson Becoming Passionate
Michael van der Galien
January 4, 2008

Note that this isn’t the first time that the Politico has gone after Thompson either. As RedState points out, they published an article yesterday saying that he would drop out if he didn’t win 15% of the vote, but that’s not true (as we can say today).

When it comes sites like RealClearPolitics and the Politico the view from this blog has moved from favorable to at least suspicious of the content and handling of other matters especially at RCP. But that is the deal with the internet. Information still needs to be checked and due diligence is always required if not allowed by time.

With that in mind it is fair to say again that this blog’s first choice for President is Mitt Romney followed by Fred Thompson. So yes, these posts are as objective as they can be with that in mind. There has been suspicion of the obvious attacks on Romney’s faith and the more subtle curiosities about how some media react to or cover news about Fred. The only real antidote for such problems would be enlightened voters but then that is like a catch 22. If there is a concerted and covert effort to diminish one or more candidates unfairly it is unlikely most voters will notice. The number of eligible voters who do not participate is reason enough to expect little from the public overall.

………………….
………………….

The statistical tie in Iowa among Clinton, Obama and Edwards finds Obama on top with Edwards edging out Clinton for second. The statistical tie between Romney and Huckabee has Huckabee taking first in Iowa with an 8 point lead. New Hampshire is just days away which is probably good for the winners and not so good for the rest of the pack.

Some reports have Thompson bowing out if he did not have a minimum of 15% for third place. Oops. Other reports figure Romney can’t recover by NH with McCain moving up. But if Clinton doesn’t strike gold in NH her campaign may be in for a rough (short) ride. But for those who do not favor a Clinton candidate that would be a little too much optimism this early in the voting. Or is it?

Some said that if Huckabee could win Iowa, make a decent showing in the next couple of states he could be a contender when the votes move to the South. But they said that is where Thompson would do well. And Giuliani apparently is getting what he planned for in states with few electoral votes….. nothing. Coming out of Iowa, Thompson and Ciuliani are not as strong as there national poll numbers were and Romney had a disappointing finish based on money spent but the negative campaign constant commentary in the media may have hurt his chances in Iowa.

Other reports suggest Edwards may not get much further than Iowa if he did not take first. Well, second is in the middle. Not too hot, not to cold, maybe it is just right. If 2nd is not good enough for Edwards to continue what does that say about Clinton’s chances? Her campaign is viewed as doing better in Iowa than whom? Obama may get a momentum win in NH and if Edwards could take another second…..hmmm.

If Huckabee takes NH he would be in the driver’s seat probably until Super Tuesday. After reviewing Iowa and considering what it may mean to each candidate and what it says, if anything about the rest of the race really shows we don’t know much more than we did yesterday. The people with Excedrin headaches tonite are Clinton and Romney. There surprises were the most noticeable. McCain is keeping a steady strength while on the other side Obama and Edwards are chipping away at the experience and inevitability factors. Basically, still even across the board.

Fred Thompson : I’m Fred Thompson and I approve this message.

Announcer : The Wall Street Journal says Fred Thompson’s tax cut plan “leads the GOP field.”

A leading economic group calls it a plan “conservatives can rally around.”

The conservative National Review says only Thompson has outlined “specific, conservative policies” on immigration.

Investor’s Daily says Thompson’s national security plan features a “Reaganesque rebuilding of our military.”

And the National Right to Life Committee endorsed him because they know he can win.

Fred Thompson. The clear conservative choice.

NBC’s Law and Order and the movie The Hunt for Red October are a couple of examples of Fred Thompson’s acting resume’. Always likeable characters and a decent performance in the Senate as well as other government service dating back to the Watergate era. It could be most voters are more familiar with DA Arthur Branch than former Senator Fred Thompson.

But the problem with ads is even though they do not lend themselves to in depth presentation perhaps some reference to the information hinted at could be given. We get it Fred. Tax cuts, immigration enforcement, strong military and anti-abortion are the points. The interesting thing is that with the exception of abortion the other issues mentioned are budget items. You can’t cut taxes, increase the military or enforce immigration without reducing revenue or increasing debt. It also requires cooperation from Congress which will not likely have a GOP majority in 2009.

You’re a good guy Fred. Just don’t know if you can ‘getter done’. At this blog you are the 2nd choice after Mitt Romney. Ya, of course, who cares?

According to the Rasmussen report Giuliani and Thompson lead the national polls for the GOP at 23 and 25% respectively near the beginning of October 2007 while McCain and Romney essentially shared second at 10 and 13% and Huckabee was not a factor in mid-single digits. For the Democrats, Clinton held a whopping 44 or 45% with Obama trailing in the 20’s and Edwards in the teens.

