Fred Thompson To Skip New Hampshire Debate
As we reported yesterday, the influential New Hampshire Union Leader, a major voice of Republicanism in the crucial primary state, published an editorial challenging Fred Thompson in no uncertain terms to attend the GOP debate in the state next week: "Republicans are starting to think that his heart is not in it, and they are getting tired of the teasing."
Well, now the paper apparently has its answer from Thompson: Nope.
According to sources who spoke to CNN, Thompson will likely not officially declare his candidacy until some time after September 5, and as a result won't be showing up for the debate.
If and when he does finally declare, something tells us Thompson won't be getting the Union Leader's endorsement for the primary.
Meanwhile, top Thompson officials are reportedly holding a conference call with top supporters today to brief them on plans for the upcoming announcement.
Update: It's now being reported that Thompson will declare on September 6 — one day after the debate. This brings to mind the following from that Union Leader editorial:
If Thompson waits until after the debate to make his announcement, it will appear to some as if he timed the announcement just to avoid the New Hampshire debate. That would give his foes the chance to say he is either not serious about running for the nomination or is too unprepared to be considered a credible candidate.
Comments (14)
Mark F. wrote on August 30, 2007 2:02 PM:For the life of me, I can't understand how Thompson is avoiding getting into trouble with campaign finance laws. Maybe they're waiting for him to declare his candidacy first? Or maybe they're just ignoring the obvious violations.
jrod wrote on August 30, 2007 2:10 PM:If that's a recent picture, Fred Thompson does not look well at all.
Dan wrote on August 30, 2007 2:13 PM:Fred Thompson on running for president in 1999: "The bottom line is that I am not willing to do what is necessary to get the job done. One of the advantages of being an old man is knowing a little more about yourself and I know that about myself." (from his Senate archives as reported by Scripps news service earlier in August)
vandydoc wrote on August 30, 2007 2:23 PM:I agree, jrod. Fred looks quite unwell in every recent picture that I have seen.
pol wrote on August 30, 2007 2:27 PM:One of my buddies in the local Democratic Committee suggested that if Cheney were to leave office, Fred Thompson would be selected as Bush's new VP, and perhaps a shoe-in for the next presidency. If the TPM anonymous commentor is correct, and Cheney is going to resign within the next three weeks, maybe that's what's holding up Thompson....
CJ wrote on August 30, 2007 2:35 PM:I don't think Fred has the 'fire in the belly' necessary to run for president.
If you can't stand the heat Fred, stay out of the kitchen.
Rob wrote on August 30, 2007 2:36 PM:WP reports he's declaring:
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2007/08/30/post_50.html
zmulls wrote on August 30, 2007 2:38 PM:I don't see Cheney resigning, and I don't see Republicans standing still for Bush trying to handpick a successor (might be interesting to see Sen. John McCain (R, AZ) make comments on a VP pick like that).
All that aside, even if this rumor -- and it sounds like a pretty wild rumor -- is true, I think Democrats shouldn't be worried about Thompson. There isn't quite the 'there' there, and people are already sensing it. There is no way of his living up to the expectations people have --- even if he had the stuff to live up to their expectations.
Thompson's support is based on Television fantasy, and people projecting their "perfect candidate" on him. All that goes away when people start looking at him for real.
POed Lib wrote on August 30, 2007 3:06 PM:Thompson is a huge fraud. He is an empty suit. Every time he speaks, he says NOTHING of interest whatsoever, except standard Repukeliscum boiler-plate.
I hope that he becomes the nominee. We can get his hot little wife in some skimpy clothes, and that would be very pleasant.
thinredline wrote on August 30, 2007 3:41 PM:I think Thompson is finally realizing the fact that his long period of not exactly running has raised the expectations surrounding him so high that he's pretty much screwed. I mean he'd pretty much need to be Newt Ginrich's policies combined with Ronald Reagan's charm to be viable at this point, and quite frankly, he's neither. Fred Thompson played his cards really badly and is going end up a nobody, when he could've probably gone very far.
mkolb wrote on August 30, 2007 4:01 PM:Harumph! Mr. Thompson, I know Arthur Branch.* Arthur Branch is a friend of mine. And your, sir, are no Arthur Branch! (apologies to Lloyd Bentsen)
Perhaps the I'm-with-Fred Republicans could gain some traction if they just ran the "Law and Order" script writers instead of waiting for the ultra-coy Fred Thompson.
*Disclosure: Arthur Branch comes into my living room every time "Law and Order" is on.
Cy Guy wrote on August 30, 2007 5:00 PM:pol:
The same rumour has been reported on Air America's Rachel Maddow show, but instead of Fred Thompson, the VP select is JEB Bush. I don't see Cheney resigning unless impeachment becomes much more likely, and with the current crop of limp dishrags leading the Dems in the House, I just don't see that happening.
john smith wrote on August 30, 2007 5:59 PM:i've listened to him carefully....he's totally enamored w/ cheney/bush,and the whole vision...why would someone run on that ticket? another oddity of the season ...rudy giuliani couldn't get elected dogcatcher in new york, and yet, that doesn't seem to be an issue for the pro-pundits?...it suggests an heir-apparent kind of free pass.
jophusa wrote on August 30, 2007 7:46 PM:I have a feeling that once Fred Thompson is finally faced with debating the issues, we'll know why he held off for so long within minutes of his first spoken words.
