My FoxNews post of the day

[Brainfade]

http://www.cnn.com/2011/12/12/opinion/avlon-huntsman/index.html?hpt=hp_bn9 Give Hunstman a look

(CNN) -- The "conservagencia" is starting to give Jon Huntsman a second look. He deserves it. But the stirrings of respect may be too little, too late. Too bad, because he might stand the best chance of beating President Barack Obama. RINO hunting has become a reflexive sport inside the Republican Party. And so when Jon Huntsman entered the presidential race, the impulse was to smack him on style points as a Republican in Name Only. It made some sense on the surface -- after all, he was the former Obama ambassador to China, in addition to being the conservative former governor of Utah. At a time when tea party enthusiasm tended toward the hot, Huntsman was cool, promising a campaign of civility and ideas. He seemed to be courting independents and centrists at the outset of the GOP primary, openly dissing the anti-intellectualism of conservative populist candidates such as Texas Gov. Rick Perry and U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann. In one infamous tweet, he pined: "I believe in evolution and trust scientists on global warming. Call me crazy." All this was very out of step with the partisan tone of the times. And so his actual record as governor and his policy plans as candidate were overlooked. Forget the record of cutting taxes, reforming government, improving the business climate and balancing the budget. Forget that he was the one candidate with real-world foreign policy experience. He was an apostate in a cult-like atmosphere where any dissent is seen as disloyalty. No one was happier than the White House, which was apparently most worried about running against Huntsman ("I think our guys were worried about Huntsman. I think he was the one who people were most worried about" recounted one Obama aide in Politico writer Mike Allen's and author Evan Thomas' new e-book, "The Right Fights Back"). Huntsman touts 'Citizen Legislature Act' Huntsman gaining ground Jon Huntsman's take on Donald Trump Huntsman on China currency manipulation So Huntsman had the buzz but no support -- he seemed stuck in the low single digits and even would-be supporters shrugged their shoulders. It seemed to say more about the current makeup of the Republican Party than it did about Jon Huntsman. After all, he was the first candidate to embrace U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan's plan for deficit reduction. His jobs plan was touted by The Wall Street Journal in uncommon terms: "Mr. Huntsman's proposal is as impressive as any to date in the GOP Presidential field, and certainly better than what we've seen from the front-runners." He even had the guts to proclaim a determination to end the collusion and market distortion of "Too Big to Fail"-- a cause that could unite Tea Partiers and Occupy protesters. But even though 70% of Republican primary voters say that economic issues are their primary focus, Huntsman's conservative substance could not seem to override the centrist style: He would not pander or throw radioactive red meat. Even the statistical analysis by the fivethirtyeight blog at The New York Times, which found Huntsman would have the best chance of actually beating Obama in the 2012 general election, did not seem to change hearts and minds. But as the revolving door of not-Romneys spun faster and faster, spitting out candidates from Bachmann and Perry to Herman Cain and Newt Gingrich, a desperate search for an electable conservative alternative to Romney commenced. And now, all of a sudden, the Utah governor has started to get some respect. CNN contributor Will Cain was an early advocate of Huntsman's substantive record as a conservative, in contrast to the style he evinced at the start of his campaign. "In this Republican primary, a candidate's conservativeness seems to be measured by his venom toward Barack Obama," Cain wrote in The Blaze. "And I'm afraid we've elevated style to such a degree that it's clouding our view of what is conservative." RedState.org editor and CNN contributor Erik Erickson is another unexpected voice lately arguing that Huntsman might just be the real conservative in the race: "His record as a governor is more conservative than Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney combined. He is more pro-life than either of them. He is more economically wedded to the free market than either of them. He has better foreign policy experience than either of them. Huntsman should be a conservative hero in this race." Conservative wise man George Will even seems to be making the case in comments delivered on the "Laura Ingraham Show," saying: "I think if you look at Jon Huntsman's record, what he's laid out, his proposals for taxes and the economy, his opposition to No Child Left Behind, you could make a case that he deserves a searching second look from conservatives. Huntsman's position on foreign policy is the most conservative. That is, it is the most modest in assessing the need and ability of the United States to control distant events." Jon Huntsman is putting all his chips on New Hampshire, where he's been inching forward in the polls. Unlike the Iowa caucus, it's a state with an open primary where independents can vote and a principled center-right perspective might be rewarded. Tonight he will get a chance to shine in a Lincoln-Douglas style debate with Gingrich in New Hampshire. It might prove to be a highlight of the 2012 campaign -- a substantive and civil debate about ideas, providing more light than heat. As conservatives consider the choice between the two flawed front-runners, Gingrich and Romney, they might reconsider the wisdom of purging center-right candidates like Jon Huntsman on matters of style versus substance. In the process, they just might finally find the perfect marriage of ideology and electability for which they have been looking.

[Lurker]

Hope Huntsman improves in chances and numbers. Rooting for him

[punjabi_khota]

Colbert bump couldn't help him. Doesn't bode well for his chances. Although it would great if he gets nominated, the debates between BO and huntsman would be a must watch.

[yoda]

You guys going gaga over someone who is getting 1% support in the polls? :hehe: He talks sense, however he has no Charisma, and totally doesn't sound Presidential. Also, to be a Republican nominee you need extreme views, not the rational ones like Huntsman has.

[cricket_usa]

Repubs are stuck between a rock and a hard place. They cannot win the nomination unless they are extreme right, cause the party is taken over by the teabaggers. An extreme right candidate like Bachman or Newt will have no chance against Obama in the general election. I don't see independents and undecideds voting for Newt, Bachmann or Perry.

[Brainfade]

You guys going gaga over someone who is getting 1% support in the polls? :hehe: He talks sense, however he has no Charisma, and totally doesn't sound Presidential. Also, to be a Republican nominee you need extreme views, not the rational ones like Huntsman has.

Like, totally? Yep, exactly the problem with the electorate today. We will elect (and have most recently elected) someone who talks little sense but does talk a good game and has charisma, but not someone with a track-record of substantive leadership and no charisma. We don't realize that the need of the hour in not rhetoric, but solid, substantive, grounded ideas and leadership. In today's visual-media driven circus, the force of personality trumps the force of achievement - a direct consequence of relying on news and opinions from MSNBC, FoxNews and Comedy Central?

[Sachin=GOD]

Obama is going to be re-elected simply because of lack of good opposition.

[punjabi_khota]

Like' date=' totally? Yep, exactly the problem with the electorate today. We will elect (and have most recently elected) someone who talks little sense but does talk a good game and has charisma, but not someone with a track-record of substantive leadership and no charisma. We don't realize that the need of the hour in not rhetoric, but solid, substantive, grounded ideas and leadership. In today's visual-media driven circus, the force of personality trumps the force of achievement - a direct consequence of relying on news and opinions from MSNBC, FoxNews and Comedy Central?[/quote'] Lol wut ? George Bush was elected in 2000 and 2004. A hobo on the streets on NY has more charisma and better hold of the language than the great Dubya. Don't whine like a old man with your 'this is the problem with the kids today' speech, Criaddict, you aint that old, and no comedy central or even fox news is not the problem :D

[cricket_usa]

Obama is going to be re-elected simply because of lack of good opposition.

Are you kidding me? GOP is going to bring out their secret weapon pretty soon. There are rumors out there that The Donald will be jumping in the race (as an Independent) so the GOP will get anyone other than Obama in the WH. See, he is the one that made Obama reveal his BC, what can he not do?

[Brainfade]

^Lol wut ? George Bush was elected in 2000. A hobo on the streets on NY has more charisma and better hold of the language than the great Dubya. Don't whine like a old man with your 'this is the problem with the kids today' speech' date=' Criaddict, you aint that old.[/quote'] I was talking BHO, not GWB. BHO won due to his charisma and skills in rhetoric. Plain and simple. BTW, I just got done grading final exams ... and so I *am* a cranky old man :-). At the risk of hijacking my own thread, here's something I saw that I thought you and The Outsider would enjoy: zn7-fVtT16k&feature=player_embedded

[punjabi_khota]

I was talking BHO, not GWB. BHO won due to his charisma and skills in rhetoric. Plain and simple. BTW, I just got done grading final exams ... and so I *am* a cranky old man :-). At the risk of hijacking my own thread, here's something I saw that I thought you and The Outsider would enjoy: zn7-fVtT16k&feature=player_embedded

Well, I know you were talking about BO. My point was that if people were just voting on charisma as you claim, GW didn't have a chance in hell. Will watch video when I get home.

[Brainfade]

Well' date=' I know you were talking about BO. My point was that if people were just voting on charisma as you claim, GW didn't have a chance in hell.[/quote'] When he was elected in 2000, he had a weird, "guy-next-door-I'd-love-to-have-a-beer-with" charm. An anti-elitist schtick that people found "charming." Again, the cult of personality over the force of ideas. In 2004, he was elected because John Kerry was a joke of a candidate (the same reason that BHO will get re-elected this time). The country should be behind people like Colin Powell and Jon Huntsman - understated giants with good ideas. Instead we get GWB and BHO. Edit: You may be right - it is not completely about the charm or charisma. It is also about financial clout and fund-raising ability (like Romney). You cannot win an election on ideas alone.

[Ram]

I've always suspected that CA is a closet liberal who just pretends to the outside world (and maybe himself too) that he leans more to the right than left. :--D

[Brainfade]

I've always suspected that CA is a closet liberal who just pretends to the outside world (and maybe himself too) that he leans more to the right than left. :--D

Huh? If I was, why would I support Huntsman? Solid conservative ideas with a moderate voice. A liberal wants higher taxes, more spending on entitlement programs, more govt involvement in everything, more concerned with feelings and political correctness than pragmatism, thinks demanding personal responsibility it cruel, is pro-abortion. I am none of those.

[cricket_usa]

@ Cricaddict Are you against abortion? If yes, why?

[Brainfade]

@ Cricaddict Are you against abortion? If yes' date=' why?[/quote'] I have posted several times about this, and PM'd about it ... so here's a quick copy-paste job from my previous musings:

[Rajiv]

I hated it when Newt mentioned that immigranys who have been here for 25 years with grandkids, are church goers, help the community.. WTF is the need for church-goers? every leader should be an atheist to avoid bias

[Brainfade]

I hated it when Newt mentioned that immigranys who have been here for 25 years with grandkids' date=' are [b']church goers, help the community.. WTF is the need for church-goers? every leader should be an atheist to avoid bias

I cringed when he said that. What the heck does church-going (or mosque-going or temple-going) have anything to do with being a decent person? Tax paying, crime-free, productive - that's it.

[Lurker]

Like' date='[i'] totally? Yep, exactly the problem with the electorate today. We will elect (and have most recently elected) someone who talks little sense but does talk a good game and has charisma, but not someone with a track-record of substantive leadership and no charisma. We don't realize that the need of the hour in not rhetoric, but solid, substantive, grounded ideas and leadership. In today's visual-media driven circus, the force of personality trumps the force of achievement - a direct consequence of relying on news and opinions from MSNBC, FoxNews and Comedy Central?

Okay first things first, take off Comedy Central from the list CA. Surely Jon Stewart does not belong in the same line up as Sean Hannity, Greta, Ed Schultz etc. Of the two channels Bill O Reilley and Joe Scarborough are the only two that talks sense (Rachel maddow is going down the poopers fast too). Stewart for the most part still remains a voice of sanity. (I am guessing your mention of Comedy Central had more to do with Jon Stewart and not South Park lol). With regards to your larger contention on charisma, that is indeed true but hardly applies to Republican line up. I mean who would suggest Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul or Mitt Romney have charisma? If that is indeed charisma then what did Bill Clinton have?? Or thats how our standards have fallen these days? I do concede that increasingly substance is taking a back seat these days in average life (let alone politics). Also there is this thought, with some justification, that right wing support is dependent on who can cash the hate-factor against Obama. Not everyone who is anti-Obama is a hater but there are plenty enough surely. And Huntsman being the genial guy he is wont get support from this group..which is a shame really.

[Lurker]

I hated it when Newt mentioned that immigranys who have been here for 25 years with grandkids' date= are church goers, help the community.. WTF is the need for church-goers? every leader should be an atheist to avoid bias

Actually that is a very pertinent point Newt has Rajeev. The undercurrent there is that these immigrants who are coming over are overwhelmingly Christians, and often very religious Catholic. Since religion is very important to many conservative this factor certainly appeals. Do we seriously think if Mexico was a non-Christian state, say Islamic, there would not have been a very strict policy to stop this? :winky: