• 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!

Huntsman Announcing His Candidacy on June 21st

The quick and dirty on Hunstman's views is this.

  • He is by far the most experienced candidate in this race in terms of foreign policy. Nobody can match credentials with him on that.
  • He's generally pro gun and has made getting concealed weapons licenses easier in Utah, but he also said he would not veto an assault weapons ban.
  • He's pro life, and has said he would support a right to life amendment.
  • He's expressed support for cap and trade, which I am iffy about, but honestly I don't think it's a very important issue. He implemented some measures on the state level, but I highly doubt he'll go too overboard on the national stage.
  • He's pro civil unions.
  • He's not a closed-borders candidate, though he has tentatively approved of better enforcement. He has supported in-state school tuition for illegal immigrant students. He also supported driving privileges for illegals.
  • I've talked to several Utahans. Support for Huntsman is generally split. The ultra-conservatives think he's sellout.
 
Last edited:
Jeezy said:
The quick and dirty on Hunstman's views is this.

  • He is by far the most experienced candidate in this race in terms of foreign policy. Nobody can match credentials with him on that.
Click to expand...

I think this^ might be the thing that I like most about Huntsman. I believe we need a president who has strong foreign policy credentials, especially with China. Like it or not, they are becoming major players in world affairs, and it would be nice to have someone with experience dealing with them.
 
rocket88 said:
"Republican In Name Only"

It's an epithet that the extreme right uses on anybody in the GOP who's anything close to moderate.
Click to expand...

Yes, and "DINO" is what the extreme left uses on anyone in their party who's anything close to moderate.
 
rocket88 said:
"Republican In Name Only"

It's an epithet that the extreme right uses on anybody in the GOP who's anything close to moderate.
Click to expand...
or Republican in name only. RINOs are Democrats without the courage to admit it.
 
Anagram said:
I don't think that he will be nominated either. But I think that the Republicans should. He would probably keep the Republican base because he is not Obama, and I think he would also heavily draw Independents and disaffected democrats.
Click to expand...
No. We need a conservative to pull us back from the brink of this man caused disaster.
 
Misterveritis said:
No. We need a conservative to pull us back from the brink of this man caused disaster.
Click to expand...

...says the guy who has repeated, on several occasions, that any of the Republican nominees would be better than Obama.

You're living affirmation of Anagram's post.
 
Last edited:
Misterveritis said:
No. We need a conservative to pull us back from the brink of this man caused disaster.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree that we need someone who can turn this around. But I also believe it is imperative that we have a president experienced in foreign policy. Besides, Huntsman seems to be fairly fiscally conservative. He is only more moderate in social and foreign issues.
 
Jeezy said:
...says the guy who has repeated, on several occasions, that any of the Republican nominees would be better than Obama.

You're living affirmation of Anagram's post.
Click to expand...
From my perspective that is still a true statement. Any body but the Marxist.
But from the perspective of winning a nomination I believe this time around we will not select the Romney's of he party. No soft and squishy, moderate Republicans need apply. We do not need Marxist-lite. We do not need Democrat-lite.
 
Misterveritis said:
From my perspective that is still a true statement. Any body but the Marxist.
But from the perspective of winning a nomination I believe this time around we will not select the Romney's of he party. No soft and squishy, moderate Republicans need apply. We do not need Marxist-lite. We do not need Democrat-lite.
Click to expand...


A man who supports a right to life amendment is hardly "Democrate-lite." That is, unless you're willing to let his stance on civil unions or his pro-environment record blind you to the best candidate in this race.
 
Misterveritis said:
From my perspective that is still a true statement. Any body but the Marxist.
But from the perspective of winning a nomination I believe this time around we will not select the Romney's of he party. No soft and squishy, moderate Republicans need apply. We do not need Marxist-lite. We do not need Democrat-lite.
Click to expand...

I understand this is probably where the GOP nomination is going, but I do not think it is wise. If the eventual match-up is Huntsman-Obama or Romney-Obama then they would both probably get my vote (with nothing etched in stone, there are 17 months until the election). However, if the GOP nominates a more extreme Palin, Bachmann, or Santorum it might give me, and I assume many other moderates, enough pause to not vote, or even to vote for Obama.
 
Anagram said:
I understand this is probably where the GOP nomination is going, but I do not think it is wise. If the eventual match-up is Huntsman-Obama or Romney-Obama then they would both probably get my vote (with nothing etched in stone, there are 17 months until the election). However, if the GOP nominates a more extreme Palin, Bachmann, or Santorum it might give me, and I assume many other moderates, enough pause to not vote, or even to vote for Obama.
Click to expand...
We disagree. We do not have another chance to save this nation. if the one term president Obama gets another term then the nation is history. Our liberty is history. The same can be said with a Romney or a Huntsman. We cannot afford to nominate someone willing to destroy the nation just like the Democrats, only slower.
 
Misterveritis said:
We disagree. We do not have another chance to save this nation. if the one term president Obama gets another term then the nation is history. Our liberty is history. The same can be said with a Romney or a Huntsman. We cannot afford to nominate someone willing to destroy the nation just like the Democrats, only slower.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. We disagree. I believe neither Romney nor Huntsman would destroy this country if elected. I also believe that if an extreme conservative gets nominated, then that conservative won't get the chance to try and save it.
 
Anagram said:
Fair enough. We disagree. I believe neither Romney nor Huntsman would destroy this country if elected. I also believe that if an extreme conservative gets nominated, then that conservative won't get the chance to try and save it.
Click to expand...

Ah. But there is no such thing as an extreme conservative. So the point is moot.
 
Misterveritis said:
Ah. But there is no such thing as an extreme conservative. So the point is moot.
Click to expand...

Yep. You heard the man.

There's *chortle* no such *chuckle* thing as---

:2rofll:

Sorry. Couldn't hold that in anymore.
 
Jeezy said:
Yep. You heard the man.

There's *chortle* no such *chuckle* thing as---

:2rofll:

Sorry. Couldn't hold that in anymore.
Click to expand...


How would you interpret "extreme conservatism"?

Is there such a thing as "extreme liberalism"?
 
Jon Huntsman has a solid resume. He has executive experience and substantive foreign policy experience. Whether he can leverage his experience and build support for a vision of leadership that wins him the nomination remains to be seen. It will probably be an uphill challenge.

Certainly, his prospects are better than they would otherwise have been on account of the fragmented field and the recent debate outcome. Governor Pawlenty's and Senator Santorum's recent weak debate performances have diminished their prospects. Speaker Gingrich's debate peformance wasn't sufficiently strong to allow him to overcome his problems. Herman Cain is a lightweight and will not pose a significant challenge once the balloting gets underway early next year. Congressman Paul still has an overly narrow appeal. Congresswoman Bachmann did quite well, though she stumbled by taking a shot a France, but needs to do more to begin to solidify the gains she made following the debate.

For now, Governor Romney maintained his frontrunner status. However, unlike Governor Romney, Huntsman does not yet enjoy widespread name recognition among voters nationwide. Voters will need to learn who he is. His fundraising skills also remain somewhat uncertain. He will start out at a decided financial disadvantage relative to Governor Romney.

All in all, his entry in the race provides Republicans with another possible credible candidate. Even if he falls short of the nomination, he could well be an attractive choice for a high-level senior appointment, perhaps a foreign policy appointment. In the meantime, he will add value to discussions of foreign policy and the increasingly important China-U.S. bilateral relationship, East Asian balance of power, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom