Fred Thompson Is No Ronald Reagan

The American Thinker ^ | March 26, 2007 | Steven M. Warshawsky

[RepublicanPatriot]

Yes, Thompson has portrayed strong executive leadership in his acting roles, but what reason do we have to believe that he will exhibit the same qualities in real life? Unlike Reagan, to whom he sometimes is compared, Thompson has never led a major labor organization, never served as governor, and never been considered one of the leaders of the conservative movement in this country.

[dirtboy]

Great find. This is so typical of the Rudy boosters - having it both ways. First Warshawsky says this:

Query whether a candidate who ran on Ronald Reagan's 1980 platform could win today?

And then he turns around and says Fred is no Reagan. It's just like some of the local Rudy boosters making an issue of Fred supporting CFR - even though their guy did as well.

[Prokopton]

We really don't know enough about this man to jump on the bandwagon.

I do. He has a long and distinguished record as a conservative. The other "bandwagons" I've seen are mostly hauling a pile of liberal BS.

[MeanWestTexan]

As a further point of interest, Ronald Reagan and Paul Harvey shared at least one joke writer.

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/gamble200406070851.asp

[volunbeer]

He is the closest thing I see on the horizon but I don't expect another Reagan in my lifetime.

We have Obama and Hillary as supposed presidential material on the other side of the aisle so why not Fred?

I will be overjoyed if he enters the race and barring some unforeseen disaster I think he will win. He is a big improvement over the current field and he will get out the base while attracting enough blue dogs to win.

[woofie]

Ronald Reagan was not even Ronald Reagan

[flashbunny]

The difference between them now - fred thompson has said CFR has been a failure and he's leaning towards supporting no limits on campaign finance as long as there's full disclosure.

[dirtboy]

Ronald Reagan did not sit back in his easy chair and basically posture in the hope that conservatives would elevate him to power.

Reagan had to show the GOP that conservatism is a winning path to power for the party. Fred Thompson is waiting for the GOP to remember that.

[rintense]

Oh? I think the hardest right conservatives will respect the fact Thompson left Congress to attend to his family MORE than the alleged groundwork Giuliani has been establishing. A man's commitment to his family will weight a LOT in this race. Giuliani's dirty laundry will not resonate with many conservatives.

[Russ]

We can probably all agree that there is no one like Reagan out there (and please don't say Duncan Hunter). However, if I line up all the candidates who have any chance to win in 2008 and select the one who most closely mirrors R.R. it has to be Thompson. If we continue to search for the perfect candidate we might as well hand the keys to the White House over to the Dems and move on.

[Pistolshot]

What amazes me is the 'he's just an actor' crowd.

DO SOME RESEARCH PEOPLE!!!!!

[Teacher317]

If we have to wait for the next Reagan, it's gonna be a loooong century.

I won't require the nominee to be Reagan... but I pray that he is the most Reaganesque of the candidates.

[TomGuy]

Thompson's political career was that of a Senator, a.k.a. professional bloviator.

He did chair the committee that wrote most of McCain's CFR. That doesn't bode well for him.

He basically voted lock-step with all immigration bills. He has sinse said that we need to do more about illegal aliens. What that is he hasn't said yet.

Until more about his potential positions is revealed, I'm not sold either.

At the rate Giuliani is flopping around on various issues, he is starting to resemble HClinton -- both are trying to be on every side of every issue, depending on the audience. Kerry tried that in 04.

It will be difficult to see which candidates have the best positions before the debates start. Until then, we will see allot of position papers without much committment.

[Always Right]

Wow, A giuliani backer going after fred thompson. Who woulda thunk that?

A real shocker. What is funny is why all of a sudden you have to be a pro-abortion, gun-grabber, pro-gay rights activist to be electable. Gun rights, tougher abortion laws and anti-gay marriage movements are still the majority in this country, but somehow anyone who holds these views are automatically unelectable. Amazing logic.

[xsmommy]

sordid personal history and liberal positions do not make a winning republican candidate.

[soccermom]

Get over it people! Unless you're Hindu, Reagan is not coming back! And frankly, if he did, many of the Reagan idealists wouldn't even recognize him.

[rintense]

You and I know that, but there seems to be a good chunk of freepers who are willing to overlook that just to ride the perception that its anybody BUT Hillary.

[rockrr]

Why, that's no bandwagon - that's more of a garbage-scow!

[Paperdoll]

And in that strident "Sheehan" voice of hers, too.

[Prokopton]

If we continue to search for the perfect candidate we might as well hand the keys to the White House over to the Dems and move on.

Don't worry, if Thompson decides to run the conservatives will overwhelmingly support him. The liberal Rudy backers are the ones who will come along only kicking and screaming and, some of them, not at all.

[trisham]

The author of this piece asks, Is Fred Thompson presidential material? He is not convinced.

************

That's his problem. I like Fred.