…what’s Fred Thompson doing signing a new deal with ABC to be a daily political commentator on ABCRadio.com?
Thompson will “provide regular opinion and analysis” Monday through Friday on a program called, fittingly, “The Fred Thompson Report”. Here’s what Fred had to say about the sweet deal:
“The Internet allows — as never before — a real dialogue among the American people. There has never been a more important time in recent history to be informed as a nation, and my hope is that my commentary will contribute to that discussion,” said Thompson. “I’m looking forward to using the medium to its fullest.”
Fred’s first column is up today, and The Fred Thompson Report is the biggest thing on the homepage of abcradio.com.
Two things about this: first, up until just now I was fully convinced that Thompson was going to jump into the race. Now, though, how could he and have a political commentary show on ABC at the same time? What about all that talk about equal time and Law and Order and all that? Is he going to sign on for this deal and then break it next month when he announces for President? It’s just bizarre. The only thing I can think of is this was a short-term contract with ABCRadio.com, but I cannot find the terms of agreement anywhere.
And secondly, where can I go to get a job like that? I want to be paid for writing a column a day or so of political commentary!
April 25th, 2007 at 2:38 pm
I have heard through two different sources that Fred Thompson is not convinced about running at all. I think perhaps people are getting this wrong.
April 25th, 2007 at 2:39 pm
Well all this presidential speculation is certainly good publicity for a radio show….Book deal, anyone?
April 25th, 2007 at 2:46 pm
Very intesting…
I just hope he makes up his mind soon so that we don’t have to waste more time with these will-he-or-won’t-he discussions
April 25th, 2007 at 2:51 pm
Fred Thompson is getting paid by ABC, for now, to campaign in a way his opponents would love to have access to. Television obligations prevent Thompson from entering the 2008 presidential race until June at the earliest. This is a shrewd way to campaign, while contractually prevented from doing so up front as an exploratory or declared candidate, until the legal shackles are off. Furthermore, as Robert Novak is reporting today, Thompson plans on doing a lot of his fundraising over the Internet, so having ABC provide him an introductory presence there dovetails with that to a tee.
I think plenty of folks are misreading the tea leaves when it comes to Thompson and Gingrich. You don’t engage in public dialogue at this level and to this degree without having a desire to get into the race where you have a chance to manifest everything you are itching to talk about. It just doesn’t work that way. There are better ways to cash in, if that is what you want to do instead of running. And outsiders are not going to influence the debate, only candidates.
April 25th, 2007 at 2:59 pm
I don’t see that there is much substance to this story at all…how does it help him with the voters to have an internet radio show at ABCRadio.com? It’s not exactly a mass audience…you would have to specifically search out this show to go there…Only a few people who already love Fred Thompson would go listen to this….And who are these people? Big ‘Law and Order’ fans?
April 25th, 2007 at 3:00 pm
“Thompson plans on doing a lot of his fundraising over the Internet, so having ABC provide him an introductory presence there dovetails with that to a tee.”
Yes, but my question is: he cannot have the radio show and fundraise with a campaign at the same time legally, can he? I can’t imagine that the contract with ABC Radio would be just two months long, allowing him to jump into the race when his television restraints are gone.
This just seems like a strange move to make if you know you’re getting into the race in the near future.
April 25th, 2007 at 3:07 pm
HeavyM (in #6), why can’t you believe it is a short-term deal? It works for both parties – Thompson gets to campaign on-line and build an Internet presence (which will be parlayed into fundraising down the line) until he can formally create an expoloratory committee or camaign, and ABC gets one of the hottest political names at the moment to gin up some traffic on its Internet site – even if for only a little while (as a little while is better than nothing for them). ABC may also get Thompson back as a hot commodity if he fails to win the nomination or presidency.
April 25th, 2007 at 3:09 pm
I just looked at that Robert Novak story. It seems a bit silly.
‘Thompson, starting far behind in the money chase for the Republican presidential nomination, is considering adopting the 2004 tactics used by Democrat Howard Dean (D-Vt.) to raise campaign money via the Internet.’
