Official Campaign 2008 Hot Stove Thread

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
MaxFisher said:
I really like Thompson's chances. He appeals to...

1. Baby Boomer Reagan Republicans.

2. Second Generation Republicans like myself who are ready for an articulate, camera savvy communicator who shares conservative values.

3. Moderates will vote for Thompson at least 2 to 1 over Hillary.

#3 is key.

dbs
 
MaxFisher said:
I really like Thompson's chances.

Dream on, dream on
Dream yourself a dream come true
Dream on, dream on
Dream until your dream come true
Dream on, dream on, dream on...

Sing with me, sing for the years
Sing for the laughter and sing for the tears
Sing with me, if its just for today
Maybe tomorrow the good lord will take you away
 
MaxFisher said:
I really like Thompson's chances. He appeals to...

1. Baby Boomer Reagan Republicans.

2. Second Generation Republicans like myself who are ready for an articulate, camera savvy communicator who shares conservative values.

3. Moderates will vote for Thompson at least 2 to 1 over Hillary.



1. can you name me a significant piece of legislation he's responsible for

2. can you give me a reason for him wanting to be president besides being camera-savvy?

3. can you give me a reason to vote for him other than him being a Republican?

4. can he get past the colorful, wide-ranging sex life that's going to surface if/when he becomes a serious candidate?

5. does he care?
 
the thing is, the big issue in the next election is going to be basic competence. after 8 years of wild incompetence, the American people are going to want a candidate who can govern.

Fred might be even lazier than Bush, and might care even less about the operations of government than Bush. if that's possible.

i'm sure he's amiable. i know he's good on camera. and he's got that swagger and southern drawl that so many Republican men find so appealing in a way that is not at all gay and doesn't in any way make them imagine the weight and heft of that huge pair he's got swinging down there.

but, sorry, he's still a Hail Mary candidate, which speaks volumes about the rest of the field.
 
Irvine511 said:


but, sorry, he's still a Hail Mary candidate, which speaks volumes about the rest of the field.

Yeah, the more and more I look at the Rep canidates the more and more I realize why the Republicans are so scared. They either have canidate such as this, Republicans that are not really "Republicans", and those that divide the base or at least don't cater to the Christian right. So unless someone rallys the Christian right into voting for someone they really don't care for just to keep the Republican party(which I know many will not go to the polls just for that reason) then I don't see them having a shot.
 
Irvine511 said:




1. can you name me a significant piece of legislation he's responsible for

2. can you give me a reason for him wanting to be president besides being camera-savvy?

3. can you give me a reason to vote for him other than him being a Republican?

4. can he get past the colorful, wide-ranging sex life that's going to surface if/when he becomes a serious candidate?

5. does he care?


1. True, he wasn't very proactive when it came to legislation. Luckily he'll be running against Hillary who has done little to distinguish herself as a Senator. (except vote for a war her party detests)

2-3. He'll announce, establish what he stands for, start debating and these things will come to light.

4. Maybe Bill Clinton will give his some advice.

5. He won't run if he doesn't care.
 
MaxFisher said:



1. Luckily he'll be running against Hillary who has done little to distinguish herself as a Senator. (except vote for a war her party detests)
That is such a weak argument. Most Democratic members have criticized the "evidence" they were handed.

MaxFisher said:


5. He won't run if he doesn't care.

:lol: Yeah, we've never had canidates that have ran for the wrong reasons.
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:

That is such a weak argument. Most Democratic members have criticized the "evidence" they were handed.

Fine. But that doesn't detract from the fact that Hillary has done little as a Senator.
 
MaxFisher said:



1. True, he wasn't very proactive when it came to legislation. Luckily he'll be running against Hillary who has done little to distinguish herself as a Senator. (except vote for a war her party detests)

2-3. He'll announce, establish what he stands for, start debating and these things will come to light.

4. Maybe Bill Clinton will give his some advice.

You say he appeals to a wide demographic of Republicans, yet you can say all this about him? That doesn't make me fell good about the state of my country's electorate. :huh:
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:


Yeah, the more and more I look at the Rep canidates the more and more I realize why the Republicans are so scared. They either have canidate such as this, Republicans that are not really "Republicans", and those that divide the base or at least don't cater to the Christian right. So unless someone rallys the Christian right into voting for someone they really don't care for just to keep the Republican party(which I know many will not go to the polls just for that reason) then I don't see them having a shot.

I'm a Christian and so are a few of my friends. We'll all support Thompson if he gets the nomination.
 
MaxFisher said:



1. True, he wasn't very proactive when it came to legislation. Luckily he'll be running against Hillary who has done little to distinguish herself as a Senator. (except vote for a war her party detests)

2-3. He'll announce, establish what he stands for, start debating and these things will come to light.

4. Maybe Bill Clinton will give his some advice.

5. He won't run if he doesn't care.



1. actually, HRC has a very strong Senate record, which has been particularly characterized by her willingness to work with Republicans, such as Brownback. and she had 8 years in the WH. there's lots she can point to and say that she's done, whether you agree or not.

2-3. we'll see. but isn't it bad that you don't even know what he stands for other than RNC talking poitns and he's running for president? i know what Brownback, Huckabee, McCain, and others are all about. they have visions and plans and causes and organizing worldviews. does Fred have any of this?

4. weak. but i don't think Bill had any dudes on his sexual resume. i'm just saying ...

5. Bush ran and he didn't care. and look where we are.
 
martha said:


You say he appeals to a wide demographic of Republicans, yet you can say all this about him? That doesn't make me fell good about the state of my country's electorate. :huh:

It's just way too early to know everything he stands for. I think that if he runs a campaign based on strong conservative values he has the gravitas and persona to appeal to his base.
 
MaxFisher said:


It's just way too early to know everything he stands for. I think that if he runs a campaign based on strong conservative values he has the gravitas and persona to appeal to his base.



but isn't that the problem? there's no there there!

he doesn't stand for anything other than the empty Regan figurehead into which the RNC and political consultants will pour positions that will make him appear appealing and electable.

he'll remain an actor. through and through.
 
Irvine511 said:
2-3. we'll see. but isn't it bad that you don't even know what he stands for other than RNC talking poitns and he's running for president? i know what Brownback, Huckabee, McCain, and others are all about. they have visions and plans and causes and organizing worldviews. does Fred have any of this?

That's because these candidates have announced and have been debating. Give Thompson a chance to get out there and he'll communicate what he stands for.
 
Irvine511 said:




but isn't that the problem? there's no there there!

he doesn't stand for anything other than the empty Regan figurehead into which the RNC and political consultants will pour positions that will make him appear appealing and electable.

he'll remain an actor. through and through.

Fine. Let him announce/debate and if he's a vapid Reagan shrill than he'll crash and burn and I'll admit I'm wrong.
 
Thompson is DOA. You may hope he makes something of himself, but the guy, for all his celebrity, is pathetic at raising money. He stands for nothing and looks like an unenergized, old windbag on TV. He'll end up being McCain Part Deux and Giuliani will probably weasel through. Now there's someone whose authoritarian style scares the shit out of me.
 
MaxFisher said:
That's because these candidates have announced and have been debating. Give Thompson a chance to get out there and he'll communicate what he stands for.



he had a whole tenure in the Senate! what more do you need in order to create some sort of political ideology and principles?
 
MaxFisher said:


I'm a Christian and so are a few of my friends. We'll all support Thompson if he gets the nomination.

Christian doesn't always = Christian right. That's something many on this board need to figure out.

That being said, Thompson already got a publicized questioning of credibility by James Dobson. Not good if you want the Christian right vote. But the christian right isn't Thompson's problem(I was speaking of other canidates when I made that statement) his problems goes far beyond that. His problem is more with the "real" Republicans not the neo-cons. His part in watergate, the fact that he's still trying to be a serious actor and not distancing himself(like other actors before him), and his well publicized laziness are just a few of his hurdles.
 
if Fred becomes the nominee, i can't wait to see the Christian Right struggle to find a way to embrace all those "Hollywood Values."
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:


Christian doesn't always = Christian right. That's something many on this board need to figure out.

That being said, Thompson already got a publicized questioning of credibility by James Dobson. Not good if you want the Christian right vote. But the christian right isn't Thompson's problem(I was speaking of other canidates when I made that statement) his problems goes far beyond that. His problem is more with the "real" Republicans not the neo-cons. His part in watergate, the fact that he's still trying to be a serious actor and not distancing himself(like other actors before him), and his well publicized laziness are just a few of his hurdles.

In May he asked Law and Order to release him of his acting responsibilities. He's not trying to be a serious actor.

In what way are "real" Republicans his problem?
 
MaxFisher said:


In May he asked Law and Order to release him of his acting responsibilities. He's not trying to be a serious actor.

In what way are "real" Republicans his problem?

But he hasn't said anything about leaving acting, in fact there is talk that he has roles lined up. Others have taken a hard stance that they will not act again, or at least until they are out of office. He's still holding on for a back up plan(which he should).

I listed his problems.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom