Thompson vs. Everybody?
EmailABC News’ Christine Byun Reports: Republican candidate Fred Thompson went down the line of his South Carolina GOP competitors Wednesday and described his differences with them.
"We have some Johnny-come-lately’s now that don’t want to talk about their record and they’re hoping there’s not enough time for anybody to even examine them,” Thompson told a crowd at a campaign stop in Abbeville, South Carolina.
Thompson may have been referring to former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who focused his campaign on Michigan before yesterday’s primary, and who has refocused his efforts in the Palmetto State and Nevada in the lead up to Saturday’s votes.
During the event, a man asked Thompson to differentiate himself from former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee and Arizona Senator John McCain.
Thompson described fellow Southerner Huckabee as "very articulate, very witty, but does not like to answer questions about his record." He called the former Governor “weak” on the issue of illegal immigration and again railed against his endorsement from the New Hampshire National Education Association, a teachers’ union.
“Is he proud of that endorsement?” Thompson asked rhetorically.
Of his "personal friend," and former Senate colleague, John McCain, Thompson said he would “never forget” McCain’s service to the country. However, he said he disagreed with McCain on tax cuts and immigration, particularly his support for last year’s failed immigration reform.
“When I saw him join forces with Senator [Ted] Kennedy on that, I knew that he was wrong track and he was, and the American people said so,” Thompson said.
While he was not asked about rival Mitt Romney, in his response, Thompson also threw some more barbs at the former Governor of Massachusetts for “tailoring” his message to Michigan residents.
"He basically promised the federal government would come in and bail out Michigan when he got elected President – very conservative notion, don’t you think?” Thompson asked facetiously.
Sen. DeMint: GOP Race Could Go Until Convention 
Obama Avoids Questions on Contraception Rule
Thompson/ Clinton ’08 would that be a good team? 2 wornout old bags
Posted by: Frank Furter | January 16, 2008, 3:24 pm 3:24 pm
“ignorant and superficial”
Pretty much sums up most of our electorate today. Thanks largely to the media, of which ABC plays a prominent role.
Posted by: jdawg | January 16, 2008, 4:10 pm 4:10 pm
“Thompson vs. Everybody”? Which candidates in EITHER party are not facing off against all the others? Which candidates are NOT slamming the others on various political points and differences in every debate ever, going back long before Lincoln and Douglas? This is what political campaigns are!
So Fred Thompson runs his campaign the same as everyone else, and we’re to believe that’s malicious somehow? Have American journalists always been this blatantly biased and stupid, or is it just more apparent now that they don’t control the information highways anymore?
I have my suspicions.
Posted by: JohnnyT | January 16, 2008, 4:48 pm 4:48 pm
Thompson IS against the RINOs in the race. Check out his latest interview on Hannity and Colmes from yesterday.
Posted by: redneck hippie | January 16, 2008, 5:13 pm 5:13 pm
I guess it’s preferable that he just tells stupid jokes, avoids all issues and never discuss his or anybody else’s record. Liberals, especially the media (FOX included) do not want Fred to win the nomination. They prefer left leaning RINO’s. Can they make it any less obvious.
GO FRED
Posted by: Buttercup | January 16, 2008, 5:16 pm 5:16 pm
First Fred they say he has no energy, and thats the knock against him, then he speaks up… and that the knock against him…?????? Wonder why ABC isn’t curious about his claims, and research those….oh wait i know the answer….that would be real JOURNALISM, investigating claims looking at facts asking and answering hard questions! WE all know The MSM (Including FOX) won’t want to do that kind of Journalism, We should just send them (Canidates) all to try out for American Idol, it seems to be the standard for how we elect a president these days, Why have primaries, Caucus or voting machines just give them all a phone number and we can be done with this…..it will be about as effective. BTW Thompson is the only real conservative, ran on and running on True conservative values, everyone else wants to change the party, like a catholic who supports abortion, their version of being Catholic. Romney and Thompson are the only GOP canidates, who could not run as DEMOCRATs, can’t say that about the others.
Posted by: Ray | January 16, 2008, 6:30 pm 6:30 pm
Thompson is campaigning against who he is running against. He’s not campaigning against the democrats – but I’m sure he’ll cross that bridge when he gets there. He’s the only Republican who gives a concise answer to the questions asked of him.
Posted by: James | January 16, 2008, 6:30 pm 6:30 pm
This is what politicians with values and ideas they believe do; differentiate themselves from others. When you are trying to hide your true feelings, sloganeering, pandering and populism gravy replace the meat of policies and ideas, i.e. McCain, Romney (who I could almost like), Huckabee, and even Guliani to some extent.
Go Fred.
Posted by: Doug | January 16, 2008, 6:33 pm 6:33 pm
How can anyone who is truely conservative support anyone else other than Duncan Hunter or Fred Thompson?
I will not vote for McShamnesty, EVER. Rudy, maybe? but he’s still a gun grabber. I will choose principal over political expediency. What used to set Republicans apart from Democrats is they stood for something. No so anymore… and it will be painful lesson. (and cosly for all our pocketbooks)
Don’t believe the hype of “Fred’s just too late!”. That is the media/talking heads on TV speaking. the MSM wants a liberal leading the Republican party. Then the Democrats can really go left and still look reasonable.
Posted by: CPT Brad | January 16, 2008, 7:01 pm 7:01 pm
It’ll be interesting to see how correct the polls for South Carolina turn out to be.
I wonder how well conservative candidates like Duncan Hunter and Fred Thompson would do if the MSM (and FOX News, too) gave them the same respect as liberals, which would be all the Democrats, John McCain, and Mike Huckabee.
Go Fred!
Posted by: Sherry | January 16, 2008, 7:17 pm 7:17 pm
Fred Thompson is the best choice out of all the Republican nominees still with a chance to win.
Posted by: Josh | January 16, 2008, 7:21 pm 7:21 pm
Hey Fred,,how many primaries have you won, placed or showed in? I guess voters really value what you have to say.
Posted by: Jerry | January 16, 2008, 7:24 pm 7:24 pm
I hope South Carolina has better sense than New Hampshire. Vote fore Fred!
Posted by: Jeff_NH | January 16, 2008, 7:26 pm 7:26 pm
Fred isn’t even trying to win, and was a Nixon mole in the Watergate hearings. (Google it) Not exactly the brightest ship on the block. I don’t dislike him personally, I just don’t see a president there. He’s a better actor than a lawyer or politician. He should take it easy and go back to films. Can you actually see Fred Thompson negotiating on an international summit with Putin? Enough said.
Posted by: rw3 | January 16, 2008, 8:52 pm 8:52 pm
“Q: Can you actually see Fred Thompson negotiating on an international summit with Putin?”
Yes, in a heartbeat. I’d rather have Fred sitting across the table in a foreign policy situation than any other candidate, hands down!
Hillary/Obama would fawn all over Putin and declare “Look Komrade, thanks to us socialism lives on in the USA!”.
Huckabee would… would… well, I cannot even imagine that exchange.
Posted by: electric-rascal | January 16, 2008, 9:14 pm 9:14 pm
Personally I think any republican who supports the policies of the last 8 years, their chances of getting elected in Nov. is slim to none. With Bush’s approval at 32% and the congress even below that, the odds are that the democrats have the red carpet rolled out for them straight to the White House. It’s theirs to loose. I will go down through each candidate and describe their short comings. Rudy is determined on the war and has a creditable history as mayor but his liberal side on social issues is seriously lacking. Romney in the private sector made a name for himself. Romney is the most unique out of all the candidates, he has a way of changing his opinions to fit the current situation, a reminder of John Kerry. Huckabee grabs a lot of attention. He has the smoothness of a Bill Clinton, he’s good with one liners and came out of no where to the win in Iowa. His shortcomings specifically is the evangelical factor and his history of raising taxes and spending more than Bill Clinton. While he talks a good talk he doesn’t have the track record of being a true conservative. McCain would be so much like George Bush on the war and has committed to follow the same path as Bush. His stance on illegal immigration and tax cuts paints him as another liberal. Fred Thompson was a personal favorite for me being from Tennessee but the guy just never seemed to be into it. He came out of the gate crawling and didn’t give a lot of hope to his supporters. He doesn’t have the fire in the belly that is needed. When you add up all of these candidates with exception to Ron Paul they don’t offer anything new then what we have seen in the last 8 years. This is the most important point, notice the turnout on the democratic side? People are turning out by the truck loads. The republicans supporters aren’t fired up about anyone , again with exception to Ron Paul ( RP supporters are everywhere!) When it comes time in Nov the republicans need a candidate that offers fresh ideas and a 180 degree in change for American policies. Ron Paul brings the policies that are truly conservative and has an amazingly consistent record on the issues. No one in the press seems to talk about that. Conservatives can’t get their head around supporting a candidate that wants to pull of of Iraq. They think it’s a defeatist attitude, it’s not. It’s correcting bad policy. Minus the foreign policy disagreement between Paul and conservatives he’s hand’s down the most conservative. If you think I’m crazy check his voting record before you speak all the media propaganda.
Posted by: Tim | January 16, 2008, 9:16 pm 9:16 pm
Fred is THE man!
Posted by: nate | January 16, 2008, 9:29 pm 9:29 pm
I’m voting for Fred because he is a man of principle and integrity. Principles and integrity is what the Republican Party has been lacking lately, so Fred is the clear choice.
Posted by: Eric | January 16, 2008, 9:53 pm 9:53 pm
Fred is the ONLY conservative in the bunch and my vote is going to him. I will vote for the democrat before I vote for McCain or Huckabee.
Posted by: Marilyn | January 16, 2008, 10:16 pm 10:16 pm
I originally was voting for Fred until I researched Ron Paul.
He has never voted to raise taxes.
He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.
He has never voted to raise congressional pay.
He has never taken a government-paid junket.
He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.
He voted against the Patriot Act.
He voted against regulating the Internet.
He voted against the Iraq war.
That’s a TRUE conservative. If men and woman have to die for war they should be hunting down Bin Laden and not nation building in Iraq. Ron Paul voted to get Bin Laden not nation build in Iraq.
Posted by: Tim | January 16, 2008, 10:25 pm 10:25 pm
To Jerry Jan 16, 2008 7:24:54 PM
Fred placed third in Iowa, second in Wyoming. He didn’t really run in NH or MI because of the crossovers and moderate Republicans there who are sold on McCain and Huckabee. His campaign is smart- this is going to be a long and drawn-out process and these candidates need to focus where they can best use their resources; for Fred this is the conservative South.
Posted by: Daniel Davies | January 16, 2008, 10:58 pm 10:58 pm
I like Fred. He is likable, however, he also IS presidential. He can look anybody in the eye and go toe to toe with them. Fred isn’t slow. He is measured. Yes, he is an actor, but that does nothing but help his presentation and like it or not ob=ne must have that or he will never get anything across to us fickle and highly critical of everything Americans. We can Trust Fred. His past is the best forcast of the future. I like Romney. He is an incredible CEO and like it or not, we need a nominee with that quality as well. I don’t get it. All you have to do is listen to the MSM and they will tell you who to vote for. They slam Fred and Romney the most, therefore they fear them the most. But, please get informed before you vote and if you don’t get informed, PLEASE DON’T VOTE…
Posted by: Dave | January 17, 2008, 3:17 am 3:17 am
I think that this is a a great article for Fred, especially the Title. Fred is against the other candidates because at some point, the others differ from the principles that have made our nation great: Federalism, Limited Gov’t, restrained spending, low taxes, pro-growth, free market solutions, etc.
Disclaimer: I’m an active evangelical Christian and I do not want Huckabee for president. He doesn’t understand the unintended consequences of violating the principles I listed above.
Posted by: Zach | January 17, 2008, 7:35 am 7:35 am
“He basically promised the federal government would come in and bail out Michigan when he got elected President – very conservative notion, don’t you think?”
Only, Romney actually did not “basically” promise this at all, not in the least; and to the contrary, Romney specifically said that he was not open to a “bail out”. So, no matter how Thompson interprets Romney’s pledge to increase the U.S. commitment to industry and innovation, to the point of higher investments, it’s not a bail out by any means.
Posted by: REN | January 17, 2008, 12:44 pm 12:44 pm
I have to note, Fred didn’t disagree with his old friend McCain about McCain-Feinglod, the bill that Thompson helped get through the Senate. But, I guess, that’s because Thompson has never repudiated his support for it.
Posted by: gregh | January 17, 2008, 1:18 pm 1:18 pm
2008.01.17 Politics and National Defense Roundup
My daily roundups grow as the day goes on. Don’t forget to check back later. Today’s headlines: Death Blow to DefeatistsPete Hegseth: Yesterday we were losing in Iraq, today we are winning. The Lessons of Iraq Stopping Iran: Why the Case for Military A…
Posted by: Bill's Bites | January 17, 2008, 1:30 pm 1:30 pm
“He’s not campaigning against the democrats – but I’m sure he’ll cross that bridge when he gets there.”
Given that he managed to work in a reference to Ted Kennedy, I’d say he’s already found a way to drive off of cross that bridge.
Posted by: Ralph Phelan | January 17, 2008, 1:39 pm 1:39 pm
Drat! No preview function. I meant to say:
Given that he managed to work in a reference to Ted Kennedy, I’d say he’s already found a way to “drive off of” … whoops!… make that “cross” that bridge.
Posted by: Ralph Phelan | January 17, 2008, 1:40 pm 1:40 pm
Life with a liberal veil over your eyes can warp your view of what is actually going on in our political world. News agencies such as ABC, NBC, and CNN only give praise to those who are most tainted by the dark side (liberal). Most of the news agencies are owned by companies such as GE look at their loyalties, They support ($) only liberal organizations and candidates. As for FOX they are trying to be politically correct, and are also supporting the most liberal of all the candidates that are running, to attract a broader audience. An other thing they all have in common is downplaying those that are the most conservative.
Fred is indeed the best chance we have for the salvation of the US.
He was the lead prosecutor in the downplayed CHINAGATE scandal
(Didn’t hear about it, What a surprise!)
Who was involved in the scandal?
_maybe… the Clintons
And what did they do?
_maybe sell nuclear secrets to china
He has always had the best interest of us all in mind. He is running for president not because of furthering his resume but to make and keep the US a safe place for his and our children to live and prosper…
Do the RIGHT thing
VOTE FRED!!!
Posted by: Strife | January 17, 2008, 1:46 pm 1:46 pm
Fred Thompson is the only CONSISTENT conservative in the Republican field. All the other have either conveniently changed positions on conservative issues recently (Romney on abortion and NRA membership; and Huckabee just flip flopped on his anti-smoking position a few days ago) or still hold to more liberal positions (like McCain on immigration and taxes, or Rudy on a whole bunch of positions).
Posted by: Chris | January 17, 2008, 1:55 pm 1:55 pm
Gregh, Fred has repudiated his support for McCain-Feingold. American Spectator last year sometime.
Posted by: Fz | January 17, 2008, 3:04 pm 3:04 pm
There’s a problem with Fred being an actor? Good thing Ronald Reagan didn’t know that.
Go Fred!
Posted by: Ron J | January 17, 2008, 4:34 pm 4:34 pm
So what if Fred is an actor. IIRC one of the most consistant criticismx of GWB is that he mangles his delivery and doesn’t “sound Presidential”.
I think the majority of the criticism from the MSM has not been over policy but how GWD “sounds”.
Fred does not have that problem. He just answers in his Tennesee drawl and doesn’t let himself be hurried.
It would be nice to have another President that realizes that the press is there to listen to him, not he to them. They aren’t qualified to have an opinions anyhow.
Posted by: John D | January 17, 2008, 7:16 pm 7:16 pm
Fred is either lying or ignorant about Romney’s “federal bailout” of Michigan.
He said no such thing. What he did say is that he would increase federal investment in a variety of areas including energy, materials, fuel AND automotive research: Read it yourself:
Posted by: Mick Stockinger | January 17, 2008, 7:21 pm 7:21 pm
Bush’s approval is down because of his failure to secure the borders, and failure to enforce laws against employing illegal aliens.
Iraq has contributed 400,000 men to their own security, men knowledgeable about Iraqi culture, and able to identify foreign troublemakers at a glance. Iraq is won, and has made it to the ranks of creaky third world nation, rather than Police State, or Charnel House.
Posted by: Don Meaker | January 17, 2008, 10:18 pm 10:18 pm
“Look how industries in other states have thrived from the spin out of technologies from our investment in these areas. So if we can invest in health care, in defense, and in space, why not also invest in energy and fuel technology here in Michigan?”
Note that all that investment in other areas resulted in business creation in states other than Michigan.
Note that all the new automotive jobs being created by Honda and Toyota are being created in states other than Michigan.
Why is that? I think it has to be something about Michigan in particular, be it demographics, education, tax rates, climate, infrastructure, or the strength of unions there.
So how does Romney propose to “invest in energy and fuel technology here in Michigan“? Are all energy and fuel technology programs going to be earmarked “Michigan only”? When NASA or the DOE licenses something like a breakthrough fuel cell technology, is the license going to include a clause saying “This product can only be manufactured in Michigan?”
Romney was BSing. There’s no way around it.
Posted by: Ralph Phelan | January 18, 2008, 9:52 am 9:52 am
Thompson is the only consistent conservative in the group. Yet identity politics is busting the party apart. It may even promote the most liberal Republican, John McCain to the forefront.
McCain will destroy America with amnesty of 15million new Democrats. He will carbon tax us into recession to solve a problem that doesn’t exist.
He will expand his unconstitutional censorship of free political speech.
McCain is death to America.
Posted by: RA | January 18, 2008, 10:21 am 10:21 am