• 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!

Jon Hunstman Declares His Candidacy (Watch Live)

Jetboogieman said:
Yeah **** moderates who have a chance of attracting independent voters (the ones that win elections).

Let's go with Bachmann, Palin and Cain. Just make sure you're not Muslim cause Cain needs to ask you a few questions.

And this is whats wrong with the republican party.

Go bat**** hard crazy right.... Or go home.
Click to expand...

Good old Jet, no tally, no clue.

Why is it BAD to back candidates that are Conservative? Cause you aren't one and don't like them? Too bad, **** off I say.

Why should Conservatives back a guy like Hunstman who supports:

Cap and Trade
UHC
Is an "untraditional Republican"?

Hmmm?

Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins are so called "Moderate" Republicans, and most of the base can't stand them.

Tell me again, oh genius Jet, where is the incentive, where is the reason the CONSERVATIVE BASE, that drives the GOP, should give up their principles just to make someone like you happy?
 
Jetboogieman said:
Yeah **** moderates who have a chance of attracting independent voters (the ones that win elections).

Let's go with Bachmann, Palin and Cain. Just make sure you're not Muslim cause Cain needs to ask you a few questions.

And this is whats wrong with the republican party.

Go bat**** hard crazy right.... Or go home.
Click to expand...

The evil liberals made them do it. It's all the liberals fault.

Their candidate loses? Because he was picked by liberals somehow.

Their candidate can't answer a question? It was a gotchya question. Evil liberal media.

Their candidate says something stupid? Just the liberal media cherry picking quotes.

Polls show that their candidate is down? Evil liberal polls.
 
Swizz said:
You don't have the slightest clue who I am or what my beliefs are or what my voting history is, so I'd appreciate if you didn't make assumptions.

I DID vote for Obama in 2008. I also voted for Mitch Daniels for governor. So there goes your ignorant theory.
Click to expand...

I would tell Vic that I voted for Obama and Bobby Jindal as my governor but I doubt he'd believe me.
 
MrVicchio said:
Good old Jet, no tally, no clue.

Why is it BAD to back candidates that are Conservative? Cause you aren't one and don't like them? Too bad, **** off I say.

Why should Conservatives back a guy like Hunstman who supports:

Cap and Trade
UHC
Is an "untraditional Republican"?

Hmmm?

Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins are so called "Moderate" Republicans, and most of the base can't stand them.

Tell me again, oh genius Jet, where is the incentive, where is the reason the CONSERVATIVE BASE, that drives the GOP, should give up their principles just to make someone like you happy?
Click to expand...

It's called winning elections. The tea party is really screwing up this whole concept for you guys.

Sure Sharron Angle and Christine O'Donnell are, on paper, conservative wet dreams...but wouldn't it have been nice to actually win those very winnable seats? Go ahead, be my guest, choose Cain or Gingrich or Santorum or Bachmann, doesn't bother me in the slightest...see how far that gets you in November 2012.
 
Swizz said:
You don't have the slightest clue who I am or what my beliefs are or what my voting history is, so I'd appreciate if you didn't make assumptions.

I DID vote for Obama in 2008. I also voted for Mitch Daniels for governor. So there goes your ignorant theory.
Click to expand...

You voted for Obama? Color me SHOCKED! Good for you, you voted Daniels, who was his opponent again? Hmm?
 
Swizz said:
It's called winning elections. The tea party is really screwing up this whole concept for you guys.

Sure Sharron Angle and Christine O'Donnell are, on paper, conservative wet dreams...but wouldn't it have been nice to actually win those very winnable seats? Go ahead, be my guest, choose Cain or Gingrich or Santorum or Bachmann, doesn't bother me in the slightest...see how far that gets you in November 2012.
Click to expand...


You can have someone with the right basic concepts who make bad candidates, or are you saying the person has nothing to do with the elections, it's all about "ideology?" Good Candidates can go down because of mistakes.


Huntsman has far far far too many negatives to get anywhere. He's not the Candidate we're looking for.
 
Mellie said:
Watch Live: Jon Huntsman Jr. Declares Candidacy at Liberty State Park | Breaking news and opinion on The Blaze

I don't know much about this guy yet, so I'll be watching him closely.
Click to expand...

I guess Huntsman is the guy that the White House is most concerned about as he is smart, well-spoken, is extremely knowledgable regarding foreign relations, and isn't bat-crap crazy. While many of these attributes will do him well in the General election, they will be a hiderance in the primaries.
 
Last edited:
MrVicchio said:
You voted for Obama? Color me SHOCKED! Good for you, you voted Daniels, who was his opponent again? Hmm?
Click to expand...

Jill Long Thompson. Didn't like her.

Point being, not everyone on the other side of the aisle is a blind partisan like you'd like to believe. I am perfectly capable of voting Republican - I have before and I will again. Regardless of whether that fits your narrative or not. And Jon Huntsman is one that I would certainly consider voting for.

MrVicchio said:
You can have someone with the right basic concepts who make bad candidates, or are you saying the person has nothing to do with the elections, it's all about "ideology?" Good Candidates can go down because of mistakes.


Huntsman has far far far too many negatives to get anywhere. He's not the Candidate we're looking for.
Click to expand...

The fact that the GOP did not win the race against Harry Reid, whose approval was in the toilet (mid-to-high 30s, I believe) is quite pathetic. It's because they picked Angle - a candidate who was too far to the right for independents to embrace, and too incompetent on the campaign trail for even her own party to accept wholeheartedly. Had a more mainstream candidate emerged victorious in the primaries, Harry Reid would be out of work today.

That's my point.
 
Last edited:
Swizz said:
Jill Long Thompson. Didn't like her.

Point being, not everyone on the other side of the aisle is a blind partisan like you'd like to believe. I am perfectly capable of voting Republican - I have before and I will again. Regardless of whether that fits your narrative or not. And Jon Huntsman is one that I would certainly consider voting for.



The fact that the GOP did not win the race against Harry Reid, whose approval was in the toilet (mid-to-high 30s, I believe) is quite pathetic. It's because they picked Angle - a candidate who was too far to the right for independents to embrace, and too incompetent on the campaign trail for even her own party to accept wholeheartedly. Had a more mainstream candidate emerged victorious in the primaries, Harry Reid would be out of work today.

That's my point.
Click to expand...

Your point is that the GOP needs to be less Conservative and more moderate, more liberal.

I understand the concept, put up candidates that don't stand for what the base believes in and hope more people vote for them. Angle was a bad candidate, it had nothing to do with the ideology she pushed.

If you were to say "The GOP needs to find good solid candidates" I'd agree, your premise is that conservative candidates cannot win, and I reject that out right. Huntsman has some good points, but his bad points will sink him. The GOP will not back a Cap and Trade, UHC supporting candidate. Period.
 
Swizz said:
Jill Long Thompson. Didn't like her.

Point being, not everyone on the other side of the aisle is a blind partisan like you'd like to believe. I am perfectly capable of voting Republican - I have before and I will again. Regardless of whether that fits your narrative or not. And Jon Huntsman is one that I would certainly consider voting for.



The fact that the GOP did not win the race against Harry Reid, whose approval was in the toilet (mid-to-high 30s, I believe) is quite pathetic. It's because they picked Angle - a candidate who was too far to the right for independents to embrace, and too incompetent on the campaign trail for even her own party to accept wholeheartedly. Had a more mainstream candidate emerged victorious in the primaries, Harry Reid would be out of work today.

That's my point.
Click to expand...

You sure it had nothing to do with mass-distributed memos sent out to tens of thousands of casino workers lamenting their fates if Harry Reid lost? Or the media slaughterfest against Angle in the last two weeks leading up the election?
 
tessaesque said:
You sure it had nothing to do with mass-distributed memos sent out to tens of thousands of casino workers lamenting their fates if Harry Reid lost? Or the media slaughterfest against Angle in the last two weeks leading up the election?
Click to expand...

No Tess, it's obvious that Angle was a Hard Right Wing nutcase that couldn't beat Harry Reid, it was all about her crazy super ultra conservative beliefs. ;)

Her negatives as a person/candidate were greatly exasperated by the Reid Machine.
 
You are right, Angle's loss had nothing to do with her ideology or incompetence, it was all about the evil lamestream media.

Are you guys serious with this? You're becoming parodies of yourself at this point.
 
Swizz said:
You are right, Angle's loss had nothing to do with her ideology or incompetence, it was all about the evil lamestream media.

Are you guys serious with this? You're becoming parodies of yourself at this point.
Click to expand...

I didn't say it had nothing to do with incompetency, I just said that there are definitely other very important factors to consider. It would be best not to make assumptions.
 
Erod said:
Wrong and wrong.

Obama has lost the independents, which got him elected last time.

True conservatives win. Reagan did it, Bush 1 did it until he went liberal and raised taxes, and Bush 2 did it. That's 5 of the last 8 elections, and if Perot never reared his head, it might have been 7 of 8.
Click to expand...

I don't consider Bush 2 a true conservative.
 
Zyphlin said:
No access to youtube here. Mind telling me whats in the video?
Click to expand...

Quotes from Huntsman, getting ready for work so here are the paraphrased highlights:

We need Cap and Trade

We need Obamacare (not in those words, but he supports UHC style healthcare)

"I am not a traditional Republican"
 
Swizz said:
It's called winning elections. The tea party is really screwing up this whole concept for you guys.
Click to expand...

I would watch whose theories you call ignorant when you then throw this comment out as some kind of reason Huntsman has no chance, considering he's ALSO a tea party wet dream since its not a social movement but a fiscal one, of which he's solidly conservative.
 
MrVicchio said:
We need Cap and Trade
Click to expand...

A view point he's since came out against due to the state of the economy and the lengths in which Obama and Co want to go on it.

We need Obamacare (not in those words, but he supports UHC style healthcare)
Click to expand...

