View Full Version : Huntsman For President
I heard this Huntsman speak and then some commentators said that he has been in favor of civil unions and also believes in global warming or something. Point is, he came off as a moderate and not someone beholden to extreme right wing views. He also worked with Obama.
I do not know much about him but I like the idea of a moderate running in the GOP instead of some of these candidates who all seem the same and so extreme in their views. Perhaps Huntsman could be a socially moderate fiscally conservative. That would be cool IMO. Maybe.
...I like the idea of a moderate running in the GOP instead of some of these candidates who all seem the same and so extreme in their views. Perhaps Huntsman could be a socially moderate fiscally conservative. That would be cool IMO.
I think there are a lot of us out here watching for a candidate like that. Time will tell if Huntsman is the guy.
From what I've read, Huntsman (former gov of Utah) does seem an appealing moderate. But it's doubtful he'll ever get the nomination. It's generally believed that to get the Republican nomination these days, a candidate has to tack to the right to satisfy the conservative, Christian base. And if he does that to get the nod, he might not appeal to independents in the general election. Like Romney, he's also a Mormon. He's also said some nice things about Obama, and such things are automatic poison to some on the right.
This will be interesting to watch, but I doubt Huntsman has much of a chance. But then when you look at the rest of the Republican field, maybe he does....
loosechickens
6-23-11, 12:14am
He had something like an 80% approval rating as the governor of the very red state of Utah, so if he is something of a moderate and managed to get the approval of so many generally accepted as conservative people, that is quite an accomplishment in and of itself.
My hope is certainly that one of the more moderate GOP candidates will be the one that gets the GOP nod, but the primary voters in the GOP at this point in time are skewed way to the right of the Republican party as a whole, so it could be rough going for anyone who doesn't follow a strict Tea Party type conservative line on key issues. We'll have to see.
He seems to have been effective as President Obama's ambassador to China, speaks fluent Mandarin,which he learned when he did his Mormon missionary work when young.
It's hard to know how either he or Mitt Romney will do with fundamentalist Christians who are often uneasy with Mormons, but hopefully, that is passing, along with other prejudices.
He seems to be an interesting man, and certainly could be a serious candidate I would think. I read something the other day that his family firm's dealings with Iran in the past that could be a problem for him, (he is the son of a billionaire head of a large chemical company.....The Huntsman Corp.), but I can't remember whether it was just that they did business with the Iranian regime, or something else. I'm sure if it's anything major, we'll hear way more than we want to hear about it.
Here's the Wikipedia article on him, for biography, etc. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Huntsman,_Jr.
He seemed to have left a pretty good impression as ambassador in Beijing -- certainly was much better liked and respected than Randt, who was pretty much a disaster. He is quite personable and engaging, and I think he would really appeal to more moderate democrats.
But he's a Mormon and he speaks Chinese. Between those two things I can't see the far right elements who control the Republican party allowing him to get the nomination.
I'm glad he decided to resign from his post and run though -- means we get my former governor Gary Locke as ambassador to China, which I think is going to be interesting. And maybe if he has a good run at the presidency it will shift the republicans a bit more to the center, and there might be room for some actual dialogue/partnership in addressing some of the serious issues the US faces. If that doesn't happen soon I really fear what is going to happen over both the short and long term.
lhamo
Here's what he had to say following the President's speech on Afghanistan. Seems pretty reasonable to me.
Former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman: "With America mired in three expensive conflicts, we have a generational opportunity to reset our position in the world in a way that makes sense for our security as well as our budget.
The war in Afghanistan is an asymmetrical war, and our approach ought to adjust accordingly. Our troops have done everything we've asked them to. They've routed the Taliban, dismantled Al Qaeda, and facilitated democratic elections.
Now it is time we move to a focused counter-terror effort which requires significantly fewer boots on the ground than the President discussed tonight.
We need a safe but rapid withdrawal which encourages Afghans to assume responsibility, while leaving in place a strong counter intelligence and special forces effort proportionate to the threat. The War on Terror is being fought against a global enemy, and it is critical that we have the resources to fight them wherever they're found."
fidgiegirl
6-23-11, 10:20am
If I had to pick a Republican at this point, I'd pick him. Second choice might be Ron Paul!
I hadn't thought that he wouldn't be able to get the nomination, but I see that you may be correct. I don't think America is ready to elect a Mormon. Maybe we would be surprised, and there are two in the Republican field, but I just don't think most people would.
Plus, would he be able to overcome talk TV/news influence? I mean, like, is he riveting enough/extreme enough for good material for them, and so then will they work against him?
Of the little I know of all the candidates, religion aside, I think he would have the biggest chance of winning against Obama.
Haven't you peoples seen the heavy "...And I'm a Morman" TV campaigns! hehehehehe. Huntsman and Romney teamed up for those TV commercials so they will both be shoe-ins ! hahahahaha. j/k
He had something like an 80% approval rating as the governor of the very red state of Utah, so if he is something of a moderate and managed to get the approval of so many generally accepted as conservative people, that is quite an accomplishment in and of itself.
Yes, but a conservative Mormon gaining the approval of a population of Utah Mormons is quite diffferent than getting the approval of Christian southern conservatives in Mississippi, Alabama etc. Perhaps that's why Huntsman has located his campaign headquarters in Florida.
Orrin Hatch, long-time R. senator from Utah, may well be 'tea-partied' in his primary because he's not considered conservative enough by the wider Republican base. That is the hard-right mind-set a moderate like Huntsman must overcome when he ventures outside his home state hoping to get votes.
loosechickens
6-23-11, 2:51pm
Well, I'm honestly quite happy with President Obama, and plan to vote for him, but I also love my country very much, and want to see whoever his opponent in the GOP is, that it be a person that should President Obama lose, I would feel that the country would be in competent hands. I might not agree with that person's political viewpoints, but I'd want to feel that someone capable of being President and dealing with all the complexities of that office were at the helm of our Ship of State.
Which is why, despite the fact that they would probably give President Obama a far more formidable opponent, I'd like to see Mitt Romney, Jon Huntman or someone similar get the nomination. The idea that some candidate like Sarah Palin or someone similar might get the nomination, and then something befall the President before the election, or the country suffer a major terrorist attack, another economical meltdown, etc., that could sweep any Republican into the White House, happening, just gives me chills.
Nope, I'd rather have a much more difficult candidate to beat, with the knowledge that if the President is NOT able to beat that candidate, at least the Presidency will be in the hands of someone who is up to the job, even if I don't like their outlook or positions.
Hope that makes sense........
Well, I'm honestly quite happy with President Obama, and plan to vote for him, but I also love my country very much, and want to see whoever his opponent in the GOP is, that it be a person that should President Obama lose, I would feel that the country would be in competent hands. I might not agree with that person's political viewpoints, but I'd want to feel that someone capable of being President and dealing with all the complexities of that office were at the helm of our Ship of State.
Which is why, despite the fact that they would probably give President Obama a far more formidable opponent, I'd like to see Mitt Romney, Jon Huntman or someone similar get the nomination. The idea that some candidate like Sarah Palin or someone similar might get the nomination, and then something befall the President before the election, or the country suffer a major terrorist attack, another economical meltdown, etc., that could sweep any Republican into the White House, happening, just gives me chills.
Nope, I'd rather have a much more difficult candidate to beat, with the knowledge that if the President is NOT able to beat that candidate, at least the Presidency will be in the hands of someone who is up to the job, even if I don't like their outlook or positions.
Hope that makes sense........
Makes perfect sense and my sentiment exactly.
I would hope these guys are not disqualified because of their religion! Who knows, no one thought a black man could be elected either. But I'm afraid these guys aren't 'red meat' enough for the base. It would seem crazy talk and hyperbole wins the standing ovations. I wonder, when people talk seriously about a Palin or Bachmann, or Trump, do they actually think about the fact that they are talking about the leader of the free world? I have to believe people who talk like that have absolutely no clue what a difficult and involved job this is. It just blows my mind that anyone would think Palin is even remotely qualified.
People said that about Reagan too. People are often wrong.
Just like FDR, there are people on both sides of the 'Reagan good' argument. Reagan (who I did vote for) was senile in his final years in office, but he was qualified to take nice naps. The first Bush seems to have been a better president than he was given credit for however.
The idea that some candidate like Sarah Palin or someone similar might get the nomination, and then something befall the President before the election, or the country suffer a major terrorist attack, another economical meltdown, etc., that could sweep any Republican into the White House, happening, just gives me chills.
Oh Lordy, or Bachmann or Pawlenty or Santorum or Perry or Cain or the Gingrich/Callista/Tiffany team..... Makes one's head spin.
Bad things can happen, and I too want the best candidates on both sides to be running. I also do not want whoever I did not vote for to 'fail' as many on the right seem to desire of our current president. I consider such wishes to be unpatriotic. I did not vote for Bush II, but I did want him to succeed. Alas he did not.
As a registered (but fallen away) Republican, I want the best man/woman for the job regardless of party. Alas the more time passes and more and more present day Repubs show their true colors, it's less likely I'd consider voting for another one however unless she/he was outstanding.
It's sad that someone like Huntsman probably wont have a chance at the nomination. (Assuming there are no serious skeletons in his closet, or he doesn't lean further to the right.)
Mangano's Gold
6-23-11, 9:36pm
Jon Hunstman could potentially be a very good president, but he is a non-starter as a Republican candidate in 2012.
Huntsman comes from a very wealthy family - old Mormon stock we would say. His father is basically giving away all his $$, said he will probably die a poor man. He has donated MILLIONS and MILLIONS (250 mil) to build a state of the art Cancer Hospital in Salt Lake City - as to many other foundations.
I really think it is odd the whole religion issue. We have a president today that rarely goes to Church - but that doesn't seem to be a big issue. As I mentioned in earlier posts on the subject - the Mormon candidates and the Church will distance themselves. Politics are just not talked about at Church - but we are encouraged to be politically active, but you would never hear (or even applied) support for any candidate over the pulpit or in classroom instruction. It is just not done.
Members of the Church are of all political parties, but most tend to be Republicans - except for Brother Harry Reid and my wife! :0!
I just came across an article in one of the newspapers that is in Salt Lake City. There are two papers in SLC, one the Deseret News is owned by our Church. The SL Tribune takes it upon itself to "balance the news" in SLC - even though the DN never shys away from issues about the Church. Below is a link about a letter of policy about politics and those who serve in the "upper" leadership positions of the Church.
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/politics/52084513-90/campaigns-candidates-church-full.html.csp
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.