Well, my decision to vote for Fred Thompson appeared to be pointless, as he has dropped out of the race.

This is not a surprise after the results of South Carolina. In fact, my vote was a very spur-of-the-moment decision. I saw him as tired, old, and without any real energy. While I have always loved his ideas, that's not everything a candidate needs. However, he seemed to recover and display this energy at the SC debate, as I explained below. But it came too late, and was not enough for him to pull through. SC was his last chance to make a statement and enter the race for real, but it didn't happen. His campaign was poorly executed and he waited too long to show the energy and passion he apparently really does have.

Anyways, what now? I have no idea who to support. I'd be perfectly content with either Mitt Romney or Rudy Giuliani; we'll just have to see what happens. I just hope conservatism predominates in whomever the candidate works out to be.

The absentee ballot for the New York primary election arrived at my house last Monday, and I wanted to mail it from my house before I left. This meant that I had to choose my GOP nominee before I left Tuesday morning.

For the past few months, I've honestly had no idea who to support. I like Rudy Giuliani because of his great successes with crime and the economy and his tough stance on national security. Sure, he had some issues with social matters, but as long as he nominated conservative judges (which he has pledged to do) it really isn't a problem. He also seemed the most electable at the time (which is beginning to change, but we'll see on Super Tuesday...).

I also have little to complain about with Mitt Romney. He is appealing to Republicans. His flip-flops are over the course of years, as opposed to Kerry's which were over the course of minutes, indicating what could be honest changes of opinion (or catering to voters, of course). He has extensive private sector experience and did a decent job as MA governor.

Either of these I would support in a national race for president with little to complain about.

But in the South Carolina debate last week, Fred Thompson shined. The reason I haven't been an outspoken supporter for him is because he hasn't been an outspoken supporter for himself. He has shown little passion or interest throughout his campaign which has turned me and I think many potential voters. But at the debate, he was on fire. He was making jokes, calling out Mike Huckabee (see below), and proving that he truly believes in Reagan and all the great things he represents.

Do I honestly believe he will get nominated? Granted, his chances are slim if nonexistent. But a strong showing in any of the upcoming states could give him some airtime and publicity. And the message of Reagan has always won, if delivered correctly, in a national election. If this change of face is permanent and he can get some airtime, who knows what can happen in the fickle creature that is the GOP race.

So I checked the box for Fred, because it was the right decision that I hope many Republicans will make. If he doesn't get the nomination, that's all right. There are tolerable alternatives. But if there is a true conservative in the race, I cannot ignore him.

While I was distracted from the South Carolina Republican debate Thursday night by an incredible Sabres game, I was left in shock and awe when I read some of the excerpts and recaps from it. I wish I hadn't missed it, because it appears that the candidates appeared for what they truly are.

There are two candidates that caught my eye in this debate, and definitely for the better. They are Fred Thompson and Mike Huckabee. Mike Huckabee exposed himself as the liberal, anti-Reagan that he is. Here is one excerpt in particular:

"The Reagan coalition certainly has not seen those same middle class, working-class Republicans feeling a part of the Republican Party as they should. Over the years, sometimes Republicans have thought that one part of the coalition was more important than the other. I think they're all important, and we need to recapture them. But we need to make sure that we can communicate that our party is just as interested in helping the people who are single moms, who are working two jobs, and still just barely paying the rent; as we are the people at the top of the economy."

What is the theme of that speech? Classes. Class warfare. The difference between the classes. The failure of the "coalition," an allusion right there to what became known as the Reagan Coalition. That monologue essentially exposed Huckabee as someone who does not believe in the success of what Reagan stood for, who does not believe in the success of conservatism. His Arkansas record is hardly conservative, and his campaign is populist rather than conservative (which is a veiled form of liberalism: using big government to help the individual).

This provides a nice segue to the other distinguished individual from last night: Fred Dalton Thompson. He's been proclaimed by pundits as the Reagan in this race, but he hasn't really been able to prove it. He hasn't campaigned, and his depth has not allowed the opportunity for him to provide 30 seconds sound bites to the media (resulting in his being underplayed). He has never shown fire or passion. But last night, he was on fire. He was a conservative. He was Reagan, and he called out Huckabee. Here's what he said:

"Governor Huckabee's campaign manager said it accurately in terms of what they believe. They believe that it is over. This is a battle for the heart and soul of the Republican Party and its future. On the one hand, you have a Reagan revolution; you have the Reagan coalition of limited government, and strong national security. On the other hand, you have the direction that Governor Huckabee would take us in. He would be a Christian leader, but he would also bring about liberal economic policies, liberal foreign policies. He believes we have an arrogant foreign policy in the tradition of "blame America first." He believes that Guantanamo should be closed down and those enemy combatants brought here to the United States to find their way into the court system eventually. He believes in taxpayer funded programs for illegals, as he did in Arkansas. He has the endorsement of the National Education Association, and the NEA said it was because of his opposition to vouchers. He said he would sign a bill that banned smoking nationwide. So much for federalism, so much for states' rights, so much for individual rights. That's not the model of the Reagan coalition, that's the model of the Democratic Party."

BAM! Thompson: 1, Huckabee: 0. This is what America and Republicans especially needed to hear. This was excellent PR for conservatism: Thompson proved to be one, and he proved Huckabee not to be one.

In a previous post, I stated that Thompson is an irrelevant factor in this race because of his lack of energy and campaigning. But this moment is what he needs, and it provides that energy and passion. I really hope he can build off of this, and I hope Republicans start to consider him more seriously.

I will be greatly disappointed if Huckabee is nominated. In fact, I will be angry. Huckabee makes me angry. I wish he knew the damage he is doing to the conservative movement and to the future of this great party that has maintained control in at least one branch in Washington every year (except 92-93) since 1980.

Thompson is officially my favorite candidate, and depending on his success over the next 3 weeks, he may just get my vote.