Deseret News | Reader comments: Utahns prefer Romney to Huntsman in new poll

Reader comments
Utahns prefer Mitt to Huntsman

103 comments | Read story

Page:
1
2
3
Next >

Annon | 5:10 p.m. April 29, 2009

Perhaps Romney with Huntsman as a running mate would satisfy at least the Utah vote. Both are excellent business men and would be a strong package for the GOP.

Are you kidding me? | 5:13 p.m. April 29, 2009

This is easily the most stupid poll I have ever seen. If a successful Harvad graduat who happens to be a mormon can't get elected, how is a G.E.D. toating playboy who also happens to be a mormon possibly going to get elected?

Cougar Blue | 5:14 p.m. April 29, 2009

Nobody asked me in a poll. but I'd take Huntsman in a heartbeat.

Comments continue below

dkr | 5:16 p.m. April 29, 2009

Neither has a chance with our AMAZING President. Obama 12 Hillary 16

gordon | 5:24 p.m. April 29, 2009

Re; Are you kidding me? Two men from Utah, both Mormon and you think they would be a strong package for the GOP nationally? Are you President Obama's National Chairperson for his 2012 reelection or the most naive political observer ever to grace the pages of the Des News?

2012 is already decided | 5:35 p.m. April 29, 2009

In this climate, a social and economic conservative will not take the prize. A compromise would be Huntsman who hasn't been too rigid on same-sex marrage, but can regain what Obama has given up economically. If Utah and the conservative's in the country lean too far to the right socially, the republicans will lose again in 2016.

nothing beter to do. | 5:35 p.m. April 29, 2009

GOP has nothing better to do, than to complaint of their resent loss. Put your energy in to doing something good now and stop thinking of 2012.

to: cougar blue | 5:35 p.m. April 29, 2009

as far as i'm concerned, huntsman does not belong in the GOP at all. he is a traitor to utahns, republicans and mormons. he has no business running for president.yes, i am reffering to his stance on civil unions. even if you agree with him on it, consider this: why did he not make this stance before the election? or when the marriage amendment here in utah reached his desk, why didn't he send it back objecting to sign because it prohibited civil unions? i'll tell you why, it's because he is nothing but a politician with no dignity. all he cares about is himself. i am not saying a man does not have the right to change his mind, i'm just saying that he did not reach these opinions overnight. if he did, he would've said something like "i was wrong before and i hope you can all understand that and agree with me." no, all he did was call everyone else a bigot and placed himself as some kind of liberator of the gays. the man has no integrity and no business representing utah, mormons, or the GOP.

RINOs | 5:42 p.m. April 29, 2009

Huntsman is a RINO (Republican In Name Only). I think all the RINOs (Hatch and Bennett also) should form their own party and get out of the GOP.

But, what we really need are people in the federal government that understand and are willing to uphold the constitution. Bail outs are no where to be found in the constitution, but Huntsman was only too eager to accept the money.

If we can't find politicians willing to uphold the US constitution, our representation will only get worse.

Romney is not from Utah | 5:42 p.m. April 29, 2009

Huntsman really isn't either

My choice | 5:59 p.m. April 29, 2009

I'd take Huntsman over Romney! FYI the old Republican Party is gone! The Party needs real leadership that appeals to all regions of the US, not just the conservatives in the west and rednecks in the south.

Anonymous | 6:00 p.m. April 29, 2009

Of course I prefer Romney, he's done something. Huntsman is just the son of someone who's done something. Romney is amazingly intelligent and hard working. Huntsman is amazingly aloof and blows with the wind. Of course, both have great hair, but I won't count that against them.

But what will the GOP do? | 6:15 p.m. April 29, 2009

In my opinion, Huntsman is the future of the GOP. Not really sure he wants to run for president in 2012.

If GOP were smart they would go back to being fiscally conservative, moderate social Americans.

They have played out the radical social conservative and lost the GOP moderates.

If they continue, what are the 6 to 10 GOP'ers going to do? Listen to Hannity?

Oracle | 6:47 p.m. April 29, 2009

Romney would do better in Utah, Huntsman would do better nation wide.

Ken Goddard | 7:06 p.m. April 29, 2009

But really, does it even matter. The GOP, which means goofy OLD (mostly) politicians, are history. They had their chance and completely blew it, big time. The party should be disbanded and the duffers put out to pasture. The party needs to be replaced with the independent party.

Anonymous | 7:08 p.m. April 29, 2009

Utahns prefer Mitt to Huntsman. They have the favorables/unfavorables about Obama pretty much in reverse. They spend millions to stop a social justice movement that's way overdue. They harbor illegal immigrants in violation of the country's laws. They turn their backs on polygamous communities where women are abused and adolescent boys are abandoned.

