Forgive me....I'd hate to come in here and screw up such high brow, serious, completely even minded and serious analysis such as "He is waaay too reasonable" and he "is too electable" but I feel I"ll do it anyways.
I'm probably one of the biggest fan's of Huntsman on the site. I think he'd be a great President and I think he'd actually have the best shot at beating Obama if he ran a halfway decent campaign of any of the Republican's in the race. However, there's a number of reasons why "not" Huntsman unfortunately. There's five things that I think are playing against him and would be the cause for him not getting the nod. Each of them, to a point, play into the next as well.
1. Name Recognition
Huntsman just wasn't a well known name on the national scene leading into this. Every other candidate still in the race was in some way shape or form. Bachmann's been in the news for some time. Newt is one of the most well known Speakers ever. Perry came out of a high profile state. Romney and Paul ran last time. Santorum was in a much publicized Senate race last time around. Cain was the only unknown similar to Huntsman, but benefits from being "different" from the rest both as a minority and a non-politician. The last time most voters that are mildly involved in politics heard about Huntsman was when he was being made an Ambassador for Obama, which is not a good last memory for a Republican primary. The simple lack of name recognition has done him no favors. By itself though it wouldn't be hard to overcome, however we move to the next....
2. Media Portrayal
This is a big one. When Huntsman announced there was a big media rush, one that could've helped get him name recognition. And in some ways, it did...but not in the way he needed. Right off the bat the majority of stories referred to him as a "moderate", with snarkier comments around the net and opinion pages giving backhanded slaps at Republicans while trying to praise him calling him a "reasonable" or "adult" Republican. The went for much of the "conservative" media as well, who jumped in on the "moderate" presentation due to their preferences already being established for other candidates in the race. Media focus during the primary has been far more on his "bi-partisan appeal", and highlighting his problematic policies as if they're a bonus and generally glossing over the more attractive to conservative qualities, which has done him no favor if cultivating the name recognition he'd need. Democrats love to point out how they like him, which creates an immediate uncertainty. Unfortunately, the next item simply plays into the hands of the portrayal of him...
3. Moderate Tone
Forgive me as I forget which poster stated it or else I'd give them credit for it, but the best line I heard summing up how Huntsman was "moderate" was essentially that he was moderate in TONE, not necessarily action. Huntsman stated out stating how he was going to run a clean and civil campaign, and shockingly enough relative to how campaigns and primaries usually go he's actually upheld that stated goal. He's not a big, in your face, fighter. He's not a guy with huge lofty rhetoric in terms of aggressive issues. He's very even, very reasoned, passionate but in a realistic and honest way rather than a feigned presentation focused style. He's not one to jump on the bandwagon of making ambiguous comments about wedge issues in hopes of hiding his positions or views, or in breaking with the "typical" republican view point on some things like evolution. He's prone to focus on issues, on policies, on what HE would bring rather than just attacking and emotional ploys against the other side. Strangely, this is a key common phrase of a major conservative figure in Rush Limbaugh, that Liberals argue on "emotion" and Conservatives argue on the "issues" and that's why conservatism will win. And yet, it seems that right now instead of appealing to emotions by uselessly attacking rather than presenting alternative ideas and issues.
Part of the issue here is the state of mind of the Republican base during this primary. The base is angry, wound up, and frothy. They're in the mood for a fight. As such, they want a candidate that kind of represents that, which embodies it. Huntsman doesn't, or at least isn't, fitting that bill which works against him. His tone also plays into the media's presentation and makes it easier to buy into the worst case scenario of the next item...
4. Problem Stances
Huntsman has problems in his past on four issues currently in the political arena. In regards to same sex marriage, he's in favor of civil unions which parts him a bit from the religious right. When it comes to immigration, he's open to individual states providing benefits for children of illegals and in the long term is open to something like a path to citizenship. With Health Care, he was open to an individual mandate on the state level. Finally, perhaps the biggest, he signed onto a regional state level cape and trade legislation.
One (Civil Unions) of these stances is big to the religious right, a major constituency within the base. One (immigration) is a bit on the back burner but still an important issue. Two (health care / cap and trade) are somewhat major issues in this primary. By themselves, these four hurt him. This is especially true given the media presentation and his image due to his tone which leads people to hear these things and take them at face value, seeing nothing more about it. However, save for the civil union issue, the initial view doesn't tell close to the whole story. On immigration, he's strongly in favor of securing the border first before talking about any kind of path to citizenship; the same view point held by Sean Hannity during Bush's push for "comprehensive" reform. On health care, he worked with the republican state legislation and passed a health care overhaul that was consumer focused and market driven with no individual mandate. On cap & trade, he's admitted to seeing first hand issues with the notion on the state level and the lack of viability in our current economic climate on a national level. These things could be pushed to counter act the press on his stances, but that leads us to the last negative...
5. Campaign Strategy
His campaign has just been horribly handled, from the start. With the current mood of the Republican base, he needed to find a way to present himself at times at least a bit passionate if not aggressive. I'm not saying go away from his "Civil" campaign, because that would hurt him if he won the primary (And what's the point of winning the primary but not the general?), but its possible to show some emotion and anger without violating that. Show anger at the situation we're in at this country, at the problems people are facing, even if you don't directly aim it at Obama himself.
The man has an immensely good fiscal conservative record. One of the best of any candidate and by far the best of any on that stage when it comes to ACCOMPLISHMENTS rather than simply rhetoric or failed votes. He's also got an extremely good record with regards to economic and business growth. This is one of the key, if not THE key, issue in this debate with regards to the one that likely registers highest across the board with republicans, independents, and democrats. Yet, rather than making this a focus during interviews and in info pushed out to the press, it seems to be just kind of...there...in presentation.
Primary awareness, he just doesn't have it here. Again, asking him to just lie about his stances is going to hurt him and is likely problematic. But he should be looking to avoid making statements or focusing on things that he knows is going to be unpopular with primary voters. If you don't HAVE to talk about it, don't. If you have to, hit it and then move on quick if possible. Save that kind of stuff for when it'll actually be beneficial to your chances at winning...during the general.
He's done a horrid job at countering things as well. As I stated in #4, he's got easy ways to try and fight against the negative issue stances that are out there about him. However, the campaign doesn't seem to try and counter when it gets thrown out. His ambassadorship gets thrown out and there's seemingly no counter when instead they should be pointing out his positions in the Bush and Reagan White Houses and highlighting the BENEFITS of his ambassadorship.
Just in general, campaign wise, he's made some MAJOR political mistakes. He's running for the Presidency at the very start of the primary season and that's not going to help you because you have to win the primary first to get to the Presidential election. You don't want to go TOO far from who you are during the primaries, otherwise it hurts you during the general because you look fraudulent. However, you have to be able to filter yourself and know how to speak to the audience in question and he's not doing that.
THOSE are the reasons right now why I think it would "not" be John Huntsman. I've highlighted in other threads that I do see a path for him to win, but its a narrow one and a long one and requires a lot of things to happen with other candidates. However, I think those 5 factors are what's causing him to be so far behind at this point with seemingly no momentum.
Two interesting studies, here at debate politics. The first is Dav. Dav is a pretty solidly conservative poster. Early on he was very negative towards huntsman, highlighting him being a "moderate" and questionable with regards to his view on conservative issues. However, after talking with him and getting him to actually look deeper into Huntsman's record rather than the rhetoric put out about him, he's seemingly became a fan or, at least, changed his view regarding his conservatism. The second is Liblady. Clearly a liberal, she was one who strongly suggested she liked Huntsman to a point because he seemed moderate. She highlighted how many people want higher taxes on the rich and don't want ideologues like Bachmann so want Huntsman. Mind you, Bachmann has little actual practical implemented credentials to point to with regards to taxes while Huntsman passed the largest tax cut (across the board) in Utah history.
In both cases you had individuals who bought into the "moderate" presentation and image. In one case you had a conservative turned off from him that needed to be spurred to look at him further. In the other you had a liberal loudly proclaiming how he would be the Republican they like and propping him up while referencing a stance he doesn't even support. In the first case, without that prompting, that's a primary voter that's likely not going for him. In the second case, its a person who just adds to the image and portrayal of him as conservatives interacting with that person view such support as a negative.
Its those kind of things that are hurting Huntsman right now.