• 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.

CNN Breaking News: Huntsman to Drop Out, Endorse Romney

VanceMack said:
This is actually a very smart move. He endorses Romney as the most likely GOP candidate showing the party that he can be counted on as a republican. Romney wins the nomination but loses the election. Opening day, 2016 campaign, Huntsman is the likely number one contender. He opens the campaign with name recognition. It makes a lot of political sense, especially in light of the fact that he stands no chance this time around.
Click to expand...
You may be right.

Justice For All said:
In 2016 the GOP should be figuring out who will be the next Ron Paul, since Paul will be really old by then.
Click to expand...
He's already really old.

If I had ever been a Paul supporter, this would be an issue to me. Who will his VP be? And no, I wouldn't be willing to wait until after he's nominated to find out. Given his age, I'd have to know what his choice would be now.
 
MrVicchio said:
Good, one less distraction. Huntsman had no appealing or redeeming value as a Presidential Candidate, and frankly am glad to see he's gone. Sadly this means "Next man in line" Mitt gets the nod, and I'll be forced to pull the lever for the less big government option instead of having a real choice. One overt Progressive Statist or a less overt Statist Progressive.

Pathetic.
Click to expand...

Well, if you think this, you're contributing to Romney's "inevitability."

I think Huntsman had plenty going on that was appealing...but he didn't have the name recognition and got into the game too late. Maybe 2016. I probably wouldn't have voted for him anyway, but I really hate reading dismissals that claim he had "no appealing or redeeming value." He did. And does for a lot of voters, although probably not me.
 
I'm not surprized. The only reasonable candidate in the GOP race is gone. Proving once and for all that there is no room in today's GOP for an intelligent and reasonable candidate. You have to appeal to the wacko fringe of the GOP to stand a chance. A sad day for a party that once was a viable alternative.
 
Not official until Zyplin writes his closing remarks on the matter.
 
VanceMack said:
This is actually a very smart move. He endorses Romney as the most likely GOP candidate showing the party that he can be counted on as a republican. Romney wins the nomination but loses the election. Opening day, 2016 campaign, Huntsman is the likely number one contender. He opens the campaign with name recognition. It makes a lot of political sense, especially in light of the fact that he stands no chance this time around.
Click to expand...
Disagree.
Christie is the Leading Contender for 2016, whether or not he is Romney's VP choice. And assuming the GOP loses 2012.

Christie has more support in the Hierarchy (and Lower-archy) and could raise a few hundred million more than Huntsmen right now, and more yet with recognition in 4 years. It's arguable he could have beaten Romney even this time around after only a few year political career.
 
Last edited:
rathi said:
Huntsman will be added to my list of favored republican candidates who got shot down in the primary. The GOP still has decent leaders within its ranks, they just can't get on the damned ballot.
Click to expand...

Exactly!

disneydude said:
I'm not surprized. The only reasonable candidate in the GOP race is gone. Proving once and for all that there is no room in today's GOP for an intelligent and reasonable candidate. You have to appeal to the wacko fringe of the GOP to stand a chance. A sad day for a party that once was a viable alternative.
Click to expand...

Yea ... the base had no clue what an outstanding candidate they had in Huntsman ... a true fiscal conservative that had intellect in foreign policy and non hawkish and cerebral, polished and not "owned" by anyone. He was the only of the GOP that could hold his own against Obama both in intellect and a closet sans skeletons. He depicts a polished, trustworthy and resolute intellect.

VanceMack said:
This is actually a very smart move. He endorses Romney as the most likely GOP candidate showing the party that he can be counted on as a republican. Romney wins the nomination but loses the election. Opening day, 2016 campaign, Huntsman is the likely number one contender. He opens the campaign with name recognition. It makes a lot of political sense, especially in light of the fact that he stands no chance this time around.
Click to expand...

Actually ... I hope you are right.
 
Last edited:
mbig said:
Disagree.
Christie is the Leading Contender for 2016, whether or not he is Romney's VP choice. And assuming the GOP loses 2012.

Christie has more support in the Hierarchy (and Lower-archy) and could raise a few hundred million more than Huntsmen right now, and more yet with recognition in 4 years. It's arguable he could have beaten Romney even this time around after only a few year political career.
Click to expand...
Christie may not even keep the governership of New Jersey. I agree...Christie has name recognition and presence, but I think there are quite a few people that would have seen Huntsman enter this race a lot sooner and stronger. Huntsman is appealing to independents. He doesnt 'just' bluster. I think he is a better candidate than Christie.
 
This Huntsman guy sounds like he'd be a very popular democrat. Maybe a party switch would be a good career move.
 
LuckyDan said:
This Huntsman guy sounds like he'd be a very popular democrat. Maybe a party switch would be a good career move.
Click to expand...

I suggested earlier, only half in jest, that Obama should drop Biden and pick Huntsman as his VP.
 
LuckyDan said:
This Huntsman guy sounds like he'd be a very popular democrat. Maybe a party switch would be a good career move.
Click to expand...

Yeah that good conservative fiscial record makes him a great Democrat...
 
VanceMack said:
Christie may not even keep the governership of New Jersey. I agree...Christie has name recognition and presence, but I think there are quite a few people that would have seen Huntsman enter this race a lot sooner and stronger. Huntsman is appealing to independents. He doesnt 'just' bluster. I think he is a better candidate than Christie.
Click to expand...
Most like Huntsmen. He's a smart guy who IS very appealing.
But ie, the Tea Party and Christian right.. no way.

Christie is the only guy virtually every Republican would support. From the Rov-ers with money, to the Tea Party.. and independents like me.
They were Begging him to enter. (he made the right decisions not running as he is too green now)
I can't think of another candidate who could garner 90% of the GOP.
No one even close. Look at them flailing now .. and ending up with a default nominee.

The country will desperately need an accredited Budget Slasher in 2016. Christie is The axeman.
The First Gov to 'take no prisoners'.
 
Last edited:
AdamT said:
I suggested earlier, only half in jest, that Obama should drop Biden and pick Huntsman as his VP.
Click to expand...

Dems should court him. They certainly seem to like more than the GOP does.
 
I think this comes as a surprise to no one. He was a nice guy that believed in science, the kiss of death in today's GOP.
 
LuckyDan said:
This Huntsman guy sounds like he'd be a very popular democrat. Maybe a party switch would be a good career move.
Click to expand...

Thanks for pointing out why he never had a chance. He worked for Obama......
But it does look like you are going to have to vote for someone who invented Obamacare.....
Which is worse?
 
Well actually Bob Dole invented Obamacare but it's all the same lol.
 
Not that I care much but... why is it that the supposed "Big Tent Party" is against supporting anybody who isn't Protestant, culturally ignorant, a total moron or whiter than Wondabread? They find a black guy they like? The guy turns out to be a ****ing moron. They find a woman they like? She turns out to be a nutjob. They find an intelligent sensible candidate that puts country before party? They don't like him for god knows what reason. It seems as if the GOP is hellbent on making itself the party of the stupids. It's a complete shame that Paul, Santorum and Mitt Romney are actually even discussed in the same sentence. Seriously guys, 2012 is yours to lose and you're doing a fine job.
 
Catawba said:
I think this comes as a surprise to no one. He was a nice guy that believed in science, the kiss of death in today's GOP.
Click to expand...

Right on Catawba ... belief in evidence based science, fiscal conservative and no hawkish foreign policy and resolute intelligence went against any chances for Huntsman as the GOP candidate.

Huntsman professes a firm belief in science, rejecting the notion that faith and evolution are mutually exclusive. In response to Rick Perry's creationist world view,[SUP][117][/SUP] Huntsman warned that the Republicans should not become the "anti-science" party, and stated: "To be clear. I believe in evolution and trust scientists on global warming". wiki
Click to expand...
 
Dion said:
Right on Catawba ... belief in evidence based science, fiscal conservative and no hawkish foreign policy and resolute intelligence went against any chances for Huntsman as the GOP candidate.
Click to expand...


It would have been nice to see the Republican party evolve into a party that places reason above ideology at least on issues backed by science.......................perhaps in 2016.....?
 
Sad that he dropped out. Viable long shot, but the main problem was probably that there was no money to back him up.
 
So what cabinet level job has Huntsman his eye on?
 
Hatuey said:
Not that I care much but... why is it that the supposed "Big Tent Party" is against supporting anybody who isn't Protestant, culturally ignorant, a total moron or whiter than Wondabread? They find a black guy they like? The guy turns out to be a ****ing moron. They find a woman they like? She turns out to be a nutjob. They find an intelligent sensible candidate that puts country before party? They don't like him for god knows what reason. It seems as if the GOP is hellbent on making itself the party of the stupids. It's a complete shame that Paul, Santorum and Mitt Romney are actually even discussed in the same sentence. Seriously guys, 2012 is yours to lose and you're doing a fine job.
Click to expand...
Your problem starts with your analysis of the candidates and a complete lack of understanding what the GOP, and is about. Oh and since you're a liberal you really don't care to know, just look for witty angles to smart off one liners and jabs then run off...
 
MrVicchio said:
Your problem starts with your analysis of the candidates and a complete lack of understanding what the GOP, and is about. Oh and since you're a liberal you really don't care to know, just look for witty angles to smart off one liners and jabs then run off...
Click to expand...

Lack of analysis? Which one did I not analyze properly? Cain? The guy that was a complete disaster? Or Bachman the retard?
 
disneydude said:
I'm not surprized. The only reasonable candidate in the GOP race is gone. Proving once and for all that there is no room in today's GOP for an intelligent and reasonable candidate. You have to appeal to the wacko fringe of the GOP to stand a chance. A sad day for a party that once was a viable alternative.
Click to expand...

its sort of hilarious to watch a far far left dem try to discuss who is a reasonable GOP candidate". Romney is much smarter than Obama
 
haymarket said:
So what cabinet level job has Huntsman his eye on?
Click to expand...
He is clearly qualified to be ambassador to China again and perhaps (Cab level) Secretary of State given China is a major foreign matter facing the USA
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom