THE NOTE: Fred's Fumbles

For Thompson, a fate worse than low poll numbers -- a punchline

ByABC News
February 12, 2009, 4:29 PM
October 4 2007 — -- To: Fred Dalton Thompson, US Senator, Tennessee (retired)

From: Arthur Branch, District Attorney, New York County (retired)

Buck up, son. So you weren't sure what you'd have done in the Terri Schiavo case -- they're not gonna unplug you for that. So you want "due process" for Osama -- we know that's code for letting Jack Bauer have at him. So now you're concerned about the threat posed by the Soviet Union -- so was Ronald Reagan, and that worked out pretty well for that old boy, now didn't it?

It's like I always told McCoy -- smile for the cameras, let the flies buzz, and elections are a breeze. And he's a liberal! You're a conservative, which means you're for solid, righteous, good things, like American values, common sense, and cookies. Plus you've got Jeri to protect you from the snakes -- particularly in that jungle of a campaign you've got. (And might I say, she is looking . . . po-li-ti-cal these days.)

--------

One month into the campaign that never seemed to start, Thompson looks like he spent all summer testing the waters but somehow never learned how to swim. His campaign may be right that voters aren't paying attention to his daily hiccups, that he can talk his way out of any gaps in his knowledge. He's still a solid second in national polls.

But something dangerous is happening to Thompson: A perception is sinking in that he's in over his head, or at least that he's not showing much interest in this whole running-for-president thing. This magnifies every mistake -- and once this narrative is written, good luck trying to act your way out of it.

The New York Times' Adam Nagourney sums up his campaign as one of "broad generalities" -- "Let's continue doing what works and quit doing what doesn't work" -- and little energy. "As Mr. Thompson campaigned in Iowa this week, he was something other than the dynamic presence that some in his party have been yearning for," Nagourney writes. "Iowans saw a subdued, laconic candidate who spoke in a soft monotone, threw few elbows and displayed little drive to distinguish himself from his opponents."

Add these to the catalog of miscues: Aside from expressing concerns about those pesky Soviets in an interview with Radio Iowa yesterday, he talked about how proud he was to guide Chief Justice John Roberts' nomination through the Democratic-controlled Judiciary Committee. (The Republicans were in charge until this year.) He also switched his position on ethanol subsidies, which he voted against while in Congress, Rick Pearson reports in the Chicago Tribune.

That follows a similar switch on No Child Left Behind, which he voted for and now rails against. And David Brody of the Christian Broadcasting Network has video of Thompson offering this reaction to the hypothetical situation of a governor signing a bill allowing gay marriage: "So be it." (There's a campaign slogan for you.)

The Des Moines Register's Linda Lantor Fandel found him "awkward at making small talk, or not interested" during Thompson's editorial board meeting. "But as the interview got under way, Thompson demonstrated that he knows how to frame big problems -- national and international," she writes. Yet "Thompson gave long, meandering answers, but offered few solutions or detailed plans." If he doesn't become president? "The worst thing that can happen to me in this process is that I get sent back to being the happiest man that you ever met," Thompson said.

Isn't this all just prelude to the clash of the New York titans anyway? Former mayor Rudolph Giuliani, R-N.Y., may be itching for a battle with Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., but Clinton's got to feel good about the matchup, according to the new ABC News/Washington Post poll. Clinton tops Giuliani 51-43 in the hypothetical head-to-head.

"Belying Clinton's polarizing image, as many say they would not even consider Giuliani for president (44 percent) as definitely rule out Clinton (41 percent)," ABC polling director Gary Langer writes. And -- surprise -- Bill Clinton is as popular as ever: 66 percent approval rating. "Bill Clinton's legacy does at least as much for his wife's presidential ambitions as Rudy Giuliani's 9/11 performance bolsters his," Langer writes.

But hold on, Rudy -- who's this with the $5 million haul? Dr. No himself -- Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, whose has tapped libertarian and anti-war sentiments inside the GOP with more success than most observers could have imagined.

"Long treated at debates as the cantankerous old uncle you don't want to get started talking about the Gold Standard, Paul had big news," write ABC's Jake Tapper and Z. Byron Wolf. " 'It's really fascinating,' Paul said, seeming as surprised with the news as was much of the rest of the political world. 'I think the time is right. People are really frustrated -- frustrated with both parties, frustrated with the war.' "

This means Paul cannot be ignored any longer -- and will provide endless fodder for the online army who've been boosting his candidacy for months. "Whether Paul will be a major factor in the GOP nominating contests remains to be seen, but his money totals -- it is likely he will have outraised several second-tier Republicans and Democrats combined -- mean he will be in for the long haul," writes Reid Wilson of Real Clear Politics.

For some perspective, Paul appears to have raised about as much last quarter as Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Gov. Bill Richardson, D-N.M., and only $2 million less than former senator John Edwards, D-N.C. He raised considerably more than the combined quarterly tallies of senators Joe Biden, D-Del., and Chris Dodd, D-Conn.

Paul brought in FIVE TIMES what former governor Mike Huckabee, R-Ark., raised, despite Huckabee's second-place finish in Ames and the surge of attention that brought to his campaign. "We don't need to raise as much funds because we are frugal," Huckabee said in a statement, per ABC's Kevin Chupka. That's fortunate, but last quarter was a huge missed opportunity for him to cash in -- one he apparently couldn't take advantage of.

On the Democratic side, Clinton in pressing her advantage -- and taking on President Bush in the wake of his veto of the children's health insurance bill. "Hillary stood up for universal health care when almost no one else would, and kept standing 'til six million kids had coverage," her new ad states. "So now that almost every candidate's standing up for healthcare for all, which one do you think will never back down?"