Another Look for Huntsman (Conservative-Libertarian CATO is on board now)

Cato Institute ^ | December 7, 2011 | Michael D, Tanner

[joe fonebone]

so, If I understand this correctly, our field of candidates is as follows:

1) mcromney.... communist lite

2) mcgrinchrich.... socialist lite

3) mcperry.... the bushes 4th term

4) bachman.... mcromneys puppet

5) ron paul.... enough said

6) santorum.... who??????

7) huntsman.... who????

I will not be staying home, I will vote for the tea party house and senate candidates.... so far, daffy duck gets my vote for president...

[ExCTCitizen]

I would encourage all to give this article an honest read and I challenge you to find where Mitt Romney or Newt Gingrich would be preferable to Huntsman. Huntsman's record and platform are to the right of BOTH, and Huntsman can and will defeat Obama in the general. I truly think that Huntsman has the ability to pull off a landslide win - and that means we keep a big majority in the House and we take the senate with several seats to spare.

Please give this article, and Jon Huntsman, an honest assessment.

I am going to keep an open mind when I do read it. I was for Palin then Cain... but now I want the person who'll defeat the MARXIST in the WHITE HOUSE... and to give the US TAXPAYERS RELIEF from HIGH TAXES!!!

If it is Huntsman, I'll be for him. None of the people who got a chance to be nominated are perfect!!

[erlayman]

Bachmann, Santorum and Perry will almost certainly drop out after Iowa if they don’t place within the top 3 (which they won’t). Then the race can start in earnest.

Huntsman hasn’t’ been marketed fully due in large measure to a right wing defamation campaign. Conservatives must be four times as happy with Obama or twice that of Romney/Gingrich if ‘front runner’ status is enough of a substantive and reasonable basis around which to base political support. Never mind that a Newt Gingrich or Mitt Romney candidacy would doom the Tea Party — what the heck, Huntsman served his country in a non-partisan capacity - for Obama ! Gotta play the ‘served your country’ card.

[cowtowney]

Here’s a review of Huntsman by the Club for Growth

http://www.clubforgrowth.org/whitepapers/?subsec=137&id=911

Highlights:

tax cuts from 2005 to 2007 totaled $407 million

Incredibly, Governor Huntsman said in 2009 that President Obama’s failed “stimulus” spending bill didn’t spend enough – it should have been a trillion dollars

Huntsman was also unequivocal in his backing of the Wall Street Bailout, or TARP

Governor Huntsman’s general ideological attitude towards health care is very concerning. He once said “health care is a right,” and he once threatened insurance companies in Utah with adding mandates if they did not reduce the price of health insurance

In 2006, the Cato Institute reported that Governor Huntsman had “proposed an annual average hike in spending of close to six percent in real per capita terms, which substantially outstrips personal income growth in Utah, and makes him one of the biggest spending Governors in the nation.”

[heiss]

“Newt, for all his faults, has been battling the liberals for 30 years.”

Unfortunately, for the last 10 years, he has been battling conservatives i.e. those radical rightwing social engineers and radicals trying to vote for a conservative in NY23. Every trendy liberal cause in the last 10 years, Newt was there. Global Warming, cap-and-trade, amnesty, fairness doctrine etc etc

[Dead Corpse]

Meh... Why bother with a Moderate when there is a real Libertarian in the mix. Two term New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson. Much better RKBA record than Huntsman too.

Bachmann is back to being my fave though for the GOP nod...

Newt and Willard can go suck a root.

[trisham]

Huntsman is a prettier Romney.

[Wuli]

One of the main problems that many Libertarians have (like some of those at CATO in my opinion), in my view, is that in the area of ‘capitalists’ many Libertarians mistake every Capitalist for a Libertarian free-enterprise Capitalist and ignore the fact that many are mere crony-capitalists, some are Mercedes-Marxist-Capitalists, some are private but state-connected mercantilists and some are state-owned “Capitalists”; and some are even outright big-government fascistic Capitalists.

Many Libertarians, in my book, deny the fact that when it comes to ALL our Liberties, many kinds of Capitalists (not all) don’t give a damn about any Liberties but their own, and least of all ours.

Thus, my support of the ‘business community’ is not a knee-jerk Libertarian-purest reaction (as if the ‘capitalist’ world reflects a non-existent Libertarian-pure world) that all Capitalists and what they want to do must be judged as if they, as a class, are all the same - they are not.

[chiller]

You are correct, SLC...his appearance on Laura Ingraham yesterday went well and certainly caught her attention...and mine. I'm taking another look. His disagreements with me may be minor when compared to the trouble spots of Newt , Mitt or whomever.

Of course...see my tagline