What a difference a couple of months can make. Currently, at Rasmussen Reports, Huckabee has nearly the first place numbers held by Giuliani and Thompson earlier at 22%. Giuliani and Romney are in second with mid teens as McCain and Thompson follow in third in the lower teens. While McCain has been mentioned in news reports as gaining some strength of late, for example, the Peter King endorsement, his 13% is representative of the last months. Giuliani and Thompson have slipped while Huckabee and Romney have gained. The Dems, nationally have not changed, but Clinton is faltering in the early state polls while Obama continues to climb and Edwards appears the same and steady. For the GOP, Huckabee and Romney lead Iowa.

With the religious questions still lingering in the campaign a recent poll indicated eight out of ten likely Republican voters said religion was not a factor in their vote. Of those voters the support for each candidate may be reflected in the other polls. For the twenty percent who say religion is a factor most suggest support for Huckabee. A related story suggest Romney has much ’silent’ support in addition to what the other poll numbers show in Iowa. Huckabee is thought to have much support in Iowa but that has not translated to strength in other early states. A first for Huckabee in Iowa may give him competing strength in subsequent early state contests while less than second may see his recent surge fade. For the Dems, less than first in Iowa may signal the beginning of the end for Clinton while a first for Obama could build a breakout leading into the New Hampshire and other states.

At USA Election Polls one could say Iowa is a statistical tie for each party. As most people know, Huckabee and Romney are a tie as well as Clinton and Obama are tied. Several delegate count listings have what one would expect based on national polls through the campaign to date. But when averages or proportional distribution of state delegates are considered the game changes dramatically.

In New Hampshire it is Romney and McCain or Romney, McCain and Giuliani for the GOP. At one time Giuliani was stronger but his strategy of focus on the ‘big’ states has seen the numbers change. Clinton and Obama for the Dems mirrors Iowa. With the NY connections for Giuliani and a NY Senate seat for Clinton, they were much stronger in the Northeast early on but things are changing.

But all this is just a snapshot in time and too much should not be read into it. Just like Huckabee’s recent rise, two months ago, who’d a thunk it? The view from this blog sees Giuliani conceding early states. The Huckabee surge is only a factor in one state thus far. Clinton continues to decline. Obama continues to climb. Edwards in holding steady and leads in at least one poll in Iowa for the Dems. Thompson has slid some while McCain and Romney have maintained or increased strength, the exception has been the tie for Romney and Huckabee in Iowa.

If forced to pick only from the Democratic party offerings this blog would recommend Obama or Edwards. Only because they are not Clinton and are the only other Dems candidates with a chance to win. But then Biden, Dodd or Kucinich would not be selected here, under the conditions mentioned, or under any other circumstance. That would be why this blog would not vote for a Democrat in 2008. Oh, did Richardson get overlooked? Yes.

On the GOP side, this blog has always supported Mitt Romney for President and will continue to do so. Based on some of the positions of Giuliani and Huckabee, this blog could only support them if they were the last ones standing. While some concerns remain about an outstanding American named Senator John McCain, primarily due to his support of amnesty last summer, if he was nominated he would get this blog’s full support. Nearly the same can be said for Fred Thompson. While some of the early criticism appears to have been a lame attempt to discredit him, since entering the campaign, his performance is a bit puzzling and an aura of almost hesitation causes some questions. But again, if he was the nominee for the GOP he would get this blog’s support.

That brings it back to Mitt Romney. Romney possesses the attributes required to be successful. The criticism voiced about Romney may be more a matter of political gamesmanship and the strategy of rivals. Questions about his faith are a distraction. Questions about his positions may reflect a willingness to respond to the will of the electorate or the strength to do what is right on behalf of them. People do change their minds for good reason although it is popular in politics to highlight that fact as a flaw.

On the practical side, Mitt Romney is credited even by some of his critics for successfully correcting a massive budget shortfall in Massachusetts. He successfully repaired a failing Olympic organization. He has successfully rebuilt million or billion dollar companies. He can do the same for a debt ridden nation. He has the knowledge to surround himself with a team to produce results and strengthen this country. With the economy taking over first place as the most important issue for the 2008 election, Mitt Romney is the one superior choice for President. Not only can he deliver leadership to our economic troubles but the remainder of policy matters are well within his grasp. His faith and family values can also restore some of the traditional concepts that have made this country great. These are not campaign tricks. The man has demonstrated throughout his life that intelligence, discipline, hard work and values have driven his success. He can apply those attributes and principles to leading this nation and getting it done.

Trackposted to Outside the Beltway, third world county, Faultline USA, Pirate’s Cove, Blue Star Chronicles, The Pink Flamingo, Leaning Straight Up, Big Dog’s Weblog, Cao’s Blog, Wolf Pangloss, Conservative Cat, and Right Voices, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

If being the front runner of a campaign includes being the primary target of every other candidate then while the national polls do not suggest Romney as a front runner his opponents in the campaign do. In early states, the LA Times only mentions Iowa and New Hampshire. Depending on the poll you read, Romney is essentially sharing the top with Fred Thompson in South Carolina. A state the pundits said earlier was one where he would not do well. In Florida, Romney is in 2nd or 3rd depending on the poll you read. And other states like Nevada and California also depict a strong showing for Mitt Romney.

As the debate continued over two hours, the most frequent target was former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who has been a leader in the two states that loom largest in the early voting — Iowa and New Hampshire.

Romney was attacked from all sides, on multiple issues. Former New York Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani accused him of employing illegal immigrants, while former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee suggested that he was heartless for opposing college scholarships for immigrants. Sen. John McCain of Arizona faulted Romney for refusing to concede that an interrogation practice called waterboarding amounts to torture. And former Sen. Fred Thompson of Tennessee — via a campaign video — chided the former governor for changing his position on abortion.

The most liberal GOP candidate, Giuliani, unable to defend his ’sanctuary city’ position selects illegal immigration as a topic to challenge Romney. Besides Tom Tancredo, Romney may be the only other candidate focusing on solving illegal immigration. Since John McCain sided with the amnesty bill last summer until it became obvious to him he needed to change his position, his choice for harassing a fellow Republican was what constitutes torture. With the trend in the media and elsewhere to discuss way too much about national security matters publicly, Romney’s suggestion that it should not be a topic for candidates was refreshing. Huckabee just tipped his hand that reinforces his leaning toward amnesty and spending public funds on illegals. A recent surge in the polls for him only reflects the evangelicals. Apparently they’re okay with amnesty. Slow on the trigger the Thompson overused the abortion card as most religious and pro-life groups have accepted Romney’s stand on abortion.

One last note on the sanctuary city label that Giulianis failed to defend. Even the notorious NYT, that’s right, the New York Times, conceded the sanctuary city status of New York.

The Congressional Research Service, a nonpartisan agency that provides support to members of Congress, issued a report in 2005 that described localities with sanctuary policies as those that have adopted “don’t ask, don’t tell” policies in which city employees, including the police, are not required to report illegal immigrants to the federal authorities.

It listed 32 cities or counties with sanctuary policies, including New York.

Mr. Giuliani had inherited an executive order from previous mayoral administrations that protected illegal immigrants from being reported to federal immigration authorities when using city services. During the presidential campaign, he has repeatedly insisted that the policy was necessary for public health and safety.

The only question that remains is why Giuliani did not reverse the previous executive order claimed to be the beginning of New York City’s official sanctuary city status?

This particular topic shows the other candidates targeting Romney view him as the leader he is for not taking the obvious opportunity to hammer Giuliani on his position which is obviously leaning toward amnesty like Huckabee. If illegal immigration is an important to you, the candidate, Mitt Romney, places a high priority on eliminating illegal immigration. That cannot be said for Giuliani, Huckabee or McCain for sure. Thompson remains a question mark on this issue. And Tancredo is not likely to move to the top tier nor is Ron Paul. Reasons that continue to reinforce this blog’s support for Mitt Romney for President in 2008. There are many more reasons for maintaining that support.

It would be fair to say that Barack Obama has stage presence. He is stronger at making prepared statements and speeches than he is at competing in public debates. While Hillary Rodham Clinton is probably the leader on closet skeletons, it is likely that Obama and Edwards have some as well. Don’t we all? But we all don’t have Hillary Rodham Clinton claiming she has a career ender for us in her arsenal. Obama does. The question is does she really have something on him or not? But that’s another matter for another time.

Frequently the voting base subset of ‘women’ is touted to be owned by Clinton. That may be more true for her husband than her. It is also reported from time to time that HRC’s campaign has focused on shoring up the women’s vote. Just by virtue of gender you might think that shouldn’t be necessary. But one report today indicates another voter subset, ‘blue collar’ women are for Hillary Clinton. Yet another features this:

Michelle Obama urges black women to support her husband

Does that mean Michelle does not want other women to vote for her husband or that other women will but she is concerned about black women voting for her husband? If you would think that women voters would vote for Hillary Clinton on a gender match, would you think that black voters would vote for Barack Obama on a racial match? It is interesting that politically motivated rhetoric renders support of amnesty for illegal aliens as an American ideal and not supporting the troops in pursuit of victory as an equally pro-American position. For liberal candidates who often speak of America with patriotic overtones and the need to ‘come together’ like a rerun of a Beatle’s song, slicing up the electorate may be good campaign strategy but what does it really tell you about the candidates?

`It would be logical for a white voter to expect that Barack Obama may spend more time pursuing legislation and policy that favors black Americans than other racial or ethnic groups. It may not be true and it may not even be fair. But when you see a report that Michelle Obama is urging black women to vote for her husband it has to make you wonder about what candidates are doing. Maybe this is the true equalizer about race and ethnicity in our nation. The fact that when it comes to politics all men (and women) are created equal. They are all equally the target of candidates and after the vote the concerns about voters are returned to the back burner. A fate executed by all candidates after election whether they be Democrat, Republican or any other.

Specifically for Obama, while the criticism from Clinton that he is naive and irresponsible in foreign affairs or elsewhere, his headline below does no better than to play into Clinton’s earlier criticism.

Obama foreign policy views based on family experience

Just living somewhere and experiencing culture and the daily life among locals in another country does not qualify as foreign affairs experience any more than Clinton residing in the White House as First Lady. It can be argued that one person who has foreign affairs experience has the last name Rice or Powell. And even the relatively brief time that both people have held the Office of Secretary of State, their experience could be viewed as far exceeding that of either Clinton or Obama. Foreign affairs experience is gathered in few places outside the White House or the State Department. Perhaps all Presidential candidates should concede they are extremely limited in that capacity and move on to matters they can speak to.

McCain and Thompson dwarf the experience of Clinton, Obama and Edwards as Senators. Romney and Giuliani dwarf the three Dems on leadership and administrative experience. The three leading Democratic contenders for the 2008 race have something in common. Essentially they are all rookies doing well in the early stages of a Presidential campaign. Perhaps the only reason they are doing that well is that within the Democratic party ranks they are the best they had to offer and no others are available with adequate experience.

Sometimes a candidate’s failed attempt to get elected serves as the seed to combine with more experience years later and a subsequent successful run for the same office. We should be viewing the Democratic candidates in that light. But then, that is all the Democratic party has to offer and one of them will be their nominee. Predicting the outcome whether you lean left or right is probably a fool’s mission. Sure, one of the candidates in the 2008 race, barring some unlikely turn of events, will be our next President. Whether they are Republican or Democrat, one of them will win.

Obama’s recent advance on Clinton’s lead and Huckabee’s mirrored experience in Iowa within the GOP ranks tell you one thing. This race is a long way from over. We are nearing the first real votes and the polling trends are shifting. That may only indicate that more people are starting to pay attention. If the first, second and third among both Dems and the GOP are close together after Iowa and New Hampshire this will get interesting. Here are two possible outcomes in Iowa you may want to consider. Either Edwards and Romney or Obama and Huckabee would really stir things up.

According to the 2008 Rasmussen Daily Tracking Poll, Fred Thompson received quite the lift in numbers within a few days of his official announcement to run for President. There appears to be no rock star mania forming in the days since which is not a surprise. What is also not a surprise is the reaction to his candidacy by various sources including the main stream media. The two accounts below are tame reports of Fred Thompson visiting his hometown as his campaign begins in earnest, post announcement.

Fred Thompson Gets Warm Welcome
Associated Press
September 15, 2007 9:03 p.m.

LAWRENCEBURG, Tenn. — Fred Thompson has made his hometown of Lawrenceburg the site for his first public appearance in Tennessee since announcing his bid for the presidency.

Fred Thompson gets warm welcome in hometown
WBIR-TV, TN
Fred Thompson returned to his hometown Saturday for his first Tennessee event since announcing his presidential candidacy. Thompson greeted friends and …

Then comes the not too subtle report from the New York Times about a Thompson stop in Florida. Make sure you offer one pro-Thompson quote from one member of the audience. Then try to invent a gaffe over a small talk comment. Bring up earlier lame criticism of the candidate and rerun it. Leave an unsuspecting reader with as bad an impression of the candidate as you can. This from a newspaper made recently famous for plagiarizing staff and the inability to use restraint and weigh first amendment rights against national security.

Sparse Schedule for Thompson on Trail
By JULIE BOSMAN
September 16, 2007
LAKELAND, Fla., Sept. 15 — At his second campaign stop of the day on Friday, just after 2 p.m., Fred D. Thompson was deep into a riff on the benefits of high-quality American health care.

Aside from media reports and opinions on candidates there is always the less than reassuring numbers from all the various polling data about the coming election. Together with the poll mentioned at the top of this post, Angus-Reid and AP submit polling data that Thompson is in a GOP field of candidates with no front runner. The Democratic party opposition would like everyone to believe this is good news for them. You could also draw the conclusion that it is real early yet and the GOP candidates offer voters a larger contingent of appealing choices.

