Posted on 06/22/2011 7:42:41 AM PDT by rightwingintelligentsia
Of course Utah is not a reflection of the country, but it says a lot that he has lost over half of his support in his own state.
I’m not sold that WE need progressives in order to win. Reagan’s two victories didn’t require pandering to progressives or getting their vote. What we need is a fired up base and something that appeals to the more conservative democrats. The one that needs the progressive vote in order to win is Obama.
Huntsman poll numbers will undoubtedly improve, after all, he can’t get much lower so there is nowhere to go but up, but I don’t think they will ever get to any significant level, he’ll always be at or near the bottom of the pack.
I just hope conservatives pick a candidate who can claim independent voters, that’s all. If they don’t, they will lose. And, I want Obama out. I love Sarah Palin’s courage, and Michelle Bachmann’s convictions. But they simply will not win independent voters. The country is much more liberal than during the Reagan era 25 years ago.
Huntsman’s a tried and true conservative on nearly all issues, has a record of accomplishment, has a vast record of experience in both governance and foreign policy, and has the money, the connections and the family backing to run a serious campaign. I hope people here start to consider those things, instead of being led down a garden path by right-wing bloggers or left-wing media—a path that leads straight to an Obama Second Term in the White House.
Certainly Huntsman and Romney are the two candidates that Obama is most concerned about.
Yup; I think that ANYone could say this with a straight face!!
My EYES!!
Kazoo, indeed!
But they DO!
Some of them anyway...
“Certainly Huntsman and Romney are the two candidates that Obama is most concerned about.”
I disagree. The way I see it, Huntsman OR Romney would be Obama’s dream competitor. With either on of those, the conservative base is GONE, making it like 2008 all over again.
Well, so the conservative and liberal wings are broken off but the middle is still looking for a guy who knows how to run companies, states, ambassadorships, deal with China, foreign policy experience, the ability to thwart a religious monoply, and a myriad of other things. Then Huntsman is their guy.
We’ll see what the polls say. I don’t think he will make it through the first few primaries.
When it comes to foreign affairs, I am concerned about China but I am FAR more concerned — by a long shot — with what a candidates strategy is in the Middle East.
And I still haven’t been able to get anyone to tell me what Huntsman accomplished on behalf of the US as ambassador to China. I haven’t seen any information that leads me to believe that he made any progress there at all, just maintained the status-quo. Perhaps you know of something you can point to in that regard?
He’s going to have a hard time competing with McRomney for the DNC international socialist nomination. Obama could just switch parties and run as a global socialist Republican.
“Obama could just switch parties and run as a global socialist Republican.”
this made me laugh but I have to admonish you, shhhhhh 0dumbo would do it if he thought that was the way to win
The most specific I have heard him spell out as to how to to improve ties with China is to first“get our own house in order.”
Here’s more Jon Huntsmann, asked about how we can compete with China on Morning Joe today (I typed as he talked):
”By getting our house in order. I can give you 10 policy prescriptions on how we can forge a better economic and security relationship with China, but it’s all right here. I hate to over-simplify this, but until such time that we get our debt under control, spending under control, get some pathway for economic expansion, we’re not going to have the leverage that we have always had in our relationship with China. I’ve dealt with China for practically 30 years, and many of those years either in business or as a trade negotiator. There were days, there were years when we had vast economic leverage … we’re losing that and they know it and are taking advantage of it. … It starts at home.
That really doesn’t answer my question: What exactly did he accomplish on the behalf of the US while he was ambassador to China?
I am going to wait for him to talk up any tangible benefits of his tenure and the relationship in general terms. Huntsman is nothing if not a cool operator. Low key but “deadly” CEO effective in getting things done.
What he has made clear so far is that any diplomatic position in China will be hamstrung by deteriorating conditions on the home front. What has Michelle Bachmann accomplished on her one committee assignment in the House ?
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/01/us/politics/01huntsman.html
I’m not asking about Michelle Bachmann, I’m asking about Jon Huntsman and I still can’t find anyone that can answer that question for me.
Well there is no substitute for patience. This is Day 1 and a year and a half going forward until the elections. Even if he was a glorified messenger, which I’m sure is far from the truth, doesn’t change that this is a man that is conservative, right on the issues, AND has a sterling resume (the experience, and accomplishments)—not to mention the big Republican money behind him—to actually win.
To get back to the question, I did read somewhere (Wash Post?) that Huntsman was apparently frustrated at his lack of influence after 2 years on the job, which ties into the need to get things together on the home front before any serious progress can be made towards making the US more competitive and building a business alliance with the Chinese.
He had planned to wait for a presidential run in 2016 but saw a relatively weak Republican field and jumped at the chance to make a real impact this cycle. Frankly I doubt it is much more complicated than that.
Well there it is, the crux of the matter. You see him as a conservative and right on the issues, and I don't. We'll just have to agree to disagree on that.
Even the Progressives (which is only a euphemism for being a hard-core socialist, or communist, or social justice adherent) look at what he has done and see them as one of their own. So they believe him to have policies that are not conservative -- the first time I have ever agreed with a progressive on anything political, LOL. REPORT: Jon Huntsman’s Secret Life As A Progressive
Here are his non-conservative beliefs, in his own words.
He just doesn't sound conservative to me. Supporter of cap and trade, stimulus wasn't big enough, fawning over Obama, etc. Certainly he isn't as bad as Obama, but he is definitely to the left of center.
However, what you and I think, as individuals, isn't relevant. What is relevant is what the voting population thinks as a whole, and I'm not hearing overwhelming positives for this guy -- far from it -- the feedback I am getting is overwhelmingly negative. So not only do I not agree with him, I'm not the least bit worried about him, either.
“Or that Palin remains unelectable. “
-
Yeah sorry. I was with you right up to that point. :)
IMHO he’s right but wrong on this.
We need to get our financial house in order, but saying so is the absolute worse way to deal with China.
What we need is someone like Donald Trump dealing with China. Never mind “face”. GET IN THEIR FACE.
That is how America needs to deal with trade. Let the milquetoast policy wonks (of which Huntsman is beginning to appear one) sit in their offices explaining why everything we see in Walmart is made in China.
Less concern please, Huntsman. More Donald Trump.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.