Odd considering as governor he prpose the type of Health Care Reform that conservatives generally want...a private sector focused solution where tax breaks and other incentives were used to keep prices low. Yes, he does feel that an individual mandate is an okay thing. A sentiment shared by a the Republican Party at large not too long ago but has been abandoned primarily because of the method in which its implimented in the Obama plan and the ramifications of the political backdoors it's there to allow for.

"I am not a traditional Republican"
Click to expand...

He's not. He's not a social conservative, which is atypical for a Republican.

Seriously, you're counter to my entire argument is something he no longer supports, a statement made about health care while ignoring what his actual governing history shows, and the fact he doesn't consider himself a traditional republican?

Wow, you sure did convince me Mr. V.

Tell me, who is it you think should get the nod?
 
MrVicchio said:
Why should Conservatives back a guy like Hunstman
Click to expand...

Because he was a solid enough conservative to be viewed as worth while to have on staff under Reagan, GHWB, and GWB with significant positions under the later two.

Because he was rated as the best Governor on taxes in the entire country. Because he was rated as a top 5 fiscal Governor in the country. Because his state was repeatedly a top 3 state for Business in the country. All during the time when candidate Pawlenty and possible candidate Palin were also governors, both who are individuals people suggest are "true conservatives".

Because he pushed for reform that sought private sector solutions to health care, because he lowered the amount of spending compared to state GDP during his tenure, because he showed a business growing agenda.

Because he has extensive experience where Obama didn't. He has Executive Experience at a state and experience in the executive branch at a federal level. He feels a strong need to make North Korea incapable of nuclear weapons. He is a strong supporter of Israel. He has a deep and thurough understanding of China which is rapidly becoming one of our biggest if not biggest foreign policy areas of the next decade.

But I forgot....he's not going to pass laws about Abortion (oh wait, he can't, that's a court thing) and won't try to push a Constitutional amendment LIMITING the rights of people (how UNconservative of him :roll:) and made a few coments years ago that he has since changed his view on. That obviously invalidates all the rest :roll:
 
MrVicchio said:
The GOP will not back a Cap and Trade, UHC supporting candidate.
Click to expand...

Alright Vicc, whose your candidate of choice out of this field then? Whose your pick for the apparently umblemished candidate with no issues?
 
Zyphlin said:
I would watch whose theories you call ignorant when you then throw this comment out as some kind of reason Huntsman has no chance, considering he's ALSO a tea party wet dream
Click to expand...

Do you actually believe this? This leads me to think you have no understanding of the tea party movement.

Tea party supporters are going to want to rip this guy to shreds.
 
Swizz said:
Do you actually believe this? This leads me to think you have no understanding of the tea party movement.

Tea party supporters are going to want to rip this guy to shreds.
Click to expand...

Being as you are obviously not a member of the tea party, how would you possibly know? Media reports? Speculation?
 
Swizz said:
Do you actually believe this? This leads me to think you have no understanding of the tea party movement.

Tea party supporters are going to want to rip this guy to shreds.
Click to expand...

Once again, as I said, I wouldn't be calling peoples views or thoughts or comments ignorant when your own shows similar qualities.

<--- Long admitted and open Tea Party supporter on this forum that's attended rallys who is advocating for this guy as a President.

The only reason members of the Tea Party movement have to rip this guy on, other than the two comments Vicc pointed to that ignore other relevant facts concerning his stance...are non-Tea Party issues. Now, because his opponents will try to trumpet those up individuals within the movement may dislike him for his broader stances based on their own broader stances. However, looking at him purely through the concerns and views that the movement...not the individual members...has a stated care for, he's an exceptionally good candidate.

To put it another way....

One could say that the Anti-War movement would have a wet dream about Ron Paul in regards to his war policies. However, it would also be realistic to say that individual members of that movement would not vote for him and tear him to shreds if he ran as a Democrat (The typical haven of the Anti-War movement). Not because he wasn't an ideal anti-war candidate, but because various movements like the Tea Party movement and the Anti-War movement rarely encompass an individuals ENTIRE view. IE, you rarely find someone that cares 100% ONLY about Tea Party issues or 100% ONLY about Anti-War issues. Thus, if the sum of a person doesn't match with a sum of the individuals views, they may not support them even if the individual falls 100% in line with the views of hte Primary movement the voter identifes themselves as.

In regards to TEA PARTY ISSUES Huntsman is a very good candidate. In regards to individual members of the Tea Party movement, he may not be a very good candidate because he may not encompass their other views and their Tea Party focused views may not be enough to outweigh that.

Huntsman is very much in line with the ideals of the Tea Party movement. That said I wouldn't be surprised if he's nto the most liked of the candidates by INDIVIDUALS within the Tea Party.

However, I do think compared to Obama he has the fiscal credentials to motivate the Tea Party base.
 
Last edited:
Swizz said:
Do you actually believe this? This leads me to think you have no understanding of the tea party movement.

Tea party supporters are going to want to rip this guy to shreds.
Click to expand...

I'm sure there will be individuals in the movement who will attack Huntsman based on his social views. But many Tea Party members are primarily concerned about the economy, and Jon Huntsman is a hardline fiscal conservative.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom