The biggest difference between Thompson and McCAin/Bush is the latter two have CONTEMPT for their base, and Thompson doesent (as far as we know).
Go back in time to 2000, and Governor George W. Bush didn't have CONTEMPT for his base "as far as we knew".
Bush said he was against illegal immigration, opposed McCain-Feingold and wouldn't sign it into law, and that he was applauded by Washington's lack of fiscal discipline. And I took him at his word.
Now things might have been different if I looked at his RECORD on those issues. Bush did seem particularly eager to get the "Hispanic vote" in 2000, but it didn't set off alarms for most of us back then. Had I read into Bush's background more I would have realized just how wedded he was to the Atzlan agenda. But I can't think of a single freeper who realized that, aside from the Buchanan brigagers that were easily dismissible because they went around screaming Dick Cheney is a marxist, ranting about "NWO" conspiracy theories at Skull-and-bones, and said the biggest issue ever was Bush's snub of confedeate hertiage.
So yes, Fred Thompson, who's been out of office for several years and out of the political scene, doesn't have contempt for the conservative base "as far as we know" . Fred Thompson's "record" on abortion issues aliviates any fears I have about statements he made in 1994. Fred Thompson's "record" on immigration (D rating on preventing amnesties) does not. Fred said as recently as last year that deporting illegal aliens is "not going to happen" and they should be given "some aspirations of citizenship". If that doesn't raise red flags, what does? Based on his "record" for 12 years, I see no reason to believe Fred won't cave sometime down the line and sign into a law an mass amnesty for illegal aliens.