A Jump in the Polls for Thompson and Gore

According to MSNBC, a new AP poll suggests that outsiders for president on both the Republican and Democrat sides have made significant gains in terms of public support as of late.

On the GOP side, Fred Thompson, the former Senator from Tennessee, will not be rolling out his campaign until July 4th, has not participated in one debate, nor has made many public appearances, but is now in second place behind Giuliani with 17% of Republican support. The situation is even more startling on Democratic side. Former Vice President Al Gore, who now says he's 50/50 about running for President, is polling at 20%. This number is well ahead of Edwards who is in fourth place with 12%. Technically, Al Gore is only 13 points behind Senator Clinton without spending a single dollar campaigning.

So why are both the Republicans and Democrats lending so much support behind candidates that haven't even entered the race. For Republicans, I believe the support for Fred Thompson is a sign of dissatisfaction with the overall choices at this point in time. None of the candidates on the Republican side have the potential to be the darling boy of the Conservative Right. All of the first tier candidates (McCain, Romney, Giuliani) have issues that turn off voters. McCain is too old and is too bogged down with the war in Iraq; Romney is a flip flopping Mormon; and Giuliani is pro-choice (enough said). Fred Thompson on the other hand reminds Republicans of Regan with his Presidential presence, and conservative overtones.

The Democratic backing for Gore is different than the Republican reason for supporting Thompson. The Democrats support Gore because many members of the base still remember how Gore got robbed in 2000. They also feel angrily sentimental (and rightfully so) because they believe that Gore would never have invaded Iraq, and would have made steps to do something about the rising gas prices and the growing environmental problem. In addition, Democrats believe that Gore's voice, which has been incredibly popular as of late, should be included in the race to ensure that the Democratic nominee is the strongest candidate out of all prominent Democrats.

Gore on the other hand is playing this situation the right way. He knows he has a tremendous amount of political capital at this point and also knows it would be a terrible mistake to enter the ring this early in the race. For Gore It is best to sit on the sidelines for a while and watch candidates to beat up on each other. Then, when voters begin to feel fatigued and worn out by the summer campaigning, the opportunity will be ripe for the former Vice President to enter the race.

In all, Fred Thompson and Al Gore have the most efficient campaigns for their respected sides They have made the biggest moves since the last polling, and are considered first tier candidates without airing one commercial.

The Primary Rush

Yesterday, Governor Charlie Crist signed a bill into law that moved the Florida primary for the 2008 presidential election up to January 28. The reasoning for the shift is logical. Like California, Florida is a large state that believes because of its size and electoral importance in the General Election, it should be allowed to have an influence on who the candidates will be.

In the past, the Florida primary took place on Super Tuesday alongside numerous primaries from other states. However, the importance of the results on Super Tuesday have wained in recent years. By the time Super Tuesday arrives, the candidates for both parties if not decided are very limited in numbers.

The main concerns that I have with early primaries, especially in large states like Florida and California, are numerous. For one, because ad time in large markets is very expensive, second tier candidates are eliminated close to a year before the election. In the past, a second tier candidate was able to gain momentum in smaller states such Iowa and New Hampshire. This momentum would lead to increased fund raising, and a greater chance of success when it came to Super Tuesday. Therefore, the mad rush to move primaries up will create a greater need to fund raise more, and faster. This will only increase the already exuberant amount of money being raised and spent before the general election.

So what should be done to balance the arguments of big states and that of the second tier candidates? The solution that I see has to do with campaign finance reform at its ultimate - public funding of elections. I understand the argument that restricting funds for elections also restricts freedom of speech - the cornerstone of the American Constitution - but I believe limited funds will just make candidates become more creative in getting their messages out. Also, it might be advisable to shorten the election season. In Britain, Parliament is dissolved, and an election occurs within roughly ten weeks. Although we have set election dates making this process almost impossible in the American system, a creative way to limit the amount of time that candidates campaign would be much appreciated by both citizens and candidates a like. For some reason I don't believe any of the active candidates for the '08 election really like being out there at this date flying from state to state knowing this madness may not end until November of 2008.