As far as I can tell, EVERY major candidate now has a website where you can donate campaign money. Here’s an example:
https://www.joinrudy2008.com/donate.php
They take Visa, MasterCard, American Express, even Discover!
These so-called ‘tactics’ were novel when Joe Trippi adopted them for Howard Dean, yes, but it’s four years later and everyone raises money on the internet. So someday Fred Thompson is going to set up a website where you can donate, sometime in Q3, maybe? How innovative! I’m sure he will ride to the nomination by acclamation now! He is really the candidate of fresh ideas. (sarcasm off)
April 25th, 2007 at 3:14 pm
Yes agreed! What I personally take from the Robert Novak story is: Fred Thompson is lazy, he doesn’t want to have to do a lot of fundraisers, it’s demeaning and tiring to him…but he is happy to have some HTML programmer set up a website and watch millions of dollars just roll in….supposedly….
April 25th, 2007 at 3:16 pm
Laurent Fourier (in #8), of course all the candidates allow on-line donations. But raising considerable funds over the Internet involves a lot more than just allowing for on-line donations on your home page. The Joe Trippi approach is a lot more expansive than this, as his book (“The Revolution Will Not Be Televised”) enumerates and his recent hiring by former Senator John Edwards reflects.
Richard Lancaster (in #9), candidates that enter late like Fred Thompson and Newt Gingrich are going to have to have a serious Internet fundraising scheme because traditional methods of raising money require lots of time and lots of candidate appearances at events, which by definition these late entrants will not be able to manifest enough to make up for those already in the race.
Tom Douthat (#11), excellent point that puts this issue in context and actually moots it as germane to the 2008 race.
April 25th, 2007 at 3:17 pm
I’m not sure this is a new deal. He’s been doing radio commentary for ABC for over a year now, and they’ve been putting transcriptions of these pieces on National Review Online and elsewhere. The way I read the linked piece, the only change is that the transcriptions are now going to be put on ABCradio.com rather than (or in addition to) those other forums.
April 25th, 2007 at 3:17 pm
Republius,
If this story is true then I would say you are misreading the tea leaves here….It would be perfectly rational for both Thompson and Gingrich to fuel speculation about their ambitions without actually ever committing. Both of them can only stand to gain from the increased attention, etc. I think Gingrich is simply trying to influence the race and the candidates without actually getting involved and Thompson may simply be using the race to his advantage as well. I may be wrong but this contract doesn’t really point in that direction.
I don’t really pay attention to Novak because he is constantly wrong in his assessments. How many different things has he said now?
April 25th, 2007 at 3:23 pm
OK, Republius (#10), you might have a point, I didn’t read Joe Trippi’s book. But i’m interested, what are the Trippi tactics that F. Thompson will use that the other candidates won’t? If they are such strong tactics why won’t everyone use them?
April 25th, 2007 at 3:27 pm
Minnesota Conservative (in #12), I respectfully think you are engaged in wishful thinking as to the likelihood of Gingrich and Thompson getting in the race. Once the debates and campaign start in earnest, nobody is going to be interested in the perspective of non-candidates very much. Newt and Fred know they have to run to have impact.
Again, public figures don’t engage in these debates in order to secure a place on the sidelines; they engage in these debates in order to position themselves for the race. Show me where it has been otherwise?
Gingrich and Thompson are not going to leverage their speaking fees any higher than they already are by getting involved in the national discussion as they have been. The only reason to do it is to run for president. There are better and easier ways for them to cash in, which is what they would want to do if they are not going to run since in an election cycle (again) only the candidates get listened to.
April 25th, 2007 at 3:28 pm
I don’t see Thompson doing what he’s done if he’s not seriously considering running. Why else leak the lymphoma info, frex? In fact, at this point I doubt that Thompson is “considering.” He’s running, barring something unexpected coming out.
Thompson obviously feels that the free publicity he gets with these radio and commentator gigs, and the free publicity of his will-he-won’t-he tease, is worth several million bucks.
April 25th, 2007 at 4:08 pm
Laurent Fourier (#10), I would once again refer you to the book. But some of the things an Internet fundraising campaign requires are more formal attempts to pyramid responses and create local get togethers (klatch-like events) among supporters who have contacted the campaign on-line that live near each other.