Republicans 2008: Giuliani 34%, Thompson 22%
September 16, 2007
(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Rudy Giuliani is holding on to the top position in the race for the Republican Party’s presidential nomination in the United States, according to a poll by Opinion Dynamics released by Fox News. 34 per cent of respondents would support the New York City mayor in a 2008 primary.

AP Poll: GOP Presidential Race a Toss-Up
By ALAN FRAM – 1 day ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — White men, conservatives, evangelicals and other pivotal blocs are divided among the Republican Party’s leading contenders for president, leaving the race for the 2008 GOP nomination highly fluid, according to an Associated Press-Ipsos poll.

A report from WaPo begins by discounting Fred Thompson and alleging the GOP field has flaws to overcome in order to distinguish a front runner. Stating the GOP race is more competitive now seems an obvious conclusion and more plausible than the flawed theory proposed by WaPo or vaguely disclosed sources. Then next several paragraphs from WaPo mostly ‘diss’ the GOP.

Once they stop dissin’ the field, some interesting strategy views are expressed. One saying the Romney camp has nothing to win right now based on an early state strategy while Thompson hopes to survive Iowa and NH and then win in the South.

Another Entry, but Still a Jumbled GOP Race
The Top Contenders, All Seen as Flawed, Struggle for a Message
By Dan Balz and Michael D. Shear
Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, September 16, 2007; A05

The contest for the Republican presidential nomination remains without a clear front-runner in a field of candidates still scrambling to find a message.

With the Dems you get Hillary Rodham Clinton or Hillary Rodham Clinton. With the GOP the choice is still open. While Giuliani is the most liberal of GOP candidates, all of them offer more strength and less social whining than their Democratic party counterparts. While many like to sneer after the 2006 midterms, the Congressional approval rating being lower than a term limited President’s do not guarantee left victory for the White House in 2008. Fred Thompson’s entry to the race has at the very least increased the ability to hone the conservative view and more carefully define which of several GOP candidates can best deliver the solutions this country needs.

BTW, here are a few facts about Fred Dalton Thompson that should be free of debate…..

THOMPSON, Fred Dalton,
born in Sheffield, Ala., on August 19, 1942;
attended the public schools in Lawrenceburg, Tenn.;
graduated from Memphis State University 1964;
received J.D. degree from Vanderbilt University 1967;
admitted to the Tennessee bar in 1967 and commenced the practice of law;
assistant U.S. attorney 1969-1972;
minority counsel, Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities (“Watergate Committee”) 1973-1974;
special counsel to Tennessee Governor Lamar Alexander 1980;
special counsel, Senate Committee on Foreign Relations 1980-1981;
special counsel, Senate Intelligence Committee 1982;
member, Tennessee Appellate Court Nominating Commission 1985-1987;
actor;
elected as a Republican to the United States Senate in the November 8, 1994, special election to fill the unexpired portion of the term ending January 3, 1997, left vacant by the resignation of Albert Gore, Jr.;
took the oath of office on December 2, 1994;
reelected in 1996 for the term ending January 3, 2003;
not a candidate for reelection in 2002;
chair, Committee on Governmental Affairs (One Hundred Fifth and One Hundred Sixth Congresses; One Hundred Seventh Congress [January 20, 2001-June 6, 2001]);
resumed acting career.
(source: senate.gov, biographical guide)

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Trackposted to Outside the Beltway, Perri Nelson’s Website, Rosemary’s Thoughts, DeMediacratic Nation, Right Truth, Big Dog’s Weblog, Inside the Northwest Territory, The Meat Scale, Nuke’s News & Views, The Amboy Times, Cao’s Blog, Pursuing Holiness, third world county, Faultline USA, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, The World According to Carl, Blue Star Chronicles, The Pink Flamingo, Gulf Coast Hurricane Tracker, Dumb Ox Daily News, Right Voices, CatSynth.com, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

For all the criticism laid on Fred Thompson for being a lobbyist, grandstanding by proxy with delays in his official campaign announcement and Mitt Romney being subjected to attacks about religious faith and position statements, Rudy Giuliani might be the candidate with whom you really don’t know what you get.

Is his statement on doing what is best for New York minus partisanship a genuine reason for a cozy relationship with Bill Clinton and supporting the ‘other’ party’s candidate for goernor of New York? With or without Giuliani’s stand on social issues like immigration and same sex marriage, his speech to a group of Louisiana Sheriffs brings out the Clinton connection, not some opponent’s campaign shot.

So how does one judge where Rudy will be facing the issues of 2008 and beyond? Add to that his positions on gun control, immigration, abortion, same sex marriage plus renewed analysis of his role in governing New York City and attending to matters related to 9/11 and Giuliani raises more questions than he answers. Even removing 9/11 from the equation leaves Rudy Giuliani’s resume’ with Mayor of a large American city and being a former US Attorney. With the other candidates you have senators, congressmen and governors.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

GIULIANI: THERE’S ONE CLINTON WHO LIKES ME
By CARL CAMPANILE“I have a letter - I keep it at home,” Giuliani told members of the Louisiana Sheriff’s Association in Baton Rouge.

“It’s a letter from President Clinton, congratulating me for all of my efforts and saying something like the crime bill couldn’t have been passed if it weren’t for me.”

If one believes the main stream media has a liberal bias that may help explain the dominant focus on national polls for the 2008 Presidential election. This is the primary/caucus season that finds surprisingly little attention being given to state polls. Perhaps that is due to the media’s alleged liberal leaning and the strength among Democratic party candidates of Hillary Rodham Clinton in the national polls.

In Iowa, according to an AP report, polling data shows Hillary Rodham Clinton’s lead over John Edwards shrinks from the double digit distance in the national polls to five points. With a five point margin of error in the poll, Clinton and Edwards are in a dead heat.

In similar fashion the GOP results show Mitt Romney leading in Iowa at 28% with his nearest rival, Rudy Giuliani, at 16%. Thompson’s effective headline grabbing strategy of dragging out announcing his candidacy has not translated to higher than tied for 2nd place in Iowa just above the 2nd tier players. This poll shows Giuliani and Thompson tied at 16% and with a five point margin of error, 8% Mike Huckabee is still doing better than expected.

With Edwards and Clinton in a virtual tie in Iowa, what does that say about the national polls. Is it simply a matter of most voters not being focused on the election this early? Is it a case of campaign effectiveness in the early states or the fact that primary/caucus schedules may change? In this case, Iowa, are voters not giving Clinton the easy pass on her history that Democrats do nationally? Could the Democratic party faithful be so obsessed with winning the White House that no matter what Hillary does they are willing to overlook it? As the early states draw closer perhaps their collective conscience will cause the majority of Dems to reject Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Clinton Leads Democrats, Romney Atop GOP
13 hours ago
THE RACE: The presidential primary in Iowa for Democrats and Republicans.
___

THE NUMBERS — DEMOCRATS

Hillary Rodham Clinton, 28 percent

John Edwards, 23 percent

Barack Obama, 19 percent

Bill Richardson, 10 percent

(all other candidates below 5 percent)

___

THE NUMBERS — REPUBLICANS

Mitt Romney, 28 percent

Rudy Giuliani, 16 percent

Fred Thompson, 16 percent

Mike Huckabee, 8 percent

John McCain, 7 percent

(all other candidates below 5 percent)
___

OF INTEREST:
Asked if they might vote for a candidate other than the person they now support, 59 percent of Democrats and 72 percent of Republicans said they might switch.

The telephone poll for the Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg was conducted Sept. 6-10. The margin of sampling error for both the 462 Democratic caucus voters and 350 Republican caucus voters was plus or minus 5 percentage points.

One could draw the conclusion that Mitt Romney’s business acumen and disciplined approach to problem solving is at work even when appraising his rivals. Speaking to the chances of nomination for Fred Thompson and Mike Huckabee, Romney began his response in an interview assessing the need for campaign ‘ground support’ and funding. Remarks given on the late start by Thompson and late up tick in the Huckabee campaign gave heavy weighting to raising funds early when they are more plentiful and developing strong support, presumably in early voting states.

Thompson remarked that his words and ideas were what would be the ultimate test and were something money can’t buy. That assumes, not unlike many current and past candidates, the money does not drive the message. Since Thompson is late to the game by necessity or design, it would also be reasonable to conclude he prepared a message like that since he is late and does not have everything in place, which probably includes the campaign warchest.

Other candidates, like John McCain, draw attention to the importance of momentum closer to the elections. If polling is any indication, nationally it has been Giuliani and Thompson followed by McCain and Romney. There is a large margin between the top two and number three and four. Momentum has certainly worked for Romney. He was in single digits early on and still is in some states but nationally he hovers in the mid-teens ahead of McCain in many states and the front runner in half or more of the early states. His large lead in Iowa and New Hampshire could trigger much momentum with back to back wins.

It is certainly too early to determine much with Thompson entering the race only this week. The daily tracking polls have had as much or more movement on the Dems side just after Thompson’s announcement. Caucus and primary elections are drawing closer yet there is still much to observe. A campaign strategist offered this assessment. Every campaign must experience a devastating event some time during a campaign. If he is right, that may be what has to happen before any noticeable difference is reflected in the polls. Maybe it won’t happen before the first election.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Romney Ups Stakes for Volatile GOP Field
By RON FOURNIER – 7 hours ago

BERLIN, N.H. (AP) — Mitt Romney said Friday that presidential rivals Fred Thompson and Mike Huckabee need to raise a jaw-dropping $20 million in the next few months to join him in the top tier of the Republican GOP field, raising the stakes in a nomination fight altered by a tumultuous week.

Feeling the heat of his rivals, the former Massachusetts governor dismissed the notion that a late-entering Thompson and an up-and-coming Huckabee were poised to squeeze into the GOP top tier now occupied by Romney and former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani.

Gotta give some credit to Dan Balz at WaPo. Someone has revived a sensible discussion on the power of what we don’t know about the 2008 Presidential campaign. With plenty of pundits filling newsprint and broadcasts with opinions carefully dodging the risk of early predictions but at the same time crafted as political wisdom, Balz offers a down to earth article suggesting we really don’t know. That is, of course, the truth or there would be no point to all the campaigning not to mention the election process. Currently, what most do know is that Hillary Rodham Clinton is the Democratic front runner and Giuliani and Romney are running point for the GOP. Everything else is at best, a guess.

How much damage would losing Iowa cause for Clinton? Everyone has an opinion. Certainly any loss is bad, but if Clinton would lose Iowa her campaign may start suffering more setbacks. Can Obama gain ground on Clinton? You might be safe saying ‘no’ since there is little evidence to suggest that possibility. One could say Obama does better on the stump than in debates.

Then there is the most popular GOP question. What effect will Thompson entering the race have on Giuliani and Romney? Again, certainly it should have an effect. The effect some suggest is he has waited too long or the expectations are too high and Giuliani and Romney will not suffer from his latest plans to announce.

Some say Thompson is the only candidate who can beat a Democratic opponent while others say they want Clinton to be nominated because she is the only candidate the GOP can beat. It seems those are the suggestions that go furthest out on a limb. And pundits don’t suffer much from missed predictions. By the next election cycle we start everything all over again. But the article from Dan Balz is appreciated. There are also some good quotes included.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

7 Questions as the Race for the White House Accelerates
By Dan Balz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, September 2, 2007; Page A02

Is the Clinton campaign a true juggernaut — or is that just what she wants everyone to believe?

Not a juggernaut, but it is the best campaign on the block right now. That’s a view widely shared among Democratic strategists and emphatically asserted by some veteran Republicans sizing up the race.

Mitt Romney has been leading polls in early states like Iowa and New Hampshire but trailing in South Carolina and Florida. A report about one of the typical Super Tuesday states, California, displays a trend developing in field polls where Romney is gaining strength in a rich electoral location.

Among likely Republican voters, Romney’s numbers have doubled since March from 7 to 14% and it is nearly six months until the primary. Thus far it appears that the current poll leader, Giuliani, is not being hurt by his liberal stand on key social issues. But then, after all, this IS California yet there is plenty of time for those positions to lower Giuliani’s lead.

The more interesting part of the field polling according to its director is even though Giuliani has an unusual polling of over 30% in every subgroup the numbers are much different among those saying they are paying close attention to the race. This is said to indicate a likelihood of significant shifts in that group as the campaign continues. Giuliani is at 34%, similar to his ranking in other groups, but Romney is at 21%. That’s another large jump in the numbers.

The increase in Romney’s popularity from 7% in March to 14% in the middle of August may mean drawing voters from other candidates since the undecided category grew from 15 to 20% in the same time period. With only a third of voters paying close attention to the race there is plenty of room for Romney to advance. His style is sometimes described as slow and methodical. It seems to be working.

Two noteworthy variables in this campaign season so far are the tentative schedules of primary election or caucus dates and the current Labor Day weekend plans for the Fred Thompson announcement. Regardless of the order of election dates, the handful of elections before Super Tuesday, providing it stays the same, will begin to validate who the leaders are. Whether the assumed official announcement from Thompson significantly changes the race is anyone’s guess. Some say his strategy is nothing short of genius. Others say it will create expectations Thompson cannot be expected to fulfill. Yet others say he waited too long and any advantage he had initially will have evaporated by the time he officially announces. Any way you slice it there will be a difference. Whether it launches his campaign to higher polling numbers or falls flat with Giuliani and Romney reaping the polling boosts remains to be seen.

But this post is really about the Romney campaign. His slow, steady progress has lifted his campaign dramatically during 2007. While election dates may continue to change right up until the end of the year, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, Florida and South Carolina are currently in the early hunt. The Romney campaign is leading in Iowa, Nevada and New Hampshire. Whether campaigning can raise his numbers in Florida and SC by 2008 or wins in the first three can change the current outlook is of course unknown.

If you compare Rasmussen’s daily tracking poll numbers from the end of this week with the five week average, Giuliani and Romney are holding steady, Thompson dropped about a point and McCain gained two. While Clinton dropped a couple of points, Obama and Edwards each received a slight bump. Perhaps the recent attack mode of Clinton’s rivals is beginning to pay off. With Thompson’s latest announcement plans barely a week away, many voters may be taking a wait and see approach.

One polling annoyance noticed on this blog was it would have been nice to see numbers without inclusion of potential candidates. This is not picking on Thompson since Gingrich and Gore were among those listed in polls that may have unfairly represented the strength or weakness of various candidates. The psychology of voting may suggest people have more of an incentive to vote to avoid something bad rather than something good. This also tries to explain why mud slinging works and why the perceived notions about a candidate are important. Others have suggested that some people choose a candidate based on who they think will win because they wish to vote for a winner. It may seem absurd as a method for selection, but that is one reason for being critical of polling data. Which brings to mind the common practice of campaigns to market test which messages will appeal to voters. So much for the idea of candidates presenting ideas they honestly view as important. No matter who wins, what we get after the inauguration may have little in common with what was offered before election day.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

It is turning into a weekly event for the DNC. Issue a press release to promote slanted distortions no self-respecting newspaper would publish. At the bottom of the press release is an absolutely priceless indictment of the political practices that cloud the DNC’s leading candidate, Hillary Rodham Clinton. Straight out of the blocks Hillary Rodham Clinton declined public money as she knew she would have plenty from her version of ‘real Americans’, the lobbyists and her associates from Glover Park Group as well as Penn and her husband.

The bottom of the press release disclaims any connection to a candidate or their committee. Like HRC has no idea this is being done. Yet HRC, Harry Reid, Pelosi and other Dems claim they are for ethics reform. The DNC does not even bother using links to the items they quote. The vague reference and the wire name and date are just enough to appear honest but without the links they discourage reference checking. Three were found but the time involved and the distortions uncovered won’t require that next time. And the risk it accepted that any remaining references are altered for the release.

Distorting the facts, not asking the right questions and sins of omission characterize every DNC press release checked to date. But that should come as a surprise to no one including the DNC. For the reader it is just nice to have someone else do the checking.

The DNC starts this press release with a misleading title, ‘ DNC: Mitt Romney Rejects Veterans; Refuses to Address VFW.’ Number one he hasn’t rejected veterans. The committee that represents the surrender monkey capital of the world, the Democratic party, has the audacity to say someone is rejecting the veterans. Romney did not reject the veterans nor did he refuse to attend but rather declined which is the exact word used by the DNC’s own reference in the press release. They also fail to tell the reader that President Bush, John McCain, Fred Thompson as well as Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama are attending. Two Presidential candidates from each party are attending but they only chose to mention Romney of those who are not attending.

The DNC also claims in the first paragraph of their press release that Romney does not have an understanding of military matters yet they offer no examples nor any references or other evidence because they have none and it fits their practice of distortion to omit the truth. In other words, if you have no argument, make one up.

Next they claim Romney lashed out at a veteran when all he did was interrupt him to ascertain whether the discussion was about active duty or not. The DNC makes another claim that Romney equated his sons work on the campaign with the service of military veterans. He did not. He said they are serving the nation by working on getting him elected. That is not the same thing. If the DNC defines service to country as only active military service then most people in the country have not served. This again from the surrender monkeys who think there is only one way to serve your country. Those favoring surrender in Iraq have done more to dishonor the troops than anyone and yet they accuse someone else of their own misdeeds.

The entire piece from the DNC repeats itself often, scatters a few vague references and tries to finish claiming Romney has no plan for ending the war, in essence surrender, like the Dems. That would be due to his support of the troops and desire for a victory in Iraq. And having a clear plan for military matters would be something few candidates would be anxious to offer since they are not seeking a dictatorship and must work in the system and with others to formalize such a plan when needed. Name one other candidate on either side who is speaking in well defined terms on military strategy.

But at least the DNC allows this post to maintain the theme expressing Mitt Romney Still Scares the DNC. But as often as they call for surrender, again on a nationally televised debate last Sunday, it should come as no surprise they are scared. The three sources of the DNC’s I tracked down are linked below with a link to their press release.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Romney Sticks Close To N.E. On Memorial Day
Presidential Hopeful Spends Holiday On Campaign Trail
POSTED: 6:51 am EDT May 29, 2007

August 10, 2007, 7:00 pm
Romney Confronts the War in Iowa
By Adam Nagourney
DES MOINES —

Bush, Candidates to Address VFW Convention
Last Edited: Saturday, 18 Aug 2007, 4:15 PM CDT
Created: Saturday, 18 Aug 2007, 4:15 PM CDT
By MARIA SUDEKUM FISHER
Associated Press Writer

DNC: Mitt Romney Rejects Veterans; Refuses to Address VFW