With Thompson Out, Who Benefits Most?

The decision by former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson to end his candidacy for the GOP presidential nomination removes a conservative voice from the field even as the remaining Republican candidates crisscross Florida in search of votes in advance of the state's Jan. 29 primary.

Thompson's departure from the GOP field could benefit more than one of the remaining candidates. (AP)

Thompson had long been considered a sideshow in the race for the nomination, a place that his disappointing third-place finish in South Carolina's primary on Saturday only served to confirm. It was a remarkable rise and fall for a candidate who just six months ago was considered one of the top contenders for the nomination. That fall left admirers and detractors trying to understand what his ultimate legacy will be on the contest.

Mark Corallo, a Republican consultant involved in the first days of Thompson's bid, summed up the difficulty of coming to grips with what the campaign meant:

"His legacy is one of missed opportunities, broken promises and an unfortunate disdain for the process," said Corallo. "His legacy is also one of having been the only candidate seeking the Republican nomination who was
willing to talk real substance, take a true, consistent conservative approach to every issue, of actually challenging the notion of big government, championing federalism and being honest about the looming entitlement train wreck that is going to bankrupt our kids. He was a lackluster candidate who would have been a great president."

Alex Vogel, a Republican lobbyist and close associate of former Senate majority leader Bill Frist (Tenn.), offered a similar evaluation of Thompson's candidacy. "Fred's legacy in this race, unfortunately, is one of lost opportunity," Vogel said. "He entered the field at a time of chaos with a clear window into the field. Whether it was a reality or not, the perception that he didn't work hard stuck with him - and his own scheduling didn't help to shake it off."

What's clear is that with Thompson out of the race, the crowd on the ideological right grows slightly less, well, crowded. "It would probably be best for John [McCain] if there were still three potentially viable opponents splitting up the Florida pie," said former McCain senior adviser John Weaver. "But this is a bridge he has to cross sooner rather later anyway."

Florida's primary is the first "closed" event of the '08 primary season -- meaning that no one other than registered Republicans can participate. As such, the Jan. 29 primary is likely to give an outsized voice to conservative voters. Former governors Mike Huckabee (Ark.) and Mitt Romney (Mass.) made the most concerted efforts to court these conservatives in the pre-Florida contests. But in South Carolina, the two governors competed directly with Thompson -- and to a lesser extent McCain.

The exit polls from the Palmetto State underscore Thompson's appeal to the most conservative GOP voters. Among the voters who described themselves as "very conservative" (roughly one in every three participants), Huckabee led the way with 41 percent of the vote, but Thompson claimed 22 percent (McCain placed third with 19 percent followed by Romney with 16 percent).

Thanks to Washington Post polling director Jon Cohen and his "Behind the Numbers" blog -- a must-bookmark for data-heads and political junkies -- we have even more in-depth information about what Thompson's supporters (or ex supporters as the case may be) in the early states looked like.

In Iowa, where Thompson placed a distant third, 50 percent of those backing him identified themselves as evangelicals. That number rose to 60 percent in last Saturday's South Carolina primary. Seventy percent of Thompson's Iowa backers identified themselves as "very conservative" while 47 percent of Thompson supporters in South Carolina said they were "very conservative."

"Based on South Carolina, a state that Thompson worked pretty hard, his departure would seem to help Huckabee and Romney probably more so than McCain," said Neil Newhouse, a Republican pollster not affiliated with any of the presidential campaigns.

Given Thompson's strengths with very conservative voters and evangelicals, it seems as though Huckabee should be the obvious beneficiary. But Huckabee hasn't won a contest since Jan. 3 (Iowa), and his near-constant dearth of campaign cash and organization raises real questions about whether he will be able to capitalize on Thompson's departure in Florida.

Enter Romney who is campaigning hard for the votes of conservatives in Florida and, because of his strong fundraising and willingness to contribute millions of dollars from his own pocket, will almost certainly spend the most money on reaching voters in the Sunshine State. Romney has been trying to get a clear shot at McCain from the ideological right for the entirety of the campaign, and Thompson's departure coupled with Huckabee's uncertain commitment to the state give the former Massachusetts governor the best chance he's had yet.

While Thompson's exit could well help Romney or Huckabee in the short run, his departure could accrue to McCain's benefit in the long-term battle for the nomination. First, and most importantly, if Thompson endorses (and that is a big "if"), he would likely turn to McCain -- one of his closest friends during their time in the Senate together.

Second, again thanks to Jon Cohen, a look at The Post's last national poll suggests that McCain may gain a very slight boost from Thompson's departure. If Thompson is eliminated and his supporters' second choices are re-allocated, that poll showed McCain leading the Republican field with 30 percent -- two percent higher than he received with Thompson included in the ballot test. The only other candidate to make gains with the reallocation of Thompson supporters was Rudy Giuliani, who went from 15 percent with Thompson in to 18 percent with him out.

Given the whimper with which Thompson left the race, all of this talk about what his departure means for the race may well be overblown. Ultimately, voters will pick between the candidates still in the race, not those who were once in it.

By Chris Cillizza | January 22, 2008; 4:44 PM ET | Category: Eye on 2008
Previous: Thompson Ends Race, Immediate Endorsement Unlikely | Next: Missouri Gov. Matt Blunt Won't Seek 2nd Term

Add The Fix to Your Site

Be the first to know when there's a new installment of The Fix! This widget is easy to add to your Web site, and it will update every time there's a new entry on The Fix.
Get This Widget >>

Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.

Our best candidate on the economy is Mitt Romney. He knows how to create and hold jobs. Without a strong economy, nothing else works! Romney has turned failing businesses into productive, profitable ones. Romney has real world experience with the global economy. He has used his knowledge gained as a Harvard business school and law school graduate to solve problems in private business, the Olympics and as a governor. Many consider Romney to be a economic genius.
Romney will absolutely support and defend our constitution. He supports states rights and individual rights. Romney believes in freedom. He will work for equal justice for every citizen and every state. He cares about those voters and states that other candidates have snubbed.
Romney is a man of integrity who has lived socially conservative values his entire life. He is free from the pay-back politics that always happen when a person has served many years in the senate. He will bring new vision, energy, and efficiency to office.
Romney asks the right questions, listens and learns, analyzes and evaluates carefully, and leads decisively. Romney is a TRUE Republican who is committed to the long-term strength of our nation. The more closely I examine Romney, the more I like him. Romney has my vote!

Posted by: ALMANOJODO | January 24, 2008 12:20 PM

I wanted Fred to do well in the coming elections so much I've made a stylish shirt design especially for women to show their support him. I called it my "Thompson Chick" shirt...

http://www.cafepress.com/zegear/4588235

You gave it a great shot Fred! We still believe in you and your ideals

Posted by: m_andrzejak | January 23, 2008 6:13 PM

Why the heck would someone vote for Romney? He isn't the only person who doesn't believe in Amnesty, but he WILL raise taxes and NOT decrease spending.

Are people so naive to think that the government can keep charging everything on the 9 trillion dollar credit card that is already maxed out? Everyone talks about social security, health care, jobs, gas prices, and fighting these "wars on terror" indefinitely. Where do you think this money comes from? Has ANYONE taken basic economics?

We live in a welfare state and are INVITING the illegals to come here. Romney has been successful in business but so have I and many other people. However, many times the most successful businessmen make their money at the expense of others. They screw over shareholders and reap the rewards. Romney has a HISTORY of this in his businesses.

I make more money than most people and have worked my ass off to do it. 16 hours per day for years (working a day job then working on my own businesses at night). I sacrificed partying and socializing, luxury items and vacations, time with my family, and even my health. I couldn't afford college and got nothing handed to me, but I made something of myself anyway.

My REWARD is to have MORE taxes taken from me, have my Government spend MORE money that I then am forced to pay for out of my paycheck, and have my money sent to others who DID NOT work as hard or DID NOT have the ambition and drive I had.

Romney has said several times that he does not plan to decrease spending, wants to continue the same mismanagement of the Government's....uhh I mean MY money, and he wants to tax me further to give money to the "working Americans".

I'm sick of this crap. The FED prints more money every day and is driving the dollar into the ground. They just did it again by lowering the interest rates. This increases lending which increases debt. Debt increases the money supply because with Fractional Reserve Banking, the banks don't need to actually have the assets on hand to lend money. This cycle will continue until we the country is completely screwed and Romney and McCain don't plan to do a damn thing about it!!!!!!

Huckabee supports the FairTax which would be a step in the right direction but ultimately it comes down to Government spending and Romney has no plan to decrease it. If you decrease spending you don't even need the national sales tax. People can take care of themselves, save more (we have the worst debt/asset ratio in the world) and will be encouraged to invest more.

Ron Paul and Fred Thompson were also fighting to SERIOUSLY decrease government spending but Ron wants to take it a step further and get the Government our of the business of running people's lives. People keep saying his is a libertarian when has been voted TEN TIMES to Congress as a Rupublican. So many people don't even realize the history of the Rupublican party which was based on all of the views he has. It is the NEO-Conservative base that has taken over in the last decade, but that these are NOT the principals that the party was founded on. The Republicans were elected to END wars, not to create them. They were famous for sound fiscal policy, not to run up the largest national debt in the history of the world. They were famous for protecting the rights and privacy of American's and we have been tricked my our own "Republican" government into giving up all of these rights for "our own good".

People have gone blind. The party has lost its way! Now that Fred Thompson is gone, Ron Paul might be the only REAL Republican left out of the bunch of them.

Posted by: running_tiger_1 | January 23, 2008 1:59 PM

"Who will benefit most"?? NONE of them!

Did you think conservatives would even think about supporting RINO's??

There is no difference in allowing socialists to rule from behind the curtain to being elected directly to it.

You've made your beds supporting pipedreams and populism in turning your backs on conservatism...we wish you all the luck with your decision but, God help the first one who whines that no one told them when the crap hits the fan;

Candidate Research - Know Who You're Voting For ( The Easy Way ) http://tinyurl.com/2sowta

Posted by: Winghunter | January 23, 2008 3:57 AM

As hard as Thompson hit McCain in them Debates about his stance on the Bush tax Cuts, gang of 14, McCain Feingold, McCain voting for Embryonic Stemcell Funding and a host of other un Conservative issues, Thompson calling McCain the most liberal candidate, do you really think Thompson would endorse McCain. Close in Conservative agenda to Thompson was Romney who vowed to build up the military, win the war, appoint Conservative Judges, seal the border and send all illegal aliens back to their countries. Lower taxes, and stop Government wasteful spending with the biggest Veto Pen. Romney vowed to fight for Marriage, support anti Abortion, and build up America's economy, not another even came close to his pledges, in fact Rudy said he will not change, Huckabee vowed to give amnesty to Children of Illegal aliens, and would only send back 2 million criminals like McCain.
I believe that if Thompson was to endorse a candidate it would be someone he was close to in ideology, Mitt Romney.

Posted by: edmcgarvey1 | January 23, 2008 1:38 AM

Sargent Dan made me fall out of my chair laughing that we need a Huckleberry Pyle who can budget and stand firm for what is right in America.

How can someone who had FIVE ethics violations against him for taking gifts ($112,000 in one year alone), then dish out government appointments be a man of the people. Then he started a wedding registry for more gifts when he left office. There's also that police coverup when his son hung a "mangy" stray dog and slit it's throat. Same son was arrested for going on a plane with a hand gun. This guy Huckleberry Pyle is just another TV Evangelist stealing from his flock of sheeple. Don't believe me look at Youtube.

Posted by: encinomanbrewery | January 23, 2008 1:14 AM

Short question: With Thompson Out, Who Benefits Most?

Short Answer: America.

When the going gets tough, the tough get going. I knew this guy was an empty suit, a nonhacker. Prevent the war your toddlers will have to fight. Draft College Republicans now and prevent another young "conservative" from becoming an empty suit like this boob. Semper Fi

Posted by: nrringlee | January 23, 2008 1:08 AM

Another Neoconman bites the dust, another one gone, another one bites the dust. Well there's only one real conservative left in the running, Doctor Ron Paul. Mitt "silver spoon" Romney, Huckleberry Pyle, Adolf Guiliani, and Johnny "bomb, bomb, Iran" McCain are all liberals politically, economically, and socially. None of these jokers represent the Republican party of Ronald Reagan and Barry Goldwater. I figure we will see Guiliani dropping out soon after Florida votes, and Huckleberry and McCain are pretty much broke at this point. We just gave the good doctor Paul another 2.5 million yesterday, so he's loaded with lots of money through the end of this primary season. It's Ron Paul for the Long Haul.

Posted by: encinomanbrewery | January 23, 2008 1:04 AM

The Bottom Line- Fred is an actor.
http://jtaplin.wordpress.com/2008/01/22/fred-thompson-the-actors-life/

Posted by: Trumbull | January 23, 2008 12:44 AM

Governor Huckabee has 2 million dollars on hand. He is wisely budgeting it. Governor Huckabee is not a foolish gambler willing to put everything in one place.

All it takes for us to get a President that is for us people of the United States is to vote and get our friends to go vote with us.

The foolish and wasteful spending done by the other candidates to dis-credit Governor Huckabee doesn't make them a better choice. It makes them wasteful and careless.

We need someone who can budget and stand firm for what is right in America. The non-rich average guy and gal in America outnumber these rich power mongers 10,000 to one. All we have to do is go out and vote to make our voice heard.

Please, if you can donate to Mike Huckabee at is website even if it is only 10 bucks. Most of us have debit visa cards which are accepted. Lets unite together and make the choice for ourselves.

We need Mike!

Dan Campbell
Sgt., USMC

Posted by: marinepatriot | January 23, 2008 12:08 AM

With economic smarts and views like this;

http://ronpaul.myfeedportal.com/viewarticle.php?articleid=37

I will be voting for Ron Paul.
He wants to run things right, by the US Constitution.

Posted by: davidmwe | January 22, 2008 11:22 PM

rdew- Not quite. John McCain is a moderate conservative that liberals respect because of his honesty and integrity. I'm very much a liberal and I cannot think of much that I agree with him on, but I WILL be voting for him if Clinton is the Democratic nominee. Actually, a whole lot of Democrats will be voting for, especially minorities that have been alienated and offended by the gutter politics of the Clinton's. Nominate Romney, who I think you believe is a true conservative, and you merely get a retread of Bush - another incompetent crook. Likewise Guliani. So, you bet liberals are rooting for McCain. We're sick and tired of scumbags and if it looks like we're going to be stuck with one, we will vote for a reasonable Republican.

Posted by: mibrooks27 | January 22, 2008 11:08 PM

McCain is a democrat in republican clothes. He has received more endorsements from the liberal media than all 3 democratic candidates combined.

McCain is on record stating that Ted Kennedy, Joe Lieberman, and John Kerry are his "dearest friends".

The democrats and liberal media would love nothing more than to see McCain get the nomination. They would be assured a friend in the White House that would do their bidding if he were to win the presidency.

McCain has broken ranks with true conservatism on numerous occasions with the likes of Ted Kennedy, voted against tax cuts, tried to get social security benefits for illegal aliens, etc...