The reasons, I think, that everyone doesn’t make the Internet a fundraising priority are twofold. One, the candidate has to have plenty of groundswell and grassroots support because by definition you are trolling for mega-numbers of small donations. Two, and relatedly, most candidates are better positioned to go after high-end, big money donors than go the populist route. It’s really a marketing issue, where some candidates can be better marketed to small donors on-line compared to the competition that is better able to attract large and high-end donors.
April 25th, 2007 at 4:21 pm
I’m on record here thinking that FDT will not run. At best, he is keeping is options open and milking the limelight some. I just doubt that he’ll formally enter the race. We’ll see..
April 25th, 2007 at 4:29 pm
Republius,
Like I said I may be wrong about Thompson or both of them. I didn’t say I thought Fred wouldn’t get in the race, just that he may not. It is far more likely that Fred will get into the race than it is for Gingrich to do so. I say that simply because Newt is a smart guy and I am sure he is aware of the percentage of the population that wouldn’t support him. Al Gore is in a similar boat in that he can influence the race from the oustide if he doesn’t get in.
You are wrong about “non-candidates” not influencing the race. That is why endorsements, etc. are important. Gingrich appeals to a large crowd and he can influence the candidates(and the base) because of that fact. The same is true of any other popular influential persona. Perhaps you have heard of Bill Clinton, Jesse Jackson, Buchanan, Dobson, etc. They all have, or have had, varying degrees of influence over candidates and parts of the electorate. Gingrich has a following thus people will give him the time of day and candidates would be happy to get his support if he didn’t run. This all translates into people being interesting in his “perspective”.
April 25th, 2007 at 4:29 pm
The Problem with rasing money later is that it harder to catch up on the ground game. Sure McCain was able to raise a bunch of money overnight after his NH Landside, but Bush already had money spent in SC and the then Super Tuesday states that matter (Bush was losing to McCain in NY even in Bush’s own polls but the ground game they set up made it up on election day).
This also tells me he not getting into after the Iowa Straw poll which is a gamble. If Rudy Mcomney sweep the two three spots in the poll then they will be an opening for him to come into the Caucus to came in as Brownback, Huckabee, Tommy, ect fade away. However of one of those break into the top three or even two then It will be hard for him to come in the Caucus then. So does he go up to NH will I think all three has a base support of 20% to start. Does he start In SC?
April 25th, 2007 at 4:32 pm
I am actually more certain that Newt win run than FDT.
But then again, I have reached the point of near certainty that FDT will run as well, so that really doesn’t mean much
.
This news does nothing to dissuade me from believing that FDT’s running. It only leads me to believe he will declare later rather than sooner.
Newt and FDT are in the strata of not needing to declare early to win. Both already have campaign apparatus ready for them the second they do so.
April 25th, 2007 at 4:39 pm
Agree with Kavon (in #19) that what it is loooking like is that FDT won’t get in as soon as some may have expected, though he will get in, and that Newt gets in.
In reference to what Minnesota Conservative posted (in #18), I think Newt has the idea (fantasy?) that the power of his ideas and articulation can make him electable in a general, especially if the Democrat nominee is Hillary, whose negatives are as high as his.
April 25th, 2007 at 4:55 pm
Perhaps, but we will see in the next few months. I would argue that both of these strategies are losing ones. Newt may have that fantasy because frankly that would be typical of a politician. Fred will have a very dificult time catching up in the money race if he gets in later rather than sooner.
April 25th, 2007 at 5:31 pm
Considering that the first two debates are on May 3 and May 15, how much time does FDT really have? If he misses a considerable number of debates, he will be at a huge disadvantage to the other candidates.
April 25th, 2007 at 5:36 pm
JF,
I mostly agree but skipping debates when your name is already out there also means that he wouldn’t trip up in those debates. He could also hope that the base says “none of the above” when they see the debaters. I have said before that I believe he has the appeal of being “the other side of the hill” and he would lose that appeal once he joined the fray.
April 25th, 2007 at 5:36 pm
Only comment from me on this is this website fredthompsonreport has been up for three weeks and this was discussed on Brit Hume last night. Don’t worry about will he or won’t he, I can’t say anymore than that.
April 25th, 2007 at 5:41 pm
by the way: 17% ain’t to bad
April 25th, 2007 at 5:44 pm
Sounds like a nice way for Fred to sit pretty for a while and see if one of the current Big 3 catches fire. If there’s mass rejection of all the candidates, he can sweep in as the conservative messiah (provided his vetting continues to be light). If, on the other hand, he wakes up in July and realizes he’s too far behind one or two frontrunners in every category, he’s got another cushy contract to sit on.
This seems like an insurance policy, campaigning tool, and delay tactic all in one. Sweet contract indeed.
April 25th, 2007 at 5:49 pm
Murphy I agree but I don’t really like that tactic because it gives people little reason to commit when he doesn’t either.
April 25th, 2007 at 5:58 pm
The contract has been out for awhile, so this isn’t new. The MSM must’ve done some digging around. Like I said, the thompson report and the website have been around. I actually linked it here a few weeks ago.
April 25th, 2007 at 6:05 pm
Considering that the first two debates are on May 3 and May 15, how much time does FDT really have? If he misses a considerable number of debates, he will be at a huge disadvantage to the other candidates.
Maybe. On other hand, maybe it means that he continues to introduce himself to the public only in controlled, non-stressful settings like radio commentaries. And even if Thompson eventually decides that his support is stuck at 10%-15% and he’s missed the boat, his endorsement would still be a big deal for any of the remaining candidates. Thompson would be in a position to talk turkey.
April 25th, 2007 at 6:08 pm
Henry Heavner, he will only be introducing himself to people who are already seeking him out. Most of the public probably isn’t familiar enough with him to know where to find him in a political context. For all we know, that 10-15% already represents his current listeners. He needs to break out of his niche and the debates are the perfect place to do it. After all, if he’s the savior that many believe he is, he’ll blow away his competitors in the debates.. won’t he?
April 25th, 2007 at 6:11 pm
New WSJ/NBC poll out thirty minutes ago has him up at 17%
April 25th, 2007 at 6:12 pm
Tommy, how much higher is that from the last WSJ/NBC poll?
April 25th, 2007 at 6:14 pm
He wasn’t included in the last one.
April 25th, 2007 at 6:17 pm
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18312789/
Giuliani 33
McCain 22
Thompson 17
Romney 12
April 25th, 2007 at 6:18 pm
Tommy, thanks for the heads-up, I just look a look. What’s interesting to me is that these polls consistently show FDT hurting McCain and especially Guiliani but not Romney. That’s odd considering that FDT and Romney are supposedly competing for the same space. Is that good or bad for FDT?
April 25th, 2007 at 6:22 pm
And this poll seems to have two problems. It groups in leaners, and it doesn’t include Gingrich. It will be interesting to see how FDT’s numbers evolve in the next WSJ/NBC poll.
April 25th, 2007 at 6:24 pm
That’s good for both candidates, in my opinion. Romney has not lost his base support, and although he hasn’t shot up, he still has the chance to move up. Good for Thompson, since it is his highest debut in a poll. Thompson seems to evening out the field to a four man race since he will have an announcement boost. The interesting thing is that Huckabee jumped over Brownback.
April 25th, 2007 at 6:25 pm
Gingrich makes it somewhat unstable. If he holds out as long as he says he does, I don’t think he’ll be a factor.
April 25th, 2007 at 6:28 pm
Yeah, FDT is definitely looking stronger every week. It just would have been interesting to see who Gingrich damaged in that poll, or if FDT and Gingrich were going after the same voters. It looks like another thread is discussing these polls, so I guess I’ll switch over there.
April 25th, 2007 at 6:30 pm
cool. I’ll be along after a while. Going to take care of something first.
April 25th, 2007 at 6:40 pm
That’s odd considering that FDT and Romney are supposedly competing for the same space.
Really odd. Its not just “supposedly.” Romney and F. Thompson are both positioning themselves as the ones who are conservative across a range of issues. For me, they’re my top two choices. Strange. Just goes to show that politics is a lot more about impressions and feelings than we think.