• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

I like Huntsman, do you?

Would you support Jon Huntsman

  • Total voters
    26
Mensch

Mensch

Mr. Professional
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2010
Messages
3,715
Reaction score
751
Location
Northern Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I like Jon Huntsman. Those of you who know me best know that I support Ron Paul for the nomination. After Paul, I would say Huntsman is my second favorite (of at least the major candidates...I would have supported Gary Johnson if the party were to take him seriously). Do you like Huntsman? Why or why not?
 
I don't particularly like his economic plan. I don't like his stance on civil unions/gay marriage (doesn't go far enough for me).

Other than that, he seems like a fine candidate. His real problems are practical and logistical; he doesn't have the organizational base that Romney does (in fact, none of the other candidates have the organizational base Romney does). As Zyphlin has pointed out multiple times, his tone/personality/charisma/lack of charisma may also be a factor.

It seems to me like he is setting himself up for 2016, when it looks like the GOP will have a great field of candidates.
 
No. You cannot lay down with pigs and come away smelling like roses. The pigs I speak of are at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue AND in the country he was Ambassador to.
 
Tigger said:
No. You cannot lay down with pigs and come away smelling like roses. The pigs I speak of are at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue AND in the country he was Ambassador to.
Click to expand...

So given this line of reasoning, your are making at least one of several false assumptions:

1) That by being an ambassador to China, it means he necessarily "lay down" with them, which is not inherently true
2) That the people of China are pigs.
 
the only remaining announced republican in the primaries who could displace Obama in the national election
they would both appeal to the same political demographic ... one disappointed by Obama


and yes, the candidate who i would most like to see as president is Gary Johnson
 
StillBallin75 said:
I don't particularly like his economic plan. I don't like his stance on civil unions/gay marriage (doesn't go far enough for me).

Other than that, he seems like a fine candidate. His real problems are practical and logistical; he doesn't have the organizational base that Romney does (in fact, none of the other candidates have the organizational base Romney does). As Zyphlin has pointed out multiple times, his tone/personality/charisma/lack of charisma may also be a factor.

It seems to me like he is setting himself up for 2016, when it looks like the GOP will have a great field of candidates.
Click to expand...

I largely agree with this. And if Tigger doesn't like him, that's a plus. :coffeepap
 
Tigger said:
No. You cannot lay down with pigs and come away smelling like roses. The pigs I speak of are at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue AND in the country he was Ambassador to.
Click to expand...

Would the same apply to someone serving in Afghanistan?
 
StillBallin75 said:
So given this line of reasoning, your are making at least one of several false assumptions:

1) That by being an ambassador to China, it means he necessarily "lay down" with them, which is not inherently true
2) That the people of China are pigs.
Click to expand...

He has resided in their country. That's more than enough for me.

AdamT said:
Would the same apply to someone serving in Afghanistan?
Click to expand...

Serving this administration in ANY position means laying down with the swine at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Note that I do not consider members of the US Military to be serving the Administration.
 
Last edited:
Tigger said:
He has resided in their country. That's more than enough for me.



Serving this administration in ANY position means laying down with the swine at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Note that I do not consider members of the US Military to be serving the Administration.
Click to expand...

Explain to us the substantive difference between an ambassador to China serving under orders from his boss, the President, and the members of the US military serving under orders from their Commander-in-Chief, the President.
 
StillBallin75 said:
Explain to us the substantive difference between an ambassador to China serving under orders from his boss, the President, and the members of the US military serving under orders from their Commander-in-Chief, the President.
Click to expand...

The members of the military joined an organization that remains, regardless of who the CIC is. An ambassador is selected by the sitting President. There is a direct line of connection from the Ambassador to the POTUS. There is not one between the soldier in the field and the CIC.
 
I don't understand why anyone even responds to Tigger. Can we please just ignore the last remaining Stormfront debater until he graces us with his departure? Let us focus on debating real issues with real people, not racially-charged bigotry with the epitome of swine, himself.
 
I wish Huntsman would run as an Independent/No Labels/AmericaSelect candidate, with David Walker (former Comptroller General) as his running mate. Let the two parties fumble and wallow in their own partisan nonsense--the sane center can vote for someone to actually SOLVE the country's problems.

It will never happen, of course, but it's a dream.
 
StillBallin75 said:
So given this line of reasoning, your are making at least one of several false assumptions:

1) That by being an ambassador to China, it means he necessarily "lay down" with them, which is not inherently true
2) That the people of China are pigs.
Click to expand...

In fact, the Chinese were very frustrated with him. Huntsman understands them like none of the other candidates do and can deal with them based on that.

They may not be pigs, but they sure love to eat them...
 
Tigger said:
He has resided in their country. That's more than enough for me.
Click to expand...

So have I. People here know how I feel about their government.

Serving this administration in ANY position means laying down with the swine at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Note that I do not consider members of the US Military to be serving the Administration.
Click to expand...

I admire Huntsman's ability to put the country over politics. If only more public servants would do the same.
 
ludahai said:
I admire Huntsman's ability to put the country over politics. If only more public servants would do the same.
Click to expand...

I do not admire ANYONE who can put ANYTHING above their Principles.
 
ludahai said:
So have I. People here know how I feel about their government.



I admire Huntsman's ability to put the country over politics. If only more public servants would do the same.
Click to expand...

Ditto. We need more politicians like him, not just in the US, but everywhere
 
Think he'd make a pretty good candidate for Sec of State.
 
Proud South Korean said:
So you would put your politics above your country?
Click to expand...

In a split second and without a second thought. For me PRINCIPLES are much more important than anything else.... country, family, etc...
 
Tigger said:
The members of the military joined an organization that remains, regardless of who the CIC is. An ambassador is selected by the sitting President. There is a direct line of connection from the Ambassador to the POTUS. There is not one between the soldier in the field and the CIC.
Click to expand...

Somebody is trying desperately to save their skin from what is certain to be a massive patriotic pile on.
 
Hatuey said:
Somebody is trying desperately to save their skin from what is certain to be a massive patriotic pile on.
Click to expand...

Not at all. There's a significant difference. That soldier in the field does not report directly to the POTUS. His responsibility is to the officers of his unit. On the other hand a US Ambassador does report directly (at times) to the POTUS, and is a direct appointee of the POTUS. The Joint Chiefs of Staff would be an equivelant military position to the Ambassador.
 
Tigger said:
Not at all. There's a significant difference. That soldier in the field does not report directly to the POTUS. His responsibility is to the officers of his unit. On the other hand a US Ambassador does report directly (at times) to the POTUS, and is a direct appointee of the POTUS. The Joint Chiefs of Staff would be an equivelant military position to the Ambassador.
Click to expand...

So in essence what you're saying is that if the CinC points to a subordinate to fill a position and that subordinate does regardless of party identity, he's "laying with pigs"? Lol.
 
ElijahGalt said:
I like Jon Huntsman. Those of you who know me best know that I support Ron Paul for the nomination. After Paul, I would say Huntsman is my second favorite (of at least the major candidates...I would have supported Gary Johnson if the party were to take him seriously). Do you like Huntsman? Why or why not?
Click to expand...

I like Jon Huntsman.

I'm voting for Ron Paul. But I'd prefer to vote for Dennis Kucinich or Bernie Sanders though.
 
Tigger said:
Not at all. There's a significant difference. That soldier in the field does not report directly to the POTUS. His responsibility is to the officers of his unit. On the other hand a US Ambassador does report directly (at times) to the POTUS, and is a direct appointee of the POTUS. The Joint Chiefs of Staff would be an equivelant military position to the Ambassador.
Click to expand...

While ambassadors are direct appointees of the POTUS, that position is part of the State Department, and so ambassadors are subordinate to the Secretary of State.
 
I like Huntsman. I don't think he is that charismatic but I regard him as sensible and focused. I do not see a streak of asshole-ness in him like most other candidates from the right.

Maybe his problem is that he hitched his horse to the wrong wagon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom