The comparisons of Thompson to Reagan are overblown. Reagan was Governor of California and head of the SAG before that -- a demonstrated leader. Thompson served in the Senate - big deal. He hasn't demonstrated leadership at any level -- unless portraying an Admiral in a movie counts.
Fred could have been a contender, but he hasn't paid his dues. The enthusiasm for him in the past couple of weeks is easy to understand -- the other conservative candidates in the race are all mini-mees, and therefore the anti-Rudy crowd has to find someone acceptable. Fair enough. But those trying to sell the idea that he's another Reagan are grossly misunderestimating Reagan's accomplishments prior to his election as POTUS.
What dues has Rudy paid? Serving as mayor of city that is more messed up than the country is? I don't want the US to be an image of NYC.
FT has the same amount of experience ( more than others ) as most other candidates in the race.
That's pretty much the case. As I pointed out, the electorate is clearly okay with cutting some corners in 2008. Hillary and Obama are not particularly well qualified or experienced, yet they're polling quite well. That begs the question, Why?
Fairly or not, there's a heavy sense of Bush fatigue out there. The voters want something, anything, so long as it's visibly different. That's why they're courting candidates who, all things being equal, shouldn't be pulling more than single digits in the polls. Barack Obama? Are you serious? The fact that this lightweight gets half a glance at all is because he's so diametrically different from President Bush.
We need to wake up and take a look at the situation. Not how we want it to be, but how it is. Either we field a candidate that is attractive to the center, or we lose. The base (i.e. us) may not like it, but that's the situation.
I for one did not vote for Reagan because he was a governor or the leader of SAG ( be deal ). SAG thing was a big deficit in my book. I voted for him based on what he told me he would do as President and what his vision for my country was and his charisma. Second time, same thing and what he had done first term.
Being a governor carries no weight, brass tacks: people vote for what they hear the person campaign on and whether or not they think that person can deliver any of what they say and their looks ( studies verify that women especially partially base their vote on looks ). FT has the looks department over Rudy.