I basically agree with John Hawkins’s summary of the situation.
Thompson is the most authentically conservative candidate with the best potential to win. Romney could fail to carry the South, and Giuliani is a liberal pretending to be conservative.
Thompson is definitely much more representative of the vision of the Republican Party that people had in 1980-1994 — than he is of the “Big Government Republicanism” vision of the GOP that George Bush has come to represent. That means that Fred Thompson could be someone conservatives really want to have in the White House, as opposed to a candidate who could only be said to be the “lesser of two evils” when compared to Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama.
When I watch Thompson on TV, he is much more Reaganesque — in the sense that he eschews specifics in favor or generalizations designed to produce head-nods. I think this is, on balance, a better strategy for Republicans, don’t you? I’d much rather have people focus on basic questions like “do you really want the federal government to get more involved in your health care and your child’s education?” rather than debating the merits of Hillary Care V3.1. It seems like such a hard lesson for Republicans to keep learning this. Republicans — at least the incumbents — seem to want to play to the Washington Post rather than the voter in Wisconsin.
Please Leave a Comment!