Think you've got some thinking to do?

Why does the rest of the country even bother with you?

shawilli | 7:19 p.m. April 29, 2009

I rather suspect that Huntsman nor Rommney have a faint distant remote chance of EVER being elected as potus. I would be so bold as to "prophesy" that there will never be a mormon elected to the Presidency of the USA,it ain't gonna happen. 6 million mormons vs. 350 million regular americans, you do the math and you'll have to agree.

Wrong about the GOP | 7:22 p.m. April 29, 2009

The GOP has not been Conservative since 1988, fiscally Conservative under Newt, but socially Conservative's left with Reagan. Bush was semi-Conservative on social issues (see: abortion, also see: Immigration-liberal), and McCain was the least Republican candidate on both economic and social issues that the Republican party could have nominated. That is why I think party primaries should be closed to party members only, no Independents and definitely no cross-overs. This way Limbaugh and the Huffington garbage can't influence elections by getting their people to cross over and vote for or against a member of a different party. They should be closed to party members registered two-three months in advance, that would let the people actually represent the party decide who runs. McCain represented old politics, and Obama represented "change" that was the only difference, Obama got the young stupid kids and ignorant changemongers to vote for him. The GOP needs REAL fiscal Conservatives, not Bush's or McCain's. Social issues will always be a middle of the road issue, and truthfully not many people are switching sides on those anymore, get them at their pocketbooks. Romney is a lot better than Huntsman.

To: Are you kidding me? | 7:24 p.m. April 29, 2009

Goodness, you use words like Harvard, graduate, Mormon, toting, etc and misspell them all. Wise up.

Anonymous | 7:32 p.m. April 29, 2009

Not all Utahns. Some of are actually democrats.

Robert - St. George | 7:36 p.m. April 29, 2009

I like both Huntsman and Romney. I would vote for either one. I am not Mormon so their religion doesn't matter to me. I do not think Huntsman would necessarily be the stronger candidate over Romney just because he is viewed as more moderate. Romney too can be slightly moderate if needed. Remember Romney was elected Governor in thee most liberal state in the USA with the smallest, or near smallest, percentage of Mormons living within its boundaries. If Huntsman and Romney were in a primary I would go with Romney. I wished I knew more why these two don't like each other. It is a strange one to me. The idea of a Romney-Huntsman ticket is really not a good thing for the country outside of Utah. No way. Yikes, that is almost scary to me.

W.D.JOINES | 7:37 p.m. April 29, 2009

ROMNEY IS THE ONE TO GO ALL THE WAY TO WHITEHOUSE.
IF YOU WANT A MODERATE, THEN WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A REP. OR DEM? THERE'S NOT ONE. LOOK AT LIBERAL SPECTER. HE'S WHERE HE BELONGS NOW.
GOP RAN LIBERAL/MODERATE MCCAIN AND LOOK AT THE RESULTS. LIBS WANT MODERATES TO RUN, BUT FEAR CONSERVATIVES.
CONSERVATISM (WHICH WILL SAVE OUR COUNTRY AND MAKE IT EVEN GREATER) WINS WHEN POLITICIANS ARE PATRIOTIC AND BRAVE ENOUGH TO STAND BEHIND IT AND PROMOTE IT.
POLITICS IS NOT FOR THOSE WHO COWER IN THE CORNER IN FEAR AND TREMBLING.
ROMNEY MAKES A LOT OF GOOD COMMONSENSE, SOMETHING U.S. IS IN DIRE NEED OF ESPECIALLY NOW.
WE NEED SOMEONE WHO WILL DEFEND OUR CONSTITUTION NOT TEAR IT TO PIECES.
GOD BLESS AMERICA!

sad but true | 7:40 p.m. April 29, 2009

It is a sad truth that America is not ready for an LDS president, there's a lot of prejudice out there. Mitt Romney learned that the hard way in 2008. Ironically, Mormons used to have no problem getting elected in liberal states like Massachusetts, where there are few evangelicals. But the Prop 8 mess means that liberals are suspicious of Mormons, and we know that Evangelicals like Huckabee and Palin never liked LDS.

Good sign | 7:55 p.m. April 29, 2009

for Gov H. If Utahns don't support him, that's a good sign that he'd fare well nationally, lol. This Utahn supports him and has been talking him up to out-of-state relatives.

Give it a break | 7:58 p.m. April 29, 2009

the campaigning gets longer and more ridiculous each election, we have a Pres with 4 years to go so why are we subjected by endless media speculation about the next one?

a story about | 8:05 p.m. April 29, 2009

stale breakfast cereal in the kitchen cupboard would be more interesting..

