Beyond the substantial structural and organizational challenges awaiting likely presidential candidate Fred Thompson, perhaps one of his biggest obstacles is Ronald Reagan – and the fact there is no possible way he will meet the media and activist expectations bar set for him as, quote, “the next Ronald Reagan.”

As some have intimated in recent weeks, especially some of Thompson’s Tennessee friends, Fred isn’t as conservative as some supporters-in-waiting might expect, or hope.

As the AP’s Liz Sidoti points out today, “Conservatives who make up a big part of the GOP base have found fault with Giuliani, McCain and Romney for varying reasons and for months now have been searching for a candidate to embrace. Thompson’s backers bill him as the perfect person — the one truly conservative candidate in the mold of Ronald Reagan who can beat the Democratic nominee in November 2008.

Thus, right off the bat, an enormous challenge Thompson must overcome from the standpoint of reporting and the subsequent developing press narrative is dealing with the Reagan comparison. Easier said than done — especially when the opposition has already started to move info around the horn — off the record thus far — implying Thompson is less than a true conservative.

The other immediate challenge is the rise of Mitt Romney in Iowa and New Hampshire, fueled in large part by being up on the air — alone and in a vacuum on the GOP side — with good looking issue-driven advertising.

The old conventional wisdom is that Romney would be toast upon Thompson’s entry. That simply cannot be said now, and it appears, correctly, that Thompson’s backers understand the need to get into the race more quickly.

One very interesting aspect of Thompson’s effort thus far is the emphasis on the internet, and how he has cleverly appealed to the GOP web roots with q and a sessions with conservative-oriented sites like Pajamas Media — and the appealing smack down of Michael Moore after the two sparred over the producer’s movie “Sicko,” which depicts Sept. 11 survivors seeking medical care in Cuba.

In the online video, Thompson puffed on a cigar as he sat in a leather desk chair and reminded Moore that the Cuban government once put a documentary filmmaker in a mental institution.

Some nice moves so far by Fred, but the GOP primary cakewalk many of his supporters thought would occur is just not in the cards, and the operatives employed by Rudy, McCain and Romney are already working behind the scenes to derail him, and so is the press; banana peels everywhere you look.

Instant post debate react: Besides the fact the SC Fox News GOP presidential primary debate was vastly more interesting and better than MSNBC’s recent debate, one key headline of the debate has to be that Rudy Giuliani recovered somewhat from his first debate — with his forceful answers on terrorism and leaving it vague as to whether he supports rougher interrogation techniques against terrorists, like water-boarding. The debate watchers liked that big time.

Mitt Romney, while laying a great hit on McCain for backing “McCain-Kennedy” and “McCain-Feingold”, took a tough counter from McCain on not changing his positions based on running for different offices in “odd and even years”. Regardless, Romney’s answers were smooth, he looked good, and his general rebuttal style against flip-flop charges were smooth and generally believable. Romney is starting to break through.

Except for Gov. Huckabee, with his great John Edwards line, all the others were non factors.

Jim Gilmore, a winner from the last debate, erred in failing to be more forceful in naming names when he made various allegations — until forced to by Chris Wallace.

Biggest winner: Giuliani.

Secondary winners: Romney and McCain, possibly Huckabee… but it will be interesting to see how the spin unfolds in regard to McCain taking a “weak” position, contrary to Rudy, on manhandling terrorists.

Biggest Loser: None, really, but Gilmore plainly had a gameplan yet didn’t execute properly.

The Washington Post’s front pager today by John Solomon and Matthew Mosk, “In Private Sector, Giuliani Parlayed Fame Into Wealth,” Giuliani Partners remains an easy target for both investigative enterprise reporting and for opponents.

Here’s the bottom line: until there is transparency and candor in regard to Giuliani Partners’ client list and other key bottom line facts about the firm’s practices and compensation records, the former NYC mayor will continue to get lambasted.

the key grafs from the Washington Post:

Clients of Giuliani Partners are required to sign confidentiality agreements, so they do not comment about the work they receive or how much they are paying for it. Though now running for president, Giuliani refuses to identify his clients, disclose his compensation or reveal any details about Giuliani Partners. He also declined to be interviewed about the firm.

Because of this secrecy — a request to visit his wood-paneled offices overlooking Times Square was turned down — a complete picture of the firm and its business is difficult to obtain. This report is based on a review of corporate, government and court records, along with scores of interviews with clients and government officials who have interacted with Giuliani Partners.

If the campaign continues a stay the course policy of secrecy, the actual “facts” about the firm — while presumably mostly sterile to begin with — will be filled in by the inevitable reporting with oppo dump info and flatly wrong info, which is far worse than putting it out on your terms, and managing the story on your terms (or at least more on your terms).

One cannot run for President today without allowing public scrutiny of your current and past employment, and income sources.

The campaign of GOP presdiential candidate Mitt Romney has cleverly and skillfully drawn the Rev. Al Sharpton into a high profile “religious slur” pissing match that helps the GOP candidate significantly every news cycle the story remains alive — especially as Sharpton tries to ease himself out, signaling the white flag of defeat.

Case in point: Sharpton’s appearance on Hardball tonite. The usual gladatorial mien of the Imus-slayer was nowhere to be found in his interview, and he already knows Romney has gotten the better of him.

Al Sharpton attacking you is made to order for Romney. Nice to watch Sharpton get nailed on this one. Good staff work, great candidate execution; a mini-sister soulja.

From Hotline On Call posted today:

May 09, 2007
Rudy’s New State Directors Aren’t Vets Of Their States

“Talented and experienced as they are, we noticed that Joe Jarabek, who’s been appointed Giuliani’s Iowa state director, and Jennifer Hallowell, who’s been appointed Giuliani’s New Hampshire state director, don’t seem to have much Iowa and New Hampshire experience.

“Jarabek joins Tony Delgado, a former RNC political aide who is Iowa political director, and Bruceanne Phillips, a top aide on Rep. Jim Nussle’s ’06 gubernatorial campaign. Ex-Rep. Nussle is Giuliani’s Iowa chair. Hallowell joins a more seasoned team in New Hampshire, led currently by ex-NH GOP chair Wayne Semprini.
Their selections are yet another sign that Giuliani plans to run an untraditional campaign in both states.

“Jarabek has run campaigns in West Virginia and Ohio, and Hallowell is the former exec. dir of the Indiana Republican Party. Republicans swept statewide officers in IN in ’06… but lost three seats in Congress.”

Frankly, there’s nothing wrong with hiring “outsiders” to run campaigns — even presidential caucus/primary campaigns of this import. In fact, it can often result in fresh, creative thinking that breaks the stale “that’s the way we’ve always done it here” mentality so pervasive in campaigns of every level.

But all things being equal, these are unusual hires, and it will be interesting to watch as the IA and NH campaigns unfold. Even if you’re not for Rudy, you have to be pulling just a little for the outsiders to come in and do well. If they win, sky’s the limit on professional upward mobility.

In 1980, New Yorker Rich Bond went to Iowa for George H.W. Bush – and the rest is history.

The morning after, assesments of the debate are all over the map, but we must concur with David Yepsen’s straight-on view:

“John McCain was his old self in Thursday night’s Republican presidential debate: Feisty, pointed and a straight-talker who wasn’t afraid to tell Republican activists things they didn’t want to hear. It made him the big winner of the night.”

McCain also looked vigorous, energetic and confident — which had been lacking on the campaign trail. He even smiled throughout much of the debate, a small thing but a big thing.

It’s surprising to see how many thought Mitt Romney did well. Frankly, he appeared plastic and Ken Doll-like, and had a lightweight aura about him.

Rudy Giuliani leaves worse off than when he arrived — mostly because he was forced to spend so much time answering abortion questions and twisting around in the wind on this contentious defensive issue for him. And Judi Nathan is downright odd — preening about, and it seems as though she’s auditioning for First Lady.

Jim Gilmore was the big second tier winner — his message of being a consistent conservative got through the clutter of a very difficult format, and he had an earnest, pleasant, professional demeanor. Gilmore’s stint at the RNC provides him with a level of comfort performing in these cattle shows, and he understands message delivery.

Big loser? tough to say. Probably none of them.

Big winners? McCain and Gilmore.

In a challenging format, McCain won the show — he was well lit, looked vigorous, demonstrated his debate experience; Gilmore the second tier winner. Rudy too much time on abortion… more later.

Despite the “John McCain is History” sentiment prevalent among so many of the uninformed and naive in DC and NYC, the Arizona Senator is beginning to climb out of his cyclical rut — despite a spate of gaffes — while Rudy Giuliani is beginning the slow, inevitable slide back to reality.

While Rudy has made some smart GOP primary plays lately — like charging another 9/11 would be more likely if a Dem was in the White House — his slippage was always in the cards, and his staying power is now definitely in question.

And forget the national polls, where Rudy is up but slipping and where McCain is languishing.

Things aren’t great for McCain in IA, NH and SC, but there’s good reason for optimism. Some reporting from the Boston Herald this morning lays it out:

On the heels of his formal campaign announcement in Portsmouth, N.H., last week, the poll by American Research Group shows McCain leading the Granite State with 29 percent support – a six-point hike over his ranking in March. Former Bay State Gov. Mitt Romney is running a strong second in New Hampshire at 24 percent, while former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani has dropped 10 points to 17 since February, the poll shows.

The news for McCain is also good in Iowa and South Carolina, which are also among the first states to vote in the 2008 GOP primary. In Iowa, McCain dropped slightly from 29 to 26 percent, but is up from the 23 percent he received in February. Giuliani is at 19 in Iowa, a 10-point decline since February, while Romney is at 14 percent, up from just 8 two months ago.

In South Carolina, the poll shows McCain at 36 percent, Giuliani at 23, actor Fred Thompson at 10 and Romney at 6.

While Romney remains an attractive wild card, there’s a nascent storyline developing about the McCain resurgence and the Rudy slippage.

At the GOP Reagan Library debate on 5/3, look for Rudy to be attacked in a collegial yet sharp manner on abortion, gays and guns. This will drive his further slippage and serve as a strong, legit newspeg to write stories as to why Rudy’s headed south in the polls, among other reasons.