Thompson overtakes Ghouliani for the national lead

[draft_mario_cuomo]

First, as I said regarding Obama (our version of Thompson) in another thread, as Thompson, the vague media creation gives way to Thompson, the man he will inevitably lose support as what people projected onto the blank screen does not match up with the reality. The question is can he gain enough converts to offset the inevitable losses he will incur?

==Thompson Grabs National Lead From Giuliani
A new Zogby telephone poll shows Fred Thompson taking the lead in the Republican presidential nomination race, even though he's yet to declare his candidacy. Thompson leads with 22%, followed by Rudy Giuliani at 21%, Mitt Romney at 11%, Sen. John McCain at 9% and Mike Hucabeee at 5%.

In the Democratic race, Sen. Hillary Clinton holds a commanding lead with 37% support, followed by Sen. Barack Obama at 25% and John Edwards at 11%.
==

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2007/07/17/thompson_grabs_national_lead_from_giuliani.html

[jobycom]

1. Which implies Republicans aren't happy having Giuilani as there king. nt

[SaveElmer]

2. I think it is more that Guiliani is falling back...

Than old man Thompson is gaining all that much...

[draft_mario_cuomo]

9. True, as more repukes find out about Ghoul's views he is falling. He was once at 44%!

Still, it is interesting that Thompson is capitalizing on this, not Romney or McCain. It is also interesting that FT is doing this well before anyone really knows what he stands for.

[SaveElmer]

12. Thompson won't get anywhere...

He is an empty suit with a good ole boy accent...

A 2008 version of Clayton Williams...

I have a feeling the Repubs will default to Romney...

[draft_mario_cuomo]

13. I hope so. Romney is the weakest GE candidate they have among the top-tier

However, don't discount FT so easily. We are talking about people who nominated Reagan and *, after all.

[HockeyMom]

16. Empty suit with a good ole boy accent?

Now who does that remind me of? :grr:

He's their PERFECT candidate just based on that.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

28. Agreed nt

[AX10]

18. I say Romney gets the nod just because he looks the part of...

a President. He's not qualified to be one, but he looks the part, and that is all that counts to Republicans.

[BringBigDogBack]

20. I have that same feeling....

[ronnykmarshall]

3. My Republican In Laws are NOT happy.

They don't like ANY of the candidates.

[jefferson_dem]

4. Don't be silly. Obama is no more "our version of Thompson" than

Edwards is "our version of McCain...or Huckabee."

[draft_mario_cuomo]

8. How so? Both entered late amid great media hype and reached the 20's in the polls...

...before anyone knew what exactly they stood for. What differences do you see between the two? Look past the obvious ideological differences because that is not the issue.

You are taking this the wrong way because you disagree with Thompson's views and view him as an empty suit (I agree with that). Obama is right on most issues and has a million times more substance than Thompson. Still, in purely political terms they are similar phenomenons. Comparing BO to him is actually a compliment to his political strength. ;)

[jefferson_dem]

10. It's not my responsibility to discredit your "invalid on their face" declarations.

Both McCain and Edwards have been in full campaign-mode for the past four years, at least. They are both known commodities who have previously run for president yet failed to achieve the nomination. They are both seen (by most) as failing to gain traction in this year's contest. Therefore, according to your template, Edwards is our version of McCain.

Anyway, this was not the principle point of the original post. A typical effort from you -- a jab at Obama in a critique of the Repuke field.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

11. You are too blinded by hero worship to see that I was complimenting him

It takes a ton of appeal and political strength to reach the 20's in the polls before people even have a clue as to what you intend to do as president.

==Both McCain and Edwards have been in full campaign-mode for the past four years, at least.==

Sure, but there are huge differences. McCain was once the front-runner and establishment candidate; Edwards has never enjoyed these advantages. McCain was once a media darling; Edwards has never been. McCain was the front-runner until recently; Edwards has never led the national polls. McCain is sinking because he took an unpopular position on an issue that riled his party's base; Edwards has not done this. McCain has no money because he was spending as a front-runner; Edwards has far more cash on hand because he has been running a frugal campaign one would expect from a 3rd place candidate without a ton of fatcat and corporate support.

==They are both seen (by most) as failing to gain traction in this year's contest.==

McCain was once the front-runner. He had traction but lost it because of immigration. Edwards has essentially stayed the same all year. You can argue that Edwards has not gained traction because of that but there is no Republican equivalent to that in the top-tier. Both Ghouliani and McCain have hemorrhaged support while Thompson has went form nowhere to the 20's. Romney is low in the national polls but clearly has grained traction and holds a substantial lead in NH and leads in Iowa.

It is naive to assess Thompson without looking at the Obama example. Thompson will face the same basic issues that Obama faced and continues to face. Just look at the last two weeks. Obama has lost support over "merit pay" and guns. The same thing will happen to Thompson as people begin to learn about his actual positions, instead of just looking at a blank screen onto which they can project their beliefs. The question is can FT gain enough support to offset these inevitable losses?

[jefferson_dem]

17. Oh. So you were actually complimenting Obama? Sure.

Leaving aside the Fred = Barack comparison...for now...

Where do you find evidence that Obama has *lost support* over his position on so-called "merit pay" and his criticism of urban violence?

[draft_mario_cuomo]

19. Yes, it has happened a few times before

;)

==Leaving aside the Fred = Barrack comparison...for now...==

The emotional reaction is telling. You compared Edwards to McCain. I simply responded by pointing out key differences between the two in political terms. It wasn't hard.

We'll see what the polling shows in light of this. It is common sense, though, that a candidate who was very popular as a blank slate will lose some supporters when people learn of his position on issues. How many teachers who supported Obama thought he supported merit pay when he was at 20% in the polls in November of 2006? Obama reached 30-33% in the national polls. He is now somewhere in the high teens to the low 20's. What happened? Let's hear your explanation... What I think happened is that as people began to see that Obama is a mortal and not the perfect candidate that they once projected him to be (the same thing Republicans are doing with Thompson right now. Why? Because all they know about him right now is positive. On what basis would they form a negative opinion of him? So they project their hopes and views onto him believing that he will be "the savior", or as some would say, "the answer") he lost some support.

[flpoljunkie]

33. Barack entered the race before Hillary, did he not? Of course, Edwards has been running since 2004.

[melody]

5. Wait till the press gets hold of Thompson n/t

[The Count]

7. Why would they? he's been beatified even as we speak.

[melody]

23. Guiliani's thugs will see to it lol

Besides, Freddie has a lot more baggage than even ol' Rudy the Bellman does.

[The Count]

25. I hope Rudy has thugs in the media - but baggage is irrelevant for THEM (see W)

[melody]

26. We have a whole different ballgame now, with "None of the Above" winning

They don't want any of those guys, so any W precedent will work against them,
especially given what a catastrophic failure this bastard has been.

[rinsd]

6. The better people get to know Rudy, the more they dislike him (nt)

[hedda_foil]

14. Thanks to Tweety, whenever I think of Thompson ...

Thanks to Tweety, whenever I think of Thompson, I actually smell that musty, fusty, lint-between-the-toes old man smell, overlaid with nasty cigar smoke and cheap after shave. Yucccchhhhhh!

[Capn Sunshine]

15. Obama is "our version of Thompson"? WTF does THAT mean?

Is THAT why Oprah is backing him? The old showbiz link?

[draft_mario_cuomo]

21. Simple, both candidates became very popular and generated a lot of media buzz...

...before anyone knew what they intended to do as president. It is a testament to the political appeal and political strength of both BO and FT that they reached the 20's in the polls before people had any idea what they intended to do as president.

The similarities end there. Obviously, Obama is not "dumb as hell" (how Nixon described FT), is not a lazy bum like FT, and is not wrong on 90% of the issues like FT is. The only similarity is their amazing early political appeal.

[Alexander]

22. Chuck Hagel will win the nomination, Mitt Romney will be nominated VP.

I hope to holy hell they don't win in 2008.

[ProudDad]

30. I doubt that Hagel

can pass muster among the knuckle-dragging, right-wing christianists who run the repuke party...

Do you think he can?

[democrat2thecore]

24. Thompson is a FRAUD

I sincerely believe Thompson is a politician of opportunity and has no real philosophical underpinnings. Same with Rudy. I think the media will chew them both up and spit them out wayyy before the first primary votes are cast.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

27. So is * and they nominated him twice! nt

[ProudDad]

29. That's a real nightmare

a repuke lobbyist with minimal acting skills as prez -- again... <shudder>

[Supersedeas]

31. Hollywood replaces 9-11 as close to reality conservatism as you can get

[EndElectoral]

32. This is no surprise. Fred T. will be the Republican candidate. Take it to the bank.