Jon Hunstman

[Yelnoc]

In what way was McCain the worst nominee in ages?  I'm sure Bob Dole would disagree. 

McCain lost by 7 in a year that should have gone the Democrat Party nominee's way by at least double digits.

He lost to the first black candidate for president and to a man who openly espoused some economic philosophies that could be described as socialist.  Obama did say he wanted to spread the wealth around.  McCain also refused to campaign in an aggresively negative manner.  Nice guys finish last.

Socialist? The 'socialism' began with TARP when George W. Bush was President and the President probably most tied to crony capitalism signed off on huge nationalizations just to prevent a meltdown of his beloved free-enterprise system. If anything, President Obama has shown himself anything but a socialist by selling off government shares of ownership in Big Business, as in "Government Motors".

President Obama treated American poverty as a political third rail.

   

TARP isn't socialism; TARP is keynesian economics.  Socialism is synonymous with a centrally planned command economy.  America is about the farthest thing in the first world from that.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Aren't people forgetting a little detail, like that Huntsman is Mormon?
If the Republican's base rejected Romney for that reason why wouldn't they do the same with Hunstman, who hasn't even pandered to the bible-thumpers, like Mitt did? 

[Whacker77]

In what way was McCain the worst nominee in ages?  I'm sure Bob Dole would disagree. 

McCain lost by 7 in a year that should have gone the Democrat Party nominee's way by at least double digits.

Indeed, John McCain seemed the strongest Republican as a potential nominee as a war hero and with an old reputation as a maverick and a moderate (even though he had become a right-wing establishmentarian).

Sarah Palin probably turned what should have been a close race into a disaster. He was clearly past prime; he might have been a better President than Dubya had he been nominated and elected in 2000. Maybe it is just too bad that he became a crybaby after the "black baby" smear that Karl Rogue engineered.

Completely wrong.  Since you don't roll with conservatives you don't realize a moderate reputation doesn't engender a lot of excitemtn for the base.  As big of a flop as Palin has become, she was the only reason McCain came as close as he did.  For a period or two to three weeks in September, McCain lead Obama.  That was all due to Palin.  In 2008, Palin energized for a time the disspirited conservative base.  McCain never did that.

[Whacker77]

In what way was McCain the worst nominee in ages?  I'm sure Bob Dole would disagree. 

McCain lost by 7 in a year that should have gone the Democrat Party nominee's way by at least double digits.

He lost to the first black candidate for president and to a man who openly espoused some economic philosophies that could be described as socialist.  Obama did say he wanted to spread the wealth around.  McCain also refused to campaign in an aggresively negative manner.  Nice guys finish last.

Obama isn't a socialist. come here to spain and I'll show you how a socialist is.

I've been to Spain at least eight times.

[Landslide Lyndon]

In what way was McCain the worst nominee in ages?  I'm sure Bob Dole would disagree. 

McCain lost by 7 in a year that should have gone the Democrat Party nominee's way by at least double digits.

He lost to the first black candidate for president and to a man who openly espoused some economic philosophies that could be described as socialist.  Obama did say he wanted to spread the wealth around.  McCain also refused to campaign in an aggresively negative manner.  Nice guys finish last.

Obama isn't a socialist. come here to spain and I'll show you how a socialist is.

I've been to Spain at least eight times.

And you still returned to Kentucky?

[Whacker77]

In what way was McCain the worst nominee in ages?  I'm sure Bob Dole would disagree. 

McCain lost by 7 in a year that should have gone the Democrat Party nominee's way by at least double digits.

He lost to the first black candidate for president and to a man who openly espoused some economic philosophies that could be described as socialist.  Obama did say he wanted to spread the wealth around.  McCain also refused to campaign in an aggresively negative manner.  Nice guys finish last.

Socialist? The 'socialism' began with TARP when George W. Bush was President and the President probably most tied to crony capitalism signed off on huge nationalizations just to prevent a meltdown of his beloved free-enterprise system. If anything, President Obama has shown himself anything but a socialist by selling off government shares of ownership in Big Business, as in "Government Motors".

President Obama treated American poverty as a political third rail.

   

You won't hear me calling TARP anything other than socialism, but to say the term socialism is unfair, but then use the liberal smear of crony capitalism is the pot calling the kettle black.

[Whacker77]

In what way was McCain the worst nominee in ages?  I'm sure Bob Dole would disagree. 

McCain lost by 7 in a year that should have gone the Democrat Party nominee's way by at least double digits.

He lost to the first black candidate for president and to a man who openly espoused some economic philosophies that could be described as socialist.  Obama did say he wanted to spread the wealth around.  McCain also refused to campaign in an aggresively negative manner.  Nice guys finish last.

Obama isn't a socialist. come here to spain and I'll show you how a socialist is.

I've been to Spain at least eight times.

And you still returned to Kentucky?

If only I could be as smug and as enlightened as Europeans then maybe I might have stayed.  Of course since you've probably never visted Kentucky, you wouldn't know whether you might want to stay here.  Louisville is a beatiful city and the taxes don't take away most of your income.

[Landslide Lyndon]

In what way was McCain the worst nominee in ages?  I'm sure Bob Dole would disagree. 

McCain lost by 7 in a year that should have gone the Democrat Party nominee's way by at least double digits.

He lost to the first black candidate for president and to a man who openly espoused some economic philosophies that could be described as socialist.  Obama did say he wanted to spread the wealth around.  McCain also refused to campaign in an aggresively negative manner.  Nice guys finish last.

Obama isn't a socialist. come here to spain and I'll show you how a socialist is.

I've been to Spain at least eight times.

And you still returned to Kentucky?

If only I could be as smug and as enlightened as Europeans then maybe I might have stayed.  Of course since you've probably never visted Kentucky, you wouldn't know whether you might want to stay here.  Louisville is a beatiful city and the taxes don't take away most of your income.

Yeah but Louisville voted for Obama so it ain't Real Kentucky.

[Poundingtherock]

Whacker,

The problem with your argument about McCain is that you don't factor in the fact that the Democrat Party has a huge advantage structurally in this country in presidential elections.

All the talk about movement to red states omits to mention that these are mainly Democrat Party voters moving to what were previously Republican-leaning states.  All that did was turn previously solid red states into swing states or even Democrat Party-leaning states.

The problem is that conservatives aren't moving out of solid red states into blue states because nobody wants to live where they are taxed out of their minds.  And the reason why solid blue states aren't turning more red because of the movement out of their states is because the movement of whites out of these states is just replaced by immigrants who lean towards Democrat Party because the Democrat Party loves to hand out government welfare.

The only way to fix this problem is if Texans and Southerners moved to swing states.  It would make Texas and Southern states more Democrat friendly but they are still red enough that we could maintain the edge in these states.  But since Texans and southerners won't move, the continued movement into states like NC, FL, AZ, will continue to make these states more blue.

[Frodo]

An interesting article, but I remain unconvinced that he will run in 2012.  With the Tea Party ascendant within the Republican Party, I don't believe that there will be any room for deal-making conservatives like himself.  The Tea Party is more interested in confrontation than they are in problem-solving -and Huntsman is perhaps too compromised and 'impure' to win his party's nomination unless he does a McCain and completely sells his soul to the Tea Party by repudiating his deviations from conservative orthodoxy. 

I am hoping he resists the temptation to run for the presidency until 2016 at the earliest. 

[Lincoln Republican]

Case in point.

If Huntsman truly has his eyes on 2016, he had best hope that Romney is not the nominee in 2012.  Should Romney be the 2012 nominee and win, he would be the incumbent President and would most likely run unchallenged for reelection in 2016.  Should Romney lose in 2012 (Heaven forbid), it is highly unlikely that the Republicans would pick another Mormon in 2016 as the nominee.  Not that they shouldn't, mind you, but it is highly unlikely they would.

At least, that is my observation.   

[Bull Moose Base]

Case in point.

If Huntsman truly has his eyes on 2016, he had best hope that Romney is not the nominee in 2012.  Should Romney be the 2012 nominee and win, he would be the incumbent President and would most likely run unchallenged for reelection in 2016.  Should Romney lose in 2012 (Heaven forbid), it is highly unlikely that the Republicans would pick another Mormon in 2016 as the nominee.  Not that they shouldn't, mind you, but it is highly unlikely they would.

At least, that is my observation.   

It's more than Mormonism.  Huntsman has zero chance unless and until there is a backlash against the Tea Party.   This won't happen if Romney or Daniels or Pawlenty is nominated and loses.  Huntsman's best prospects are if Palin loses in a landslide.

[Lincoln Republican]

Case in point.

If Huntsman truly has his eyes on 2016, he had best hope that Romney is not the nominee in 2012.  Should Romney be the 2012 nominee and win, he would be the incumbent President and would most likely run unchallenged for reelection in 2016.  Should Romney lose in 2012 (Heaven forbid), it is highly unlikely that the Republicans would pick another Mormon in 2016 as the nominee.  Not that they shouldn't, mind you, but it is highly unlikely they would.

At least, that is my observation.   

It's more than Mormonism.  Huntsman has zero chance unless and until there is a backlash against the Tea Party.   This won't happen if Romney or Daniels or Pawlenty is nominated and loses.  Huntsman's best prospects are if Palin loses in a landslide.

That may be, however, do you really think it likely the GOP would nominate two Mormons in a row for President?  Personally, I don't think there would be anything wrong with that, but I do not believe they would actually do that.

[milhouse24]

He would be a good VP pick instead of Romney.
IF he was in the primary he would compete for the LDS Mormon voters and the non-evangelical voters. 
But I still think being LDS in the Republican primary is not going to help get the win.