Reagan 2.0

Instapundit referring to this note at PJM from Fred Thompson:

No wonder Thompson's paying attention to the Internet: "As of Wednesday afternoon, Thompson’s video, in which he suggests that Moore might look into a mental institution, drew 598,600 viewers on Vimeo, YouTube and Google Video. That dwarfs the most views from any moment during the debate."

It was easier, too. It probably took a half hour or less to make that video. People sometimes say that Thompson's lazy, but I'm put in mind of the Robert Heinlein short story, The Man Who Was Too Lazy to Fail.

Many have said that Reagan's greatest strength was his ability to talk over the media and connect directly with the American people. The mis-characterizations of his intellect, ability and effort never really hurt him much while he was in office because, in a sense, people felt they had a relationship with Reagan. You didn't need the media to tell you who Reagan was, or that for which he stood. His communication skills were so solid, he told you, you sensed he was telling the truth, and a vast majority of the American electorate very much liked what they heard.

We often hear partisanship being blamed as the big problem with getting effective leadership from Washington. But it's interesting to consider Reagan, his ability to skirt the media, and wonder if the media hasn't been the biggest challenge for Presidents since the Kennedy/Nixon debate.

To the extent that might be true, at least for now Thompson has found the same method around the media we bloggers use. It's powerful and, for a candidate, or a President, it could be Reagan on steroids aka Reagan 2.0.

Unfortunately, assuming there's anything to the above, the media will figure it out and go after Thompson or anyone else who does it effectively with everything they're worth. Only a fool would ignore them, but perhaps we can be glad the MSM isn't worth quite as much as it once was.

The only caveat I'd add is, while reading Thompson's note, which I enjoyed, in thinking generally about the power of the Internet and politics, I realized there is also reason for concern. In the wrong hands, there's no telling what this new power to connect directly with voters could achieve. And, in Thompson's case, liberals could end up sensing that very thing, whether it's true, or not.

Comments

[Tim Worstall]

I realise that this is simply a proof of Godwin's Law, that n=1 in this case, but a large part of Hitler's rise was precisely this, that he sidestepped the then current information filters by using radio and cinema.
No, this doesn't mean Thompson = Hitler, obviously, just that history does indeed repeat itself, as technologies change they overturn the established order and it is at those times that the outsider is more likely to triumph, being able to bypass the strictures created by the previous technoligical set up.

[Fred Beloit]

Really hope Fred decides to run. When one looks at the GOP candidates, what does one see? Rudi, a New York Republican. A New York "conservative"? This is just an oxymoron. He did very, very well for NY after 9/11 and has a lot of good qualities. But a New York lawyer picking federal judges; no thanks I'll pass. Mitt? No, he worked for a socialistic medical program in Mass. He has a lot of good qualities too, but again I'll pass. McCain? I believe he would be good at war. He's decisive and not as PC as most candidates. I'd be a little worried about the judge-picking aspect. His big mistake, initiating the anti-free-speech bill. Would I vote for someone who would work to pass a clearly unconstitutional bill? Probably not. Don't see any of the others as electable. That may be wrong but they are just not well known. Paul? No. With Fred one would get a real what-you-see-is-what-you-get conservative. Of course he has to be in to win.

[Helo Pilot]

Fred Thompson makes people like Hillary Clinton and Barak Obama look like adolecent teenagers - and that is why they're so scared of this man and would love to shut his talk radio show down. This man can think and act on his feet, and articulate the issues. He has more character and class in his little finger than do all the other candidates, dems and reps - combined. He strikes me as no nonsense and ready to stand up for the best interests of America. Let's do it - Fred in 08!

[southdakotaboy]

It would be nice to see Fred run. I think he would cause most of the Arab world to wet thier pants if he was elected. He just looks like a bad a##.

[BARRASSO]

It does not matter who the reps run they will lose, bush taint will kill any rep in the race. Bush has a huge taint it's like six inches.

[seekeronos]

I think Fred is the man for the job. I don't see "Bush taint", as one of our BDS-crazed lib commenters tried to make a poor excuse for a joke stated... I just don't see it affecting Fred as much since he really isn't part of the entrenched GOP machine as RudyMittMcCain are. Plus, he is far more close to what a "conservative" should be than gay-rights Rudi or socialize-medicine Mitt are.

And McCain? The same of that name about near makes me want to hork up my lunch. He's no better than Hitlery or Barrack Hussein Obama.

[jong]

Any republican nominee following the Worst President In History is starting off in a bit of a hole. And unless the war turns around or ends, the nominee is going to have to repudiate Bush's policies to have any chance of winning. .

[southdakotaboy]

Lets face it folks Fred has face and name recognition. The vast majority of the voting public are fairly issue illiterate and are locked into one side or the other most of the time. Independents don't make up their mind until basically the last minute. Fred has a certain image with the public, that of his role on Law and Order and as much as the msm might try and change that image they will be unsuccesful. He will become the nominee after his HBO mini series aires (he is not going to be on the next season of Law and order.
Fred knows how to play the media and pr image game he will not be reframed by the msm.

[jong]

He's gonna need more than a folksy manner to overcome the damage Bush and Iraq have done to the Republican party. And as long as Fred says this, he ain't gonna be the next President:

"Thompson said he believed America should stay in Iraq as long as there was any chance of bringing stability to the country."

[seekeronos]

That is a qualified statement, neh?

It is perfectly logical that if there is _no_ chance of bringing stability to Iraq, then we should withdraw.

But it will actually take troop levels of up to 3x what we have thre now to really belt this thing down. For one, we should pull out of Europe altogether (Russia doesn't have much of a vested interest in taking over Germany anymore) and relocated those forces to Iraq.

Furthermore, we should relocate most if not all of the forces in South Korea to Iraq. It's not like the ROKs really like us much anymore anyway, so let them deal with Kim. We can leave ROK a few anti-missile assets in case Kim gets an itchy button finger. Japan's SDF is easily on a par with Red China's military (in terms of technological parity with the USA, not necessarily numbers).

Get me 300,000 ~ 500,000 soldiers to properly occupy Iraq and exterminate the extremists and tear down the mosques that breed the worst terrorists, and I think it can be done.

[markg8]

Thompson is a lightweight phony actor-lobbyist. He's not presidential material, he shouldn't even play one on teevee. Like most Republicans these days he thinks nobody's gonna factcheck him. It's an understandable fault, because the media hasn't bothered factchecking Republicans since 1976.

Here's a nugget from what Thompson had to say in one of podcasts ABC pays him for the other day:

"If you went to college in the sixties, like I did, you might not know how much higher education has changed since then. Universities today are different places. At Vanderbilt, where I got my law degree, I hear you can take courses in third wave feminism or colonial governmentality.

Your guess is as good as mine.

On the other hand, some of the courses that we took for granted aren't around at all. One area of study that's almost disappeared from universities today is military history -- the history of warfare."

Here are some courses taught this semester at Vanderbilt:

Military Science courses: Basic Leadership, American Military History: Principles of War, Leadership & Ethics, and Officership. The History Department is offering Sea Power in History and the History of World War II. The undergraduate seminar on the U.S. Occupation of Japan has a few lessons regarding what America's military is tasked with these days.

*Credit to No More Mister Nice Blog for finding this.

[jong]

Fred actually dug himself a hole with his statement. He can't just say we should leave because it's not worth it, the public's against it, etc. He has to either follow the logic of his previous statement and say there's no chance of winning in Iraq or do a major flip-flop. And this guy is supposed to be the Great Conservative Hope? He boxed himself on the biggest issue of the day.

The American Public is sick of the war - period. Any candidate that supports continuing the war isn't moving into the White House.

[Purple Avenger]

If there's no video of Fred snorting blow off the booty of a fine hooker actually available, you can bet the democrats are working on producing a fake one at this very moment.

They'll need it.

[jong]

Don't need that video as long as Fred's talking about staying in Iraq. That's a suicidal position for any presidential candidate. Read the numbers, Fred's either gotta flop to have any chance to win.

[Buzzy]

Sometimes it's hard to tell if some of the detractors are Democrats or Rudy supporters. Fred's going to run and honestly it will be a campaign unlike anything we've seen in a long while. Win or lose he's going to the voters and not the special interest / big business folks and I would submit that his statement about staying in Iraq as long as there is any chance of bringing stability to that country is a nearly perfect common sense approach to the "Iraq problem". Those who want to leave while there is a chance of stability are surrender monkeys and those who would stay if there is no chance of stability are fools. It frames the debate well and is a common sense approach that envelops both intelligent sides of the issue as well.

[jong]

Common sense? Hardly. The army's going to be broken with another year or two of Iraq. They just lengthened National Guard rotations because we don't have enough troops. Equipment is wearing out at a record pace. And the CIA says the war is actually benefiting Al Qaeda.

***
President Bush sought to rally Republican lawmakers around his Iraq plan Thursday, saying Iraqis are ready to "take the training wheels off" by assuming some political power.

He warned that violence is likely to worsen as that transfer approaches, and after it passes.

***
That quote's from three years ago.