Three Cheers For Fred Thompson
The Weekly Standard’s Andrew Ferguson has a must read column on why Fred Thompson’s campaign failed…and why it shouldn’t have failed. Here’s a delicious sample of Ferguson’s thinking:
The man or woman who seeks out such a life and enjoys its discomforts is not normal. Not crazy necessarily, but not normal, and probably, when the chips are down, not to be trusted, especially when the purpose of it all is to acquire power over other people (also called, in the delicate language of contemporary politics, “public service” or “getting things done on behalf of the American people”). The case is made, in defense of the contemporary campaign, that this is an efficient if unlovely way to choose leaders: It winnows out those who lack the stamina and discipline necessary to lead a rich, large, powerful, and complicated country. By this argument, Thompson failed because he deserved to.
But the opposite case is easier to make, that the modern campaign excludes anyone who lacks the narcissism, cold-bloodedness, and unreflective nature that the process requires and rewards. In his memoir, Greenspan remarks that of the seven presidents he has known well, the only one who was “close to normal” was Jerry Ford. And, as Greenspan points out, Ford was never elected.
Fred Thompson probably feels terrible at the moment, but he should be honored to be in Ford’s company.
Frankly, I was upset that Fred didn’t garner more votes than he did. I’m more upset with the way the media gave his campaign less attention than they’d give a leper. Most of all, I’m upset with right-of-center commentators who talked endlessly about the latest poll, the candidates’ cash on hand and other horserace-related topics while ignoring the candidates’ qualifications.
To this day, I’m still convinced that Fred Thompson was the most over-qualified presidential candidate since Reagan. To this day, I’m upset that conservatives, who say that the GOP has to be the party of ideas, ignored Fred like he was the Invisible Man.
After the 2006 midterm elections, analysts said that it was an “ideology-free campaign.” I said that the GOP had to return to being the party of ideas. That’s what I’ve devoted the last 14 months to. On issue after issue, I’ll bet that Fred would’ve drawn a sharp, compelling contrast between the Democrats’ position and the GOP’s position.
Conversely, the least-qualified candidate was Mike Huckabee. Simply put, his smartalecky answers were seen as amusing, which garnered him some attention. Frankly, I’ve never even thought of the Huckster as a second tier candidate, much less a first tier candidate.
One theory I have about why Fred didn’t do as well as some thought he would is because the GOP focused on being a big tent party that it forgot to be a principled big tent party. The GOP got so enamored with the majority that they tossed aside the principles that brought the GOP to the doorstep of being the majority party for a generation.
Another theory I have about the GOP’s rejection of Fred Thompson is their not understanding what the pillars of conservatism is built with. At its core, the three essential pillars of Reaganite conservatism were liberty, liberty and liberty. Fred understood that we needed a strong national defense strategy to keep us a free nation. Fred understood that we needed to keep taxes and spending low to give individuals economic liberty. Fred understands that Americans cherish personal freedom, which is why small l libertarianism is part of the Reaganite-Goldwater model.
Views like these might have earned another candidate a reputation for “straight talk”, maybe even the title of “maverick.” But Thompson was more subversive than that; he was an existential maverick, and his campaign was an implicit rebuke to the system in its entirety. He was a man out of his time. With its reduced metabolism and procedural modesty, his campaign still might have served as an illustration of what politics once was like and, if we have the audacity to hope, might be again. After all, by the standards of a century ago, Thompson was a whirligig.
The best thing that could happen to the GOP is for the next generation of GOP leaders to be Fred Thompson intellectual heavyweights. That’ll take lots of work because intellects like Fred don’t come along everyday. Let’s illustrate that by playing a little word association with the candidates.
The first word I think of when I hear McCain’s name is panderer. (The second is stubborn.) The first word I think of when I hear Huckabee’s name is socialist. The first word I think of when I hear Ron Paul’s name is either Neptune or Pluto. The first word I think of when I hear Mitt’s name is flip-flopper. The first word I think of when I hear Fred’s name is gravitas. The first word I think of when I hear Giuliani’s name is 9/11.
That should’ve been the big indicator as to who was best equipped to be the GOP nominee. Unfortunately, the first states allowed open voting, meaning that liberals could pick candidates as unqualified as Mike Huckabee and as liberal as John McCain.
It’s time we started picking serious candidates that would’ve tied the Hillary Clintons and Barack Obamas of the world in knots. That’s what Fred gave us. Which of the last debates, from the ‘Schoolmarm’ debate in Iowa to the ABC debate in New Hampshire to the FNC debate in South Carolina wasn’t Fred the smartest man on the stage? That string of impressive debates was nothing less than an intellectual drubbing by Fred.
While the other candidates each settled into their niches, Fred owned the stage. National security credentials? Check. Fiscal conservative? Yep. Federalist? Definitely. Immigration hardliner? Without a doubt.
The most-repeated ‘criticism’ of Fred was his……style. We were insulted by people who said that Fred didn’t have a fire in his belly. PHHHFTTT!!!! Give me a brilliant man who’s thought through the important issues of the day over a politician with fire in their belly anytime. That isn’t a difficult decision.
Finally, my hope is that we’ll take Fred Thompson, and like-minded politicians, seriously the next time around.
Technorati Tags: Fred Thompson, Gravitas, Federalist, Conservatism, John McCain, Panderer, Mike Huckabee, Socialist, Mitt Romney, Flip-Flopper, National Security, Hillary, Obama
Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog
January 27th, 2008 at 10:38 am
I was saddened by Freds withdrawal but understand the reasons why. This nation has become ‘entitled persons’ and we should give everything to all.
I am almost of the mind to wish Barack the Presidency….for a couple of reasons.
1). The ‘al sharpton’s, and Jesse Jacksons of the world would be out of business. Race issues would have to end because a black man reached the highest pinnacle in the United States.
2). Lack of experience and knowledge might finally wake up even the left side of the Democrats (hopeful wishing, of course), when this Nation goes absolutlely NOWHERE in 4 years. Interns are not welcome. Pie in the sky dreams for all is not welcome. Keeping the poor poor is not welcome.
REPUBLICANS are about incentive to be the best and produce.
DEMOCRATS are about non-incentives and keeping the people ‘down’ so as not disrupt our all-knowing elites in Washington.
Fred won’t be here in 2011 but maybe someone of his capability and gravitas may return to the scene. We can only hope.
January 27th, 2008 at 2:41 pm
I hope for a Ron Paul presidency. He has some great ideas.
January 28th, 2008 at 8:19 am
Ron does have some good ideas, but his foriegn policy ideas are childishly idealistic. This is 2008 not 1808.
January 28th, 2008 at 1:02 pm
Ron Paul supporters and pretty much insane. Ron Paul has a few ideas that I agree with but his foreign policy is a fn joke and will have serious long lasting detrimental effects on the world and the USA.
A Ron Paul without the KKK is nothing. Nuff said…
January 28th, 2008 at 9:42 pm
I am disappointed with people being disappointed, sighing, and without so much as peep, handing the GOP nomination over to one of those flip-flopping, pandering, RINOS. I simple refuse to do it. I am still a free voting citizen, and I am voting for Fred Thompson, and as he let me know, I am ASKING him to serve as POTUS. Now what’s stopping the rest of you disapppointed conservatives from doing the same? There are only a little over 400 signers on our petition for Fred. Please get over there, and sign up! Believe me, you are going to feel a lot better when you stop the moping and get back up to fight for the conservative Republican Party, and the candidate YOU want to lead it. I would rather risk at least four years of the worst one to attain the office, whether RINO or DEM, than to drop my head, hold my nose, and vote for what is being served. No sir, I am making my stand, and I’m making it with Fred. Won’t you also, ASK Fred to be your president? Sign the petition now!
January 29th, 2008 at 10:15 am
Where is the petition? Ill sign as many times as they let me :)
February 3rd, 2008 at 12:11 pm
You and Andrew Ferguson are so right. We claim to be a party of ideas, but this election has been about polls.
Fred made a mistake entering so late — many fundraisers and opinion-leaders were locked up. But still he took the process of governing seriously, as opposed to the Huckster (or McCain’s “I deserve to be president because I want to be president”).