Funny | 8:23 p.m. April 29, 2009

Why to newspapers always act like they stand for everyone? I don't prefer Romney..I prefer Gov. Huntsman.

NevadaCoug | 8:32 p.m. April 29, 2009

Funny, all these people saying that the Republican Party needs to be less conservative. They did that, after 2006, and look what happened. Republican's mis-read the 2006 election. The Republican's who lost weren't conservatives, they were "moderates".

If you don't show the people how you're different than the other guy, why should they vote for you? Republicans in 2008 tried to be just like the Democrats. Didn't turn out well, did it.

Which is why Mitt would be a much better choice than Huntsman.

RE: NevadaCoug | 8:58 p.m. April 29, 2009

It's not about being more conservative or more moderate. It's about choosing WHAT to be more conservative or more moderate about. Chew on that. Thank you.

memo from Massachusetts | 9:06 p.m. April 29, 2009

Utah is a very special and beautiful state that is much, much more conservative than the rest of America. It might surprise Utahns to know that Mitt Romney ran for governor of Massachusetts as a moderate, low taxes, pro choice, pro gay civil unions, pro universal health care candidate. And he won big as a Republican in the most liberal state in America. I am convinced that if Brother Mitt had remained true to his moderate New England ways he would be president today.

Re:Massachusetts: | 9:41 p.m. April 29, 2009

Well spoken.

"a moderate, low taxes, pro choice, pro gay civil unions, pro universal health care candidate."

I think that is what most Utahans (& US folks) are too. Although the republican right will not agree.

Huntsman or someone like him will be the future of the GOP.

Huntsman Spammers! | 9:53 p.m. April 29, 2009

Looks like the Huntsman campaign has their teams working overtime trying to puff up their guy.

The poll results are pretty clear, and once again show that Huntsman's RINO actions are getting better recognized and that he clearly is not the choice of REAL Republicans.

No more "moderate" candidates who stand for nothing, or meekly mouth conservative thoughts, but prove by their actions they are RINO liberals when in office.

Mitt would be acceptable, but I would prefer an even stronger conservative, but sadly I do not see one rising from the ranks yet.

By 2012 Obama will have messed this country up so much that virtually any Republican should win in a tidal wave of "throw the bums out" sentiment.

Re: Huntsman Spammers! | 10:20 p.m. April 29, 2009

Ah, REAL Republicans. May they stand steadfast while the rest of the world moves forward, leaving them far behind.

("Fake" Republicans are welcome to come along with the rest of us; we might even let them help lead the way.)

Anonymous | 10:47 p.m. April 29, 2009

I like Huntsman, I voted for him last election. But if Obama keeps up the good work I will vote for him again. As long as bitter, old, angry conservatives remain that way, he must be doing something right.

Keiji | 11:27 p.m. April 29, 2009

This poll makes sense as to how I see things. Former Massachusetts Mitt Romney has great presidential traits, including his intellect and energy to work so hard. He also has great background experience in very huge successful business endeavors, as a Governor in Massachusetts and the very successful Winter Olympics.

Good debate!! | 11:41 p.m. April 29, 2009

Hey, its the first time that I have ever seen a reasonable debate on these blogs. People just giving an honest opinion without having to attack anyone and for once leaving Obama alone. I'm from Australia and as an observation the Rep Party is in a total mess with nutty Republican supporting radio hosts just spitting out crazy ideas which only damages the party. With this lot Obama doesnt have a chance of losing in 2012 so your favorite sons Mitt and John might as well stay home and relax for that one.

Off Course | 12:35 a.m. April 30, 2009

Utah always chooses the lying waffler with the cookie cutter hair cut.

Who cares?!? | 12:44 a.m. April 30, 2009

LDS or not, they're both flaming liberals. Huntsman supports gay civil unions and Mitt legislated them. Mitt banned assualt weapons and Huntsman took the stimulus money.

Want a conservative? Try the governor of Alaska.

Anonymous | 12:52 a.m. April 30, 2009

Romney makes me ill, he is an arrogant person. I really like Huntsman, he is articulate and could possibly be the only type of republican that could save the GOP. Conservatism is dead, they failed the people with their ideologies and budgetary failures. They cannot balance a checkbook, are only interested in their wealthy friends and donors, and ohhhh the HATE!

Re: NevadaCoug | 1:15 a.m. April 30, 2009

John McCain had a particularly tough battle on his hands, especially considering the damage George W. Bush did to the Republican brand. But I don't think any other Republican would have fared better, and some would certainly have fared much worse.

Republicans need to put forward candidates that the general public can stomach. Arch-conservatives appeal to Mormons and Evangelicals, but really turn the general public off. We need less ideology in politics and more pragmatism. Moderate Republicans, if they can ever get past the primaries, are better qualified than anyone else to offer that to the American people.

Hispanic Vote | 5:31 a.m. April 30, 2009

Utah may prefer Romney. However, hispanics prefer Huntsman (or any other advocate for illegal immigration). This is a fact D-news so it is okay to allow this post. And from Obama's election forward hispanics WILL determine our president. Yes that's right our second world neighbors to the south will shape this once great nation's future!

scotwright | 6:17 a.m. April 30, 2009

I am pleased to say that Mitt Romney was and is the best candidate for the office of President. He has the skills, brains, and temperment for the job. When he dropped out last year all the good conservatives were left out in the cold. We had the choice of a "moderate" Republican in John McCain or a "far left" Democrat. America chose the real Democrat rather than the Republicrat McCain.

In 2012, I pray that Mitt Romney will show the country that he can lead us back from the abyss that we are now falling into. Ronald Reagan, an actor from California, was a true conservative and won the presidency in two landslides. I believe the reason the libs are pushing moderate Republicans is that they know the they can not beat a REAL CONSERVATIVE in a national election.

If we are stupid enough to put up another moderate
Republican, Obama will win again and really turn this into another "Democratic People's Republic". To prove my point about moderates look how our "moderate" Republican Candidates fared in the last election. They were trounced by Moderate to Conservative Democrats. MODERATE REPUBLICANS CAN'T WIN NATIONAL ELECTIONS!

Indiana | 6:20 a.m. April 30, 2009

I would take Mitt... and this has been a good debate and not mean spirited for the most part like many debates on here get to be... that is good

liberal larry | 6:34 a.m. April 30, 2009

Romney vs Huntsman, is a perfect illustration of the beleaguered republicans dilemma. They can either support the rock ribbed Romney, who has the national media charisma of a turnip, and will go down in a flaming defeat to Obama, or they can pick the charming, but moderate, Huntsman and have a real chance of winning. I can count on the conservatives to do the right thing, go Romney.

Cats | 6:56 a.m. April 30, 2009

This is exactly what I said in my blog yesterday. Romney would beat Huntsman, even in Utah. Huntsman has disappointed many Utahns with his positions on civil unions and so-called "climate change."

Huntsman is a competent guy, but he doesn't have the looks, the charm or the political appeal of Romney. I don't think he would have a snowball's chance of even getting the nomination, let alone win a national election.

The only reason John McCain has cited him as a possible candidate is for payback for Huntsman's support in 2008. It was REALLY tacky for Huntsman to go to Florida to campaign. This was a slap in the face both to Huntsman's own constituents (who overwhelmingly supported Romney) and to a guy who has done a lot for Utah.

I think Mitt has a great chance the next time around. He's doing all the right things. I would certainly support him and I don't think I could even vote for Huntsman for governor again. Thank goodness he's not running.

first of all | 6:58 a.m. April 30, 2009

Huntsman has not been receiving national attention. Utahn perceive him as doing so.

Second, Huntsman is a liberal RINO that betrays the GOP by giving in to environmentalists, gays, bailouts, etc. It was that kind of leadership that cost the GOP their power.

Third, How can Romney be arrogant when his desire is to serve the people after earning his millions. Huntsman is the one seeking power after receiving millions on a silver platter.

Dan | 7:00 a.m. April 30, 2009

Conservatism is alive and well, hence the reaon for the hundreds of thousands participating in the tea paries across this great nation. Republicans suffered because they became democrat lite, i John McCain, and the same result would happen with Huntsman. The conservatives would stay home as was evidenced in the last two elections. Elections have consequences, and if the republicans embrace thier roots we will see a route of the radical left who have taken over government.

Emjay | 7:03 a.m. April 30, 2009

To Anonymous 12:52: I never cease to be amazed at the way some people perceive things. Almost every statement you have made it completely off base. In addition, I NEVER seen hate to compare to the far-left hatred toward President Bush. It is the most irrational, vicious thing I've ever seen in my life.

Conservatism isn't dead. It's the only thing that will save our country from the path of destruction we have taken in the last few months.

Anonymous | 7:14 a.m. April 30, 2009

What Utah wants makes no difference on the national level. Let's see how they do in the other state primaries. Eithe way, the GOP is in trouble. The tent is way too small.

Dream on | 7:22 a.m. April 30, 2009

No Mormon will ever be elected president if he's a GOP candidate. The evangelical voter base won't stand for a