McCain is a democrat running for the republican nomination so the liberals can win the White House regardless of which party wins the election.

Posted by: rdew | January 22, 2008 10:36 PM

The facts, realities and existing examples of the horrific long term effects of illegal immigration should be enough for every "real" American to be storming Washington with rage. However, it is not the case. We have a national press that for some reason seems to be invested in the defeat of American greatness and in destroying the culture and traditions of historic America. The coverage and information regarding this issue presented by the mainstream media is shameful, inept, and biased beyond a point of argument or discussion.

McCain, Huckabee, Giuliani and the Dems. support amnesty for tens of millions. They consider and label American citizens racists or bigots, if we don't agree to lie down and allow our country to be taken over by every third world inhabitant that seeks to extort financial gain from the success and ingenuity of generations of hardworking Americans? If illegal aliens are granted amnesty by these deceitful and vile politicians, we will surely be engaged in a culture war in the not too distant future that will turn quickly violent. The abundance of polling information that condemned the McCain/Kennedy farce and the irrefutable living examples of why this shouldn't continue is simply overwhelming.

There is nothing more ridiculous than for McCain and Huckabee to think we will forget. They must pay the price for their hatred of our laws and their constant attempts at using Christianity to create a moral excuse for their decision to violate the constitution of the United States-the same nation these greedy traitors want to lead! The same constitution that would grant them executive powers! Fred and Duncan Hunter believed in securing our border and attrition thru enforcement. For the sake of your children, grand-children and America vote Romney 2008.

Posted by: aslinnwinthrop | January 22, 2008 10:29 PM

The only reason that McCain won in NH and SC---is because the Independents (who plan on voting for a Dem) voted for him in te primaries. They want him to win because he will be the easiest candidate for the Dems to beat!!!

This information was passed around on all of the Dem forums!!!

Think about it........Thousands of citizens have registered as Independents due to the war and the illegal immigration issues.

McCain is pro-war and pro-amnesty---he will NO WAY win the election!!!

The Dems would also love to face Huckabee----as he has NO CHANCE of winning over the Independents!!! Even conservatives have said that they will not vote for him.

Guliani has the NY Firemen and their families----as well as the firemen/emergency responders throughtout the country---trying to bring him down. They blame him for the deaths of the firemen in Tower 2.

Guliani did not upgrade the radios they were using---which was asked numerous times since the first time that the trade center was targeted. Because of the radios, they were not able to hear the evacuation orders!!! Police who were in that same Tower were able to escape--because they were able to receive their evacuation orders!!! They didn't even want Guliani to speak at the 9/11 ceremony!!

Plus, because of Guliani's policies regarding illegals----he will NOT be supported.

This leaves Romney as our BEST choice!!!!

Posted by: Brendasue4824 | January 22, 2008 10:26 PM

Does this mean that Ron Paul will now get the media attention that was previously reserved for Thompson?

Paul appears to be the only conservative in the traditional sense of the word, and the only anti-empire republican. It's funny how the GOP has become the party of war mongering and empire, and it would be nice to see some of that macho jingoism die down. Are there any Eisenhower republicans left out there?

I like Ike and Ron Paul!

Posted by: protagoras | January 22, 2008 10:19 PM

WAKE UP REPUBLICANS / CONSERVATIVE / MODERATES!

MITT ROMNEY IS THE BEST CANDIDATE

--He was at the TOP 5 of his class at Harvard (MCCAIN was in BOTTOM 5 of Naval Academy).
--He is awesome with people (without having to being a joker).
--He is EXPERT AT RESCUING failing organizations (OLYMPICS, ETC.) and makes them successful.
--He is awesome at getting things done in organizations.
--He has the best plan for the ECONOMY, stimulus and illegal immigration (unleash economic capital, reduce the burden on OLDER AMERICANS
--ILLEGAL ALIENS need to GET IN LINE like everybody else).
--He knows how to deal with the BIG ELEPHANT (China).
--He has worked with top business leaders in over 40 FOREIGN COUNTRIES (foreign experience)
--He has been a chief EXECUTIVE (McCain is an old Washington insider)
--He WANTS TO REALLY STRENGTHEN OUR MILITARY.
--He is PRO-FAMILY and PRO-LIFE. (Both McCain and Huckabee have flipped AND flopped on taxes, illegal's, spending, etc. MCCAIN personally FILED BRIEFS AGAINST Right to Life to shut them up near an election).
--He has only had ONE WIFE, 5 kids.
--He WON the Evangelical vote in Nevada and Michigan.
--He has WON the MOST conservative, republican VOTES in all primaries so far.
--He has the MORE DELEGATE VOTES than the others.
--Reagan did NOT win in SC either.
--He will not embarrass us like Clinton did and McCain does.
--He is being GANGED UP ON by both MCCAIN AND HUCKABEE (a moderate pack against one conservative).

WHAT DO YOU WANT?
--PS: HUCKABEE: FREED 12 MURDERERS to kill another innocent and PARDONED 1200 CRIMINALS to rob and steal again.
--PS: Huckabee - HIS restructuring our tax structure is a side show. CANNOT HAPPEN. Where is the beef?
--PS: Huckabee - BILL CLINTON RETREAD. He has the whole Clinton Kit: slick talker, attacks others religion, raises taxes, thinks constitution should be a living breathing liberal document, from Hope AK, 12 ethical charges filed against him, wants Americans to subsidize illegal aliens college instead of your kids, likes to play a guitar.
--PS: McCain - supports AMNESTY, rejects tax cuts, parties with Hillary and Kennedy and other liberals.
--PS: McCain - WANTS PEOPLE TO SHUT UP TALK RADIO. That is CALLED THE MCCAIN-FEINGOLD LAW. McCain authored and passed the first successful, major shut-up bill in the history of the country. McCain-Feingold was ABRIDGES FREE SPEECH AND TALK RADIO. It limits freedom of expression for citizens and lets George Soros-type billionaires to pool money into anti-conservative defeats using a big loop-hole like 527s.
--PS: McCain - HAS TURNED HIS BACK ON CONSERVATIVES MANY TIMES. Loses his temper, gets mad easily, TAKES PRIDE IN snotty and snide remarks to fellow republicans.
--PS: McCain - TRADED MILITARY INFO TO GET BETTER POW TREATMENT.
--PS: McCain - MAY NOT MAKE IT THRU ONE TERM--he is 72+ years old

Posted by: Brendasue4824 | January 22, 2008 10:17 PM

If any of you are curious about whom the Fredheads will be breaking for now, check out this poll. It was run from a very popular pro Fred site.

http://blog.electromneyin2008.com/2008/01/22/fredheads-will-decide-the-gop-nominee/

By the way a warm welcome to any of you Fred supporters who are now joining us. If you follow the same link you will find a great site with an abundance of information on a candidate, who like Fed Thompson, stands for the full spectrum of Republican values. Don't let the media make up your mind for you; please take the time to really look at an honorable man who has the experience we need as the leader for our country. Go Mitt Romney.

Posted by: ljpitcher77 | January 22, 2008 9:52 PM

PLEASE READ THIS POLL REGARDING THE CHOICE OF FRED THOMPSON'S SUPPORTERS NOW THAT HE IS GONE FROM THE RACE:

http://blog.electromneyin2008.com/2008/01/22/fredheads-will-decide-the-gop-nominee/

Posted by: rdg | January 22, 2008 9:50 PM

I am also speaking from Ron Paul's home state of Texas, and he is the most fiscal conservative running. Better choice than John "100 years in Iraq" Mccain, Mitt "flippity flop" Romney, Mike "God's candidate" Huckabee and Rudy "9/11 is my one trick pony" Giulliani. And if he's such a joke, how has he raised so much money? More than any other candidate. Sure, Romney can buy his way to an election, which I guess is the American way these days.

Posted by: jrhodes445 | January 22, 2008 9:49 PM

Our nation needs Romney. He has spent his life fixing problems, from failing businesses to the Winter Olympics to making significant progress as governor of a state largely controlled
by democrats. He has learned to surround himself with other intelligent persons and to get the big picture before making snap judgments. Romney has demonstrated the leadership, intelligence and personal character to be an excellent president. Please support Romney so that some of his outstanding business and leadership skills can be applied to our national government.

Posted by: ALMANOJODO | January 22, 2008 9:47 PM

I have to agree with Brendasue.. a Romney-Thompson ticket would make a strong run against the Dems.

Ron Paul IS a joke. And I am speaking from his home state of Texas!

Posted by: zzzzingas | January 22, 2008 9:35 PM

nick, the economy is less volatile than it was before FDR for many reasons. But we still have business cycles. You probably know this, but it is background I am compelled to include in an abundance of caution.

1] Now, Fed Reserve would not tighten money as it did in the Depression, when it made matters worse.
2] Freed from the asset based standard, currency can be floated against perceived productivity and need.
3] Private businesses run on very short inventories, not true years ago, so now there cannot be an oversupply that causes long term unemployment when demand slows.
4] Social security and unemployment compensation keep a recession from spiraling into a depression because people no longer in the work force or temporarily out of work can still spend - demand does not increasingly spiral down.

The cycle is much dampened by all this. But the cycle still exists. So the Fed can ease money and unemployment comp payments can be extended.

JD has accurately described the genesis of the current situation. I would only add that mortgage brokers are unregulated middlemen in most states in America. The good ones are good because of their personal morality - there are no professional ethics as there are for doctors, lawyers, engineers, cpas, etc.
The bad ones cheated the lenders and the borrowers and took their commissions and ran. Future regulation by the states is probably in the offing.

Greenspan suggested that direct help to borrowers was a better "fix" than "freezing" interest or otherwise screwing around with contracts made. Many of the borrowers will be able to negotiate novations or seek bankruptcy protection. But trying to turn the business cycle on its head is a lose-lose proposition. It will let banks think they can take greater risks b/c they will be bailed out. It rewards bad behavior.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | January 22, 2008 9:32 PM

Headline "Huckabee camp short on money" Today, I read several headlines saying that Huckabee is playing it day-to-day. He does not have plans to even run commercials in Florida. Some of his staff are going without pay. This almost sounds like McCain several months ago. Could this be the end for Huckabee? Who knows? I read one report that Mrs. Huckabee and Josh Romney are in Montana for a fundraiser. Judging by the performance Mitt has had in Wyoming and Nevada, I would say Romney is getting the lions share of the fundraiser.

Posted by: ceo1 | January 22, 2008 9:29 PM

If McCain wins---it will mean MORE WAR---you can GUARANTEE that a military confrontation with Iran will take place!!!!

Remember a few months ago when he was asked what we should do about Iran?? Remember when he gave/sang his answer----bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran (Barbara Ann, Beach Boys).

Granted, no matter who gets in, it might mean a military confrontation with Iran----but McCain will GUARANTEE that it happens!!! That is why Lieberman endorsed him!!!

Posted by: Brendasue4824 | January 22, 2008 9:29 PM

Romney is the BEST candidate to enforce the laws against illegals!!!

He has been endorsed/supported by both Tom Tancredo and Sherrif Joe---as well as MANY others!!!

EVERY other candidate Huckabee, Guliani, McCain, Hillary, Obama----is going to try to force amnesty down our throats as soon as they get into office!!!

Therefore, they will want to give 20+ million illegals amnesty---plus millions more of their famiy members through chain migration!!

What will be left for you and your family??? What type of future will your children and grandchildren have!!!

This might end up being our last chance to put a stop to the madness of the illegal invasion---and Mexico's interference in our laws/country.

PLEASE HELP US TO SAVE OUR COUNTRY----VOTE FOR ROMNEY!!!!

The Romney Record: Immigration
Friday, May 18, 2007

http://www.mittromney.com/News/Press-Releases/Record_Immigration

Posted by: Brendasue4824 | January 22, 2008 9:28 PM

Ron Paul has the best chance of beating Hilary. He's the only Republican candidate calling for our withdrawl from Iraq. She has already stated she has no timetable for a withdrawl. Besides, Paul has been talking about our failing ecomomy for almost 12 months now. Now all of a sudden the economy is the main issue. What gives? Guess the MSM has failed to mention this.

Posted by: jrhodes445 | January 22, 2008 9:27 PM

Did you know..........

John McCain voted "YES" to give illegals Social Security benefits..........However, he voted "NO" (twice) to tax cuts for US citizens!!!

Posted by: Brendasue4824 | January 22, 2008 9:26 PM

Amnesty John
If this is straight talk, who needs lies?

By Mark Krikorian
NRO Contributor
January 7, 2008 5:20 PM

"In Saturday's debate, John McCain called anyone accusing him of supporting amnesty a "liar." Actually, he wasn't bold enough to make the accusation directly, instead cravenly quoting his most notable supporter: "Joe Lieberman said, John McCain has never supported amnesty, and anybody says that he does is a liar, is lying."

Since McCain has accused me (among others) of lying, let's see where the real deception is."

Contd through link..........

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NWMyMzUyMWVhNzQ1YzJhNmEzZTU2ZDlmOTY4NGU3YjE

Posted by: Brendasue4824 | January 22, 2008 9:25 PM

The Real McCain Record
Obstacles in the way of conservative support.

January 11, 2008 12:00 PM
By Mark R. Levin

"There's a reason some of John McCain's conservative supporters avoid discussing his record. They want to talk about his personal story, his position on the surge, his supposed electability. But whenever the rest of his career comes up, the knee-jerk reply is to characterize the inquiries as attacks.

Cont'd through link..........

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YjUzOGY0ODA1YzBmNjFhOWE5NWU0OTY5NTZiOGNhOGQ

Posted by: Brendasue4824 | January 22, 2008 9:24 PM

Who Benefits Most Chris Cillizza asks?

The American people benefit the most, that is who. That is all we need right now, a lazy, not very bright, B list actor in the White House. We could combine the worst of Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush into the mega Republican.

I'd take Huckleberry over this guy. At least we know, barring a total catastrophe, we'd never see the Dingleberry in the White House. Thompson? Well maybe. Heaven forbid!

Posted by: zigzagg | January 22, 2008 9:23 PM

SENATOR JOHN McCAIN ACCUSED OF SELLING OUT LAW ENFORCEMENT

By Jim Kouri
Posted 1:00 AM Eastern
January 11, 2008
NewsWithViews.com

"The news media and Republican Party bigwigs may be happy with a John McCain candidacy for President of the United States come this November, but a lot of law enforcement officers will probably sit out election day if McCain is the GOP presidential candidate."

http://www.newswithviews.com/NWV-News/news24.htm

Posted by: Brendasue4824 | January 22, 2008 9:23 PM

Fred is saying that he would be interested in the VP position. I think that Romney/Thompson would be an EXCELLENT ticket----and one that could beat the Dems.

McCain has NO chance---he is only being pushed by the liberal media and Dems---because he would be EASY for them to beat.

Think about it.......THOUSANDS of people have turned to Independent voter status due to the war and the illegal issues. McCain is running a pro-war and pro-illegal campaign. He has NO chance of winning.

Guliani is HATED by the NY Fireman and fireman/emergency responders throughout the country and their families---as they blame him for the deaths of the firemen in Tower 2---and other reasons as well. They have a national campaign to bring him down.

Huckabee is considered a joke---and ANY Dem would beat him easily!!!

Romney is our BEST chance!!!

Posted by: Brendasue4824 | January 22, 2008 9:22 PM

Ron Paul is a joke maybe that's why he's not taken seriously by the Republican establishment.

Libertarianism, for that matter, is also a joke. Just ask the libertarian educated at a state supported institution of higher learning, who received tuition assistance in the form of Federal student loans and grants, who drives on Federally and state funded highways, who flies on aircraft controlled by Civil Service air traffic controllers, who takes medication researched and funded by NIH, and who consumes food inspected by the USDA.

Posted by: montana123 | January 22, 2008 9:21 PM

Here is Romney's actual conservative record:

---In the four balanced budgets he signed into law, Governor Romney used the line-item veto or program reduction power to cut spending by nearly $1 Billion. Over the course of four budgets, Governor Romney made over 300 line-item reductions, 350 line-item eliminations and struck language 150 times.

--- When Gov Romney took office in Massachusetts, he inherited a $2 billion deficit. While in office, he turned the $2 billion into a surplus----WITHOUT raising taxes.

---Gov Romney solved the health care crisis in Massachusetts----and his plans are still used today. He did this by using the free market and competition---and without raising taxes.

--- Gov. Romney was instrumental in passing a bill abolishing a retroactive capital gains tax in the state that would have forced nearly 50,000 taxpayers to pay an additional $200 million in state taxes and fees

--- 4 years ago --- before the illegals marched in our streets --- Romney opposed a bill that would have allowed illegal aliens to get driverâ€™s licenses. "Those who are here illegally should not receive tacit support from our government that gives an indication of legitimacy," the governor said.(Scott S. Greenberger, "Romney Stand Dims Chances Of License For Undocumented," The Boston Globe, 10/28/03)

--- Romney vetoed a bill in 2004 that would have permitted illegal aliens to pay the same in-state tuition rate paid by citizens at public colleges and universities in Massachusetts.

--- Romney vetoed the bill providing state funding for human embryonic stem cell research

--- Romney vetoed a bill that provided for the "morning after pill" without a prescription because it is an abortifacient and would have been available to minors without parental notification and consent

--- He vetoed legislation which would have redefined Massachusetts longstanding definition of the beginning of human life from fertilization to implantation

--- Governor Romney strongly supported a successful ballot initiative that replaced the state's bilingual program with English immersion.(Romney Vows to Protect English Immersion Law, May 1, 2003)

--- Governor Romney demonstrated his commitment to school-choice by vetoing a bill that would have canceled funding for Massachusetts' charter-school program.(Romney to Veto Charter School Moratorium, June 23, 2004)

--- He supported parental notification laws and opposed efforts to weaken parental involvement

--- He fought to promote abstinence education in public school classrooms with a program offered by faith-based Boston group Healthy Futures to middle school students.

---Governor Romney filed and signed into law the most significant expansion of military benefits in recent years. The new law reduced to zero the cost members of the Massachusetts National Guard must pay to attend public colleges and universities, increased twenty-fold the death benefit paid to families of members killed in the line of duty, created a new annuity benefit for Gold Star spouses and boosted the amount paid to Gold Star parents.(Romney Signs Legislation Expanding Military Benefits, November 11, 2005)

Posted by: Brendasue4824 | January 22, 2008 9:20 PM

"Illegal aliens and those who support them.

Posted by: Tupac_Goldstein | January 22, 2008 08:55 PM "

And those who employ them.

Posted by: OldAtlantic | January 22, 2008 9:18 PM

"His legacy is also one of having been the only candidate seeking the Republican nomination who was willing to talk real substance, take a true, consistent conservative approach to every issue, of actually challenging the notion of big government, championing federalism and being honest about the looming entitlement train wreck that is going to bankrupt our kids. He was a lackluster candidate who would have been a great president."

Totally Ron Paul. The media IS scared of him. They are in bed with big government. Most major media outlets are owned by people with ties to the military industrial complex.

Posted by: jrhodes445 | January 22, 2008 9:17 PM

VOTE FOR ROMNEY:

You need to understand........

If anyone else gets into office---and they are able to get amnesty through----NO OTHER ISSUES will matter----as our country will be headed for bankruptcy/destruction!!!!

I belong to numerous anti-illegal groups/forums----made up of millions total memberships combined. If Guliani, Huckabee, McCain become the nominee---NONE of us are going to vote!!! We are going to let the Dems take the election-----as it will not matter who delivers the final blow to the US as we know it now!!!!!

Posted by: Brendasue4824 | January 22, 2008 9:17 PM

"Gone"? He was never "there." It's amazing he's had such a long acting career. He's absolutely lifeless.

Posted by: shag11 | January 22, 2008 9:16 PM

Illegal aliens and those who support them.

Posted by: Tupac_Goldstein | January 22, 2008 8:55 PM

It is amazing to me that Ron Paul's name isn't even mentioned. Especially when Fred Thompson's views are closer to Paul's than anyone else's.

Seriously, is the media THAT scared of Ron Paul that they give him absolutely NO respect whatsoever when he is closer to true Republican beliefs than anyone else; when he has beaten Guliani time and time again; when he is closer to Reagan's platform than ANYONE?! Honestly, what is going on here?

This quote is describing Ron Paul more than it is describing Thompson. Maybe Mark was completely confused on who he was talking about.

Has Mark Corallo even bothered to watch the debates or look at the rock-hard, unwaiverable positions that Ron Paul has been saying, or are people scared sh*tless that this guy is actually speaking the truth that they don't want to hear?

Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate that is addressing big government, overspending, and the fiscal and monetary policies that are at the heart of EVERY OTHER ISSUE. Yet he isn't even mentioned!

Posted by: running_tiger_1 | January 22, 2008 8:54 PM

vijanno, welcome to this country.

Posted by: JD | January 22, 2008 8:37 PM

sry about the double post.

As for Bush being like Carter? Um... no:

- unemployment has been at near full employment levels (5%), even below that, for virtually all of his administration

- GDP has grown at near record rates

- interest rates are very low, mortgages too (except the stupid adjustables), inflation is virtually non-existent

Of course, Carter had an oil shock that really set him back, but Bush had 9/11, you could argue which was worse for the economy and harder to overcome. (IMHO, the 1979 oil shock was worse, since it takes about 1/2 the energy to produce a unit of GDP now, than it did then).

Bush's problem is he's been spending like a drunken sailor (or a Democrat...) The next guy (or babe) needs to give government a haircut on spending; not borrow another $150b from the Chinese so we can all go to the mall some more.

Posted by: JD | January 22, 2008 8:35 PM

Romney has a sophisticated understanding of the challenges we face in both the national and global economies. He's been a highly successful leader in business making money by turning around floundering companies, understands the importance of people, organization, research, planning, communication and direction. While Governor of the mostly Democrat Massachusetts, he brought the fractured constituencies together and they became the first state with universal health care that seems to work. He took no salary at all as Governor because as he said, I have enough. He lowered state taxes. He increased penalties on drunk driving. Never supported the release of criminals convicted of serious crimes. Never was first to bring up religion. As governor he kept his promise not to attack anyone's cherished right to choice of lifestyle or abortion. He turned around MA's economy from negative to a positive. How dare he do his job well and for no pay on top of it! When the Salt Lake City Olympics crumbled under corruption and scandal he went to Salt Lake, took over for a one dollar salary, saved the Olympics and made it profitable. He supports a strong military. He led a massive security mobilization at the Olympics in the wake of the 9/11 attack and, as governor, helped build up Massachusetts' homeland security efforts. I can certainly understand left wingers hating Romney, after all he's been married to the same woman. He's from a close knit family and values family first. He is not a Washington insider! He is concerned about illegal immigration and what it means to the security of the United States. Regarding his flip-flopping on big issues? He may have flipped but not flopped! Everyone, and that means everyone in politics makes mistakes, gets to change their mind once after gaining more knowledge, and most politicians seem to change more than once. Stand all of the candidates up next to each other in a direct comparison of what they really have done and then vote for the best person to make good change and run the country in the right direction.

Posted by: dcdinnell | January 22, 2008 8:33 PM

Fred Thompson will have NO legacy. You are kidding. Even the losers who actually won a nomination are totally forgotten. Those third and fourth place politicians who couldn't even win a primary will be forgotten before you can spell "loser". Legacy? Come on!!

Posted by: tribute1 | January 22, 2008 8:30 PM

In the year 2000 Medicare cost to the retirery $56.00 A Mount,we are in 2008 and the cost of Medicare is $96.00 dollars a Mount.Were are all these Money going.
Not one of the Republican Candidat have said a word abouth containing Medicare expense,and how to fix the problem,
I for one ,I don`t Believe a word of it.
Remember Mr. President Bush, all the promesses.
No child left behinds.To me there are all left behinds,All the school are with out money People are loosing job and loosing Housen,Give Me A brake,I call them all lier.

Posted by: vjianno | January 22, 2008 8:28 PM

femalenick, IMHO (or maybe not so humble... ), the government deserves no fault for the current crisis. Not the R's in the whitehouse or D's who own congress.

The 'fault', if there is one at all, lies in:

- lenders relaxing credit standards as they got swept up in the tide
- borrowers who 'just had to have that house' (or flat screen TV or new Lexus or whatever) and way overextended (and more importantly, STUPIDLY went with adjustables)
- financial institutions deciding to double up or triple up through the collateralized securities
- the economic cycle; a crash was bound to happen eventually - it always does

Government really doesn't have any blame here. And they aren't the ones who should try to fix it either: #1 - it won't work, and #2 - you don't want to introduce a moral hazard, bailing out the speculators et al, encouraging them to do this again.

Posted by: JD | January 22, 2008 8:28 PM

femalenick, IMHO (or maybe not so humble... ), the government deserves no fault for the current crisis. Not the R's in the whitehouse or D's who own congress.

The 'fault', if there is one at all, lies in:

Posted by: JD | January 22, 2008 8:28 PM

I think McCain will benefit the most from Thompson dropping out, however, I would like to see Romney take a lead. Right now he has the most delegates, he just needs the momentum. I would like to see what someone like Romney would suggest to help the economy. His business record says a lot for me...I also like his family values and think he very well-rehearsed.

Posted by: shooter_4 | January 22, 2008 8:22 PM

JD, what if Bush is GOP's Carter?

RE: this comment: "HRC says we'll freeze the interest rates for 5 years (and watch Citi go out of business, putting 70k people on the street... and that's the GOPs fault somehow."

Given that we've had a GOP president for 7 years and has had a stranglehold on Congress for even longer, it could easily be argued that indeed, the GOP can be faulted for a lot of what's going on.

Last week, both Merrill Lynch and Citicorp got cash infusions from foreign governments. I can't be certain of the figure but as I recall roughly 15 of the top US financial institutions have now taken cash infusions from sovereignties, primarily from China, Singapore, and the Middle East. There are those who can argue the dangers of this, and their critics will call them alarmists. But setting aside the possible ramifications of this, the U.S. clearly continues to play a starring role in the global economy. The Asian market plunge yesterday is what likely prompted Bernanke to cut the rate earlier than scheduled.

So is it pandering to try to do something about the economy, Mark, or is it perhaps necessity?

Posted by: femalenick | January 22, 2008 8:22 PM

JD, what if Bush is GOP's Carter?

RE: this comment: "HRC says we'll freeze the interest rates for 5 years (and watch Citi go out of business, putting 70k people on the street... and that's the GOPs fault somehow."

Given that we've had a GOP president for 7 years and has had a stranglehold on Congress for even longer, it could easily be argued that indeed, the GOP can be faulted for a lot of what's going on.

So is it pandering to try to do something about the economy, Mark, or is it perhaps necessity? Certainly, Bernanke thought so.

The U.S. clearly continues to play a starring role in the global economy, so I don't think it's as black and white as it might have been once upon a time.

Posted by: femalenick | January 22, 2008 8:17 PM

The great thing about this article/blog is that it continues the predictable disinvolvment of Ron Paul. Not that I necessarily plan on the voting for the guy, but he is interesting. I love how most writers won't even mention him, even when writing about the republican candidates.

Posted by: fullclip16117 | January 22, 2008 8:16 PM

Romney stands the best chance of beating any Democrat candidate. His experience in turning around a major deficit in MA with a Democratic group of state legislators shows he can work with a Democratic Senate.

McCain doesn't have the people skills to manage this country. Ask his constits in AZ.

Posted by: zzzzingas | January 22, 2008 8:10 PM

republicans debating the merits of a Washington Post story about Fred Thompson. Talk about the blind leading the blind....

Posted by: montrealslim2002 | January 22, 2008 8:09 PM

You're right, Mark. I didn't see your post, but the government's fixes are far more long term, and too much of a blunt instrument, to deal with quick-response cycles like this.

I feel like Bush, HRC, and the rest want to steal my wallet, then let me keep $20 from it. I'm supposed to be happy that they let me have the $20. How patronizing, condescending, and cynical can they be?

(Then again, the American public isn't too bright...witness Rufus... I know many people, when I ask them how much federal tax they pay, tell me "No, I don't pay tax! I get a refund!")

I guess that's how HRC might get in, if she does.

Posted by: JD | January 22, 2008 8:04 PM

Robert Rubin who converted Bill Clinton to being a deficit hawk.

Bill was always fairly moderate and he actually had trouble with the Democratic congress his first two years. I think the Republican Congress and Clinton accomplished some things together they never could have with one party rule. At least until Congress got investigation happy. I have come to believe that fiscal discipline in impossible with one party rule - at least as our current political system operates.

Personally, I find the Republicans too far right and the Democrats too far left. So, President McCain with a Democratic Congress suits me just fine.

Posted by: jimd52 | January 22, 2008 7:58 PM

Bhoomes, watch as every candidate but McCain talks about massive federal intervention in the economy [beyond rate cuts and extending unemployment comp payouts].

Last night Blitzer egged the Ds on about who had the biggest giveaway
and I do not care if it is a spending giveaway or a tax giveaway it is bad to make huge policy decisions under fire.

McCain may lose by saying he does not want to support tax cuts without budget cuts, but he may eventually cave to the pressure, which is huge, but IMHO, stupid.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | January 22, 2008 09:58 AM

Posted by: mark_in_austin | January 22, 2008 7:58 PM

JD, I suggested this morning that beyond the rate cut and extending unemployment benefits - a self correcting measure in that if employment stays strong in TX the money does not get spent here willy-nilly -
that the Ds and all the Rs except McCain were pandering - bidding for the biggest payout or the biggest tax cut.

I suggested that any spending increase or tax cut is not timed for the problem.

I suggested that all Gov. can do about the cycle is soften the edges and attempts to reverse it are "stupid".

Any ideas?

Posted by: mark_in_austin | January 22, 2008 7:54 PM

Romney is the clear choice now that
Thompson is out. Huck has abandoned Florida, not that he was electable anyway.
Romney is the voice of America!
Romney will fix the economy and bring jobs.
Romney will win Florida and
the nomination!

Posted by: uuforyou | January 22, 2008 7:46 PM

I agree jimd, McCain + Dem congress has best chance for bipartisanship. And SS/Med are the 800 lb gorillas nobody is talking about. I remember when Breaux chaired some blue ribbon, bipartisan panel, with ideas to fix it (like all such, they had ideas from both sides: increase wages subject to taxation, raise the retirement age). Clinton said thank you, and put it on the shelf.

As for HRC: her hubby, when he wasn't chasing broads, governed largely as a moderate (reformed welfare, passed NAFTA, minor military responses that seemed to split the difference between war and sanctions, etc). I doubt HRC would govern that way; at least if you believe her campaign bullsh... er, I mean promises.

Last night's debate: HRC says we'll freeze the interest rates for 5 years (and watch Citi go out of business, putting 70k people on the street... and that's the GOPs fault somehow, lol) We'll give 'rebates' to people who don't pay taxes in the first place. Oh yeah, univ health care, federally funded this and that, etc.

She's a disaster in the works. She knows nothing about how the economy functions; or worse - she does know, she has no intention of fulfilling any of these promises, and she's just saying what the lefty whackjobs want to hear.

Posted by: JD | January 22, 2008 7:45 PM

Looking at who is left, I cannot see anybody who has the slightest chance of convincing the American people in November. Will it be the "lesser evil" once again, or will Bloomberg ride to the rescue as an Independent?

Posted by: dunnhaupt | January 22, 2008 7:43 PM

The money goes up, it does not go down, right gop? The trickle down effect is a myth. Liek global warming right gop?

"Supreme Court Tells Enron Investors, "So Sorry, Oh Well..."
By: Nicole Belle @ 4:45 PM - PST LA Times:

The Supreme Court today dismissed a huge lawsuit growing out of the Enron debacle that sought to hold Wall Street bankers liable for scheming with the executives of the defunct Houston energy trader.

Lawyers for investment funds and pension plans, including the University of California's pension plan, had sued Merrill Lynch and the other bankers, seeking to recover more than $30 billion that was lost when Enron folded in 2001. They argued that all the key players in the scheme that fooled stockholders should be forced to pay.

In dismissing the appeal of the Regents of the University of California vs. Merrill Lynch, the court appeared to doom the big lawsuits still pending against Enron's bankers.

Today's ruling is the most recent of a spate of decisions in which the courts have favored businesses. Last week, the Supreme Court rejected the notion of "scheme liability" in a closely watched stock fraud case involving a cable TV company and its vendors. In a 5-3 ruling, the court said suits for stock fraud are limited to the company that sells stock to the public, not bankers and other firms that had done deals with the company.

Decisions favoring businesses and protecting them from accountability from collusion and fraud against investors, whodathunk it from the Roberts Supreme Court? This precedent will also make it difficult to sue sub-prime players. As the Houston Chronicles says, the Enron-driven reforms are now unraveling. And it is this environment that the White House want YOU to direct your Social Security account...with no security.

f
u

Posted by: JKrishnamurti | January 22, 2008 7:40 PM

Fred Thompson was one of the Repug candidates who was a leader in select categories: Least creative, Best able to spit out talking points (tied with Duncan Hunter, Tom Tancredo, Mitt Romney, and Rudi Guiliani), and Married to a Babe.

Other than these meaningless attributes, I can only remembering Thompson as one candidate whose southern drawl and monologue was capable of putting me to sleep during the debates. However, he does not need to fret too much. Thompson can find new employment in Bush's Navy patrolling the Straits of Hormuez where he can bellow out that famous line: "This could get out of control. This could get out of control in a hurry."

All of the misplaced attention at Thompson and the other insignificants on stage makes me ask why has the Main Stream Media continue to disrespect Ron Paul. Paul is the only true conservative on stage who will defend and uphold the Constitution, something the rest of the Repug cvandidates seemed to have forgotten about altogether.

Posted by: AngryAmerican | January 22, 2008 7:40 PM

"Huckabee just won the White House with Thompson out of the way.

Posted by: AlbyVA"

Not if common sense and REASON has anything to do with it!!

And shockingly, they won't.....

Posted by: FredEvil | January 22, 2008 7:29 PM

We ALL benefit from the departure of this right-wing nut buffoon!

Posted by: kase | January 22, 2008 7:24 PM

What if Clinton II is a reprise of Clinton I - low unemployment, a disappearing deficit and semi-entertaining scandals that don't shake their support too much? The Clintons are far more politically adept than Carter.

JD - Seriously, I don't suppose you buy that line. I see people on the right here constantly excoriating liberals for hoping that bad things for the country will happen to enhance their election prospects. (I think I've seen you do it). Personally, I enjoy tweaking both sides.

I think a Republican president like McCain with a Democratic Congress offers the best chance for dealing with the impending fiscal crises for Social Security and Medicare. It will have to be a compromise solution. If one party tried to stuff a partisan plan through Congress, the minority could easily derail it, especially in the Senate. Those kind of fixes have to have far more support than 50% plus one.

Posted by: jimd52 | January 22, 2008 7:19 PM

With Thompson out, John McCain is the most conservative on the issue that matters most to grassroots conservatives. McCain has a lifetime rating of 83 from the American Conservative Union. What has made conservatives most despondent as they watched their party take the reins of government is the prolific spending and earmarking. Inside-the-Beltway Republicans have embraced earmarking in a way that would make Bobby Byrd blush. As McCain says, Republicans came to change Washington and Washington changed them. It isn't grassroots conservatives that are attacking McCain now, it's the Republican lobbyists who have benefited greatly from the earmarks. This explains why Romney and Guiliani are getting the support of Republican insiders. Romney is joined at the hip to Clark and Weinstock and Guiliani to Bracewell Guuiliani. Both of these firms are in the earmark business, which is surprisingly easy and, astonishingly, legal. They collect hundreds of thousands in fees steering multi-million dollar earmarks to private companies, while each firm donates to Democrat and Republican appropriators. McCain would end this taxpayer-funded party (or at least turn down the music.) McCain should go after these earmarkers just as he went after Hillary's earmark for Woodstock--directly with some Straight Talk. McCain is under attack from his own party's fat cats. The scourge of earmarking is an issue McCain can use to rally the conservative base.

Posted by: PaulKirk | January 22, 2008 7:11 PM

Who is this quote referring to:

said Corallo. "His legacy is also one of having been the only candidate seeking the Republican nomination who was
willing to talk real substance, take a true, consistent conservative approach to every issue, of actually challenging the notion of big government, championing federalism and being honest about the looming entitlement train wreck that is going to bankrupt our kids. He was a lackluster candidate who would have been a great president."

hmmmm...... let's see - "Who is Ron Paul?"

Posted by: rigatony1 | January 22, 2008 7:08 PM

jimd, you may be right that McCain is the only electable R; or maybe more accurately, he has the best chance in a general.

However, I know many R's (including some local talk show people and some relatives) who are thinking it might make sense to throw this one, let HRC get in, the country tanks due to her dramatically increasing gov spending and raising taxes, then the R's sweep in 2012 and rule things for a decade.

Kind of like, you can't have a Reagan without a Carter.

Posted by: JD | January 22, 2008 7:07 PM

"I hope that my country and my party have benefited from our having made this effort. Jeri and I will always be grateful for the encouragement and friendship of so many wonderful people." ------> Not Exactly Fred

Who's most likely to benefit among the Republican Candidates from Fred Thompson's exit?

http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=1610

Posted by: PollM | January 22, 2008 6:54 PM

My first thoughts were that Huckabee would benefit the most from Thompson's departure because of the idealogical wing of the party both are from.

Some may drift to Giuliani, however I believe Romney is a stretch due to Romney's flip floping on abortion and other issues dear to the right.

McCain will get some. The nightmare for McCain is that Huckabee is able to steam forward with Thompson's supporters and build steam into SuperTuesday, thereby deadlocking the delegates between three. However, it just may be enough to push McCain over the top and maintain his momentum.

It is hard to believe that anyone will gain much momentum from Florida, due to the field split relatively evenly between four candidates.

The voters have to be smarter than to follow the lead of a small slice of Florida voters who gave one candidate a victory by a few percentage points. In that case, McCain has it. Any reports yet on the kind of ad buys Romney is making for SuperTuesday?

Posted by: Miata7 | January 22, 2008 6:50 PM

ARG has McCain surging to a 7 point lead over Romney with Giuliani fading fast. I firmly believe that McCain is the only electable Republican.

Posted by: jimd52 | January 22, 2008 6:47 PM

I felt like I was reading his eulogy.

In that vein, who stands to profit? Romney will be the one to gain everything and McCain will be the crochety old relative that contests the will.

Posted by: cld9 | January 22, 2008 6:39 PM

I found Jesus, put 10 commandments in the class room, I'm against gay marriage and abortion, protect frozen embryos, everybody should have the right to own fifty jillion guns, and rich people shouldn't have to pay any taxes. Also, for good measure, let's start a war with Iran and North Korea.

Lastly, let's get rid of social security and medicare and, to all you people who don't have health insurance, go to Hell and fend for yourself!!!

Hey all you Republicans I'm your guy! Vote for me!!!

Posted by: montana123 | January 22, 2008 6:37 PM

Latest poll has McCain pulling away and Giuliani in 4th place behind both Romney and Huckabee. If this trend holds up, Giuliani is toast and McCain is probably the biggest beneficiary.

http://americanresearchgroup.com/

Posted by: jimd52 | January 22, 2008 6:36 PM

kind of a short lived campaign!

Posted by: oknow1 | January 22, 2008 6:12 PM

I hope he can get his bit part back on Law & Order. Meanwhile, the Republican powers continue their search for another mindless puppet.

Posted by: joy2 | January 22, 2008 6:11 PM

Huckabee's numbers in Florida have been dropping too. Romney appears, from his ads, to be trying to reach out to moderates. He is portrayed as a problem solving businessman turned governor who will bring change to Washington and get them working on addressing our problems.

Most people do not vote ideologically, although those that do are the most faithful primary voters. Perhaps Romney feels he has solidified the non-evangelical ideological conservative vote and is trying to cut into Giuliani's support - Rudy has been slipping lately.

Posted by: jimd52 | January 22, 2008 6:09 PM

There is one informal poll that shows that about half of Fred's supporters will join Mitt, while a quarter will go to Rudy. The rest are split between Huckabee (one vote), "write Fred in", and a few for McCain. Paul is excluded to keep the results from showing 99.9% Ron Paul. (Not because he has no support.) The link is somewhere in here (found via Google News):

http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/190882.php

Posted by: Jed_Merrill | January 22, 2008 6:08 PM

He was an actor getting paid to deliver lines. Then he ran for president. Same thing.

Posted by: dfc102 | January 22, 2008 6:03 PM

AlbyVA,

I really doubt that this gives Huckabee much of a boost. Thompson didn't earn more than about 15 percent in any contest, and only a little more than half of these are evangelicals. Many may head toward Huckabee, but most who would vote for Huckabee already defected in that direction a month ago. The remaining Thompson supporters probably include many of those who want the social conservative but don't want someone with progressive ideas about government. That is to say, Thompson's supporters have been the more politically ideological evangelicals, and now they will go through serious fits choosing among the remaining candidates, all of whom fail to meet the ideological qualifications in some way.

Thompson's supporters may lean slightly one direction or another, but I doubt they will throw their weight solidly for one candidate, and so no one will get a huge bump out of this. The remaining candidates really are going to have to fight for Thompson's die-hard supporters because these are people who were dissatisfied with the crop of candidates all through the spring and summer until they finally pressured Thompson into the race.

Also, contrary to the Post's numbers showing a gain for Guiliani from the last poll, with Guiliani sinking fast, I doubt he will attract much extra support. A one point bump would surprise me. Picking up the three points predicted by the poll seems overly optimistic at this point.

Posted by: blert | January 22, 2008 5:58 PM

Romney should get many of these supporters because he is the most viable true conservative. Romney should win Florida.

Posted by: wwinfield | January 22, 2008 5:46 PM

I guess the folksy average everyday guy schtick didn't work for Fred this time. He came across as a complete buffoon even for Joe six pack. BTW, what happened to the red pickup truck? Maybe Thompson should have incorporated more discussions about gay marriage, flag burning, and abortion into his canned stump speech. In any event, it looks like Huckabee has the guns, gays, and god vote locked up.

My question, though, is which Republican candidate is going to be able to unite the country club blue blooders and the Hezbollah bible thumpers to forge another 50.1% coalition for the general election?

Posted by: montana123 | January 22, 2008 5:42 PM

Huckabee just won the White House with Thompson out of the way.

Posted by: AlbyVA | January 22, 2008 5:38 PM

"Republican voters probably have figured that Hillary is the Dem nominee so they will be angling towards the candidate most able to defeat her."

GOP voters have had that mindset for a year or more.

Ironically, party faithful are likely the least able to effectively pick the best candidate for the general. See Kerry, John.

Posted by: bsimon | January 22, 2008 5:35 PM

Chris,

Republican voters probably have figured that Hillary is the Dem nominee so they will be angling towards the candidate most able to defeat her.

The choosing and electing won't be on ideology as much which horse will beat the filly.

Another prediction:

The next candidate out is Huckabee aka "The Conservative Jimmy Carter".

Posted by: rfpiktor | January 22, 2008 5:24 PM

Judge, reverse the order so that #10 becomes #1, send them to Letterman, and Fix posters could qualify for membership in the Screenwriter's Guild!

Posted by: femalenick | January 22, 2008 5:23 PM

Judge,

Your post is better than mine. Yet, not as concise.

Posted by: rfpiktor | January 22, 2008 5:14 PM

This was my prescient post-S.C. scenario:

"SOUTH CAROLINA:

Thompson begs the wife. Will re-retire with what is left of his modicum chance of ever winning anything." Posted by: rfpiktor | January 19, 2008 02:26 PM

Posted by: rfpiktor | January 22, 2008 5:07 PM

Worth posting twice.

"Those close to Thompson say that his mind has been elsewhere since...."
1. 1992.
2. He married that hot wife of his.
3. He found out that real life isn't scripted.
4. He found out that Nixon said mean things about him.
5. He didn't get Sam Waterston's endorsement.
6. Law and Order hired yet another hot new assistant DA for Jack McCoy and Fred hasn't been part of the show.
7. The lease ran out on the Red Truck.
8. Since it was revealed that historians believe that the real reason Robert E. Lee surrendered at Appomattox is because the Union drummer boy was Fred Thompson.
9. He heard about the impending leak of his Secret Service codename, "Johnny Sack."
10. The Screenwriter's strike deprived him of anything to say.
11. His wife left him for older man.
12. He heard he was up for part of Gollum in Peter Jackson's upcoming production of the Hobbit.

Posted by: judgeccrater | January 22, 2008 5:07 PM

Campaign 2008

Primaries & Caucuses

Candidate Quiz

recent posts

Stories by Category

Stories By Date

Related Links

More on The Fix

From The Post

BlogRoll

washingtonpost.com's Politics Blog

With Thompson Out, Who Benefits Most?

Comments

Post a Comment