Fred Thompson would be an awesome addition to the Republican field. Not only does he "walk the walk", but he's got that sexy voice!

I'd contribute to his campaign if it meant he'd use his line from Hunt For Red October, "A Russkie doesn't take a dump without a plan, son.", as part of a response to a debate question.

Just what we need, John McCain running as a third party spoiler. Say hello to President Hitlery.

The problem with boutique candidates such as Thompson is, while he may have sizable support amongst similar boutique delegates, not only does this not necessarily translate into broad-based support, but more critically, his boutique delegates are blinded by their own wishful musings.

Jon Anderson in 1980,
Ross Perot in 1992,
Raplh Nader in 2000...
All had great messages - to their base.

If you want to prevent a President Hillary or Obama, remember that whom ever comes out of the process has to have a chance to win the general election. Not to say that Fred Thompson ought not enter the primary, rather that if the supporters of the GOP want to retain the White House, we damn well better not eat our own on the way to the eventual nomination. Lets not marry a candidate this early.

Here we go again. Fred is a nice guy, was a competent Senator and then quit. He quit because he was tired of politics and could make more dough as an actor. Remember? He could have won election after election in Tenn. He chose not to. Most people love his voice, his acting and folkly ways. He might, might make a nice VP choice for Rudy G but he will not win primaries that need to be won, raise money that needs to be raised. I know the Purist Pubs love to dream, but c'mon. Already people are crying for Mitt to quit! And who does love St.John McCain?? Not me. Newt is great and won't even toss his hat in till after Sept. Again, a nice dream. And Duncan Hunter?? For heavens' sake, doesn't anyone ever work precincts or raise dough or join groups in the GOP? We have a few candidates raising dough and getting endorsements and having a chance to win primaries, and heavens to betsy, even have a chance to beat BO or Her Highness. But, it is not Fred.

I think the interest in Fred Thompson shows the chronic dissatisfaction of Republicans over the last 20 years. We want Reagan again, but no one comes close.

Sure, Reagan was an actor, but it is important to remember he also led a union and was a two-term Governor of our largest state. He had the administrative experience to try to run the largest operation in the world, the US government.

We don't have another Reagan handy, and the Democrats have never found another JFK or FDR. We have to choose from the available candidates.

I believe Fred Thompson might be an ideal RNC Chairman, but not President. He lacks the requisite experience and drive.

Thompson is electable. The same can not be said of the current crop of front runners. Giuliani has high approval numbers among people who don't know anything about him accept his speeches after 9/11. Once conservatives get to know him (and if the ugly attacks don't come in the primaries you can be certain the Dems and the complicit media will attack in the general) they won't want him for president. By the time of the election we will be over 7 years removed from 9/11 and that distant memory won't be enough to generate a high turnout for a liberal running as a Republican. The inevitable attacks on his less than stellar personal life will result in a low turnout and a 45 state landslide for the Dems.

I'm afraid we've done it to ourselves to have to "settle" on a candidate that would have a chance to beat a Hillary or an Obama, albeit one who isn't as socially conservative as we'd like. Giuliani can win, and I can't think of another prospect for the GOP that can. We've made our bed. If the Clintons get back in the Whitehouse, God help us.

Fred Thompson is what we "real" Republicans have been looking for so we don't have to hold our noses to vote!

RUN! FRED! RUN! PLEASE!

FRED& ZELL in '08

He didn't run because he promised to keep the contract with America term limits

Newt, Thompson and, JP Watts upheld the pledge.

Citizen Legislature Act


Summary:

This resolution provides for consideration of two joint
resolutions which propose amendments to the constitution limiting
the number of terms members of the Senate and the House of
Representatives can serve. The first joint resolution
(identical to H.J.Res. 38 as introduced in the 103rd Congress)
limits the number of Senate terms to two and the number of House
terms to six. The second joint resolution (identical to H.J.Res.
160 as introduced in the 103rd Congress) also limits Senators to
two terms, but it limits members of the House to three terms.
Under the terms of this resolution, the joint resolution with the
text of H.J.Res. 38 will be debated first and the first amendment
in order will be a substitute consisting of H.J.Res. 160.


Background:

The idea of limiting the tenure of elected officials has recurred
through our history, but it has become more popular in the last
few years. In 1992, 14 states passed initiatives limiting the
tenure of federal legislators. Two of these laws, however, have
been challenged and found unconstitutional in court. The U.S.
Supreme Court will review the ruling by the Arkansas Supreme
Court. Since there is a chance the high court will uphold the
state court's ruling, a constitutional amendment may be necessary
to limit congressional tenure.

People, The reason Thompson didn't seek reelection was HIS DAUGHTER DIED IN 2002 in a car accident, and he had a lot on his plate to deal with. Thompson is an ICON in the south and would wipe the other candidates off the map down here. He is the most popular public official in the history of TN.