I agree with my colleague, Professor Schaff, that we not far apart on our view of the Thompson campaign. When I said that Thompson was a "potential candidate," I meant that long period when he seemed reluctant to actually throw his hat in. I think it was in that time that he lost his chance to be the nominee. But that is of little matter.
What is of some importance is the question whether the virtue proper to a Presidential candidate requires that he somehow remain "above the fray," keeping some distance from public opinion. Consider the case of Lincoln. In his time, I gather, it was still considered unseemly for Presidential candidates to let other campaign for them. So I suppose that that is what Lincoln did. But that was hardly the case in his 1858 Senate campaign! We owe the priceless Lincoln-Douglas debates to the fact that Lincoln took his case to the people of Illinois, north and south. Lincoln was not trying to "base his power on public opinion." He was in fact molding public opinion. Lincoln possessed the virtue of prudence. He acted effectively by acting appropriately in each venue.
Today the difference between a Senate race and the Presidential race has disappeared. This may be an unfortunate fact, it is a fact. If Fred Thompson had acted in 2007 as Lincoln did in 1858, well, things might have been very different. By not taking his case to the people of Iowa and New Hampshire, he squandered his chance to bring his virtues, such as they are, to the Oval Office.
Readers may regard this as an academic discussion, as Thompson's campaign is now but a memory. But it may be a valuable lesson for the next virtuous contender, if any such person should be available.
Recent Comments