Fred Thompson ... Seriously?

Ouch!!!

Thompson is a guy whose political record in the Senate was a big zero; whose only real claim to fame is being a character actor on TV and in films; who has done nothing to distinguish himself this year except deliver a few vaguely Reaganesque pastiches in a nice baritone; who is apparently not Christian enough for James Dobson's taste; who has no known issues that he really cares deeply about; and whose most famous quality is his laziness.

That sure doesn't sound like the resume of a guy who's going to rescue the Republican Party to me. The fact that so many people are talking him up seems like it says more about the suicidally desperate state of the GOP than it does about the actual presidential prospects of Fred Thompson.

I'd quibble only with the emphasized part. Intellectual laziness is hardly a steep hurdle to success in the Republican primary. Witness the still-present lead that Giuliani holds in many states. Witness the remnant of a dream that Mitt Romney will be able to bring the conservative movement back from life support. The one candidate who's been rather consistently conservative throughout his career - McCain - is simply floundering. Can a third McCain announcement be too far off? Granted, still a few innings of play left before the votes start counting. So put the over/under at four.

Watching Fred Thompson on this clip, however, doesn't exactly instill fear in me. Heck, I'd love to beat up a southern-fried Mr. Magoo for the next year and a half. By all means, please nominate this man.

Anyways, for the mathematically inclined, Charlie Cook has some numbers on GOP primary polling that are worth a check. I'm always a bit skeptical out of any analysis that suggests Candidate A takes votes away from Candidate B when the field is relatively fluid as a whole. Polling, after all, is as much art as it is science. Still, it is what it is and clearly there'll be winners and losers by a Thompson run for the nomination.

For those looking to hedge their bets, Andrew Kohut has another take: "while there is broad discontent with Bush ... their own potential nominees are not so strong that they can rule out being beaten by a Republican who is seen as an agent of change."

Without a doubt, that's true. But we're a far cry from the 1988 scenario, where our candidates were far less known than the incumbent and remarkably unable to state their case for change vis-a-vis the incumbent. The odds are good for now. I'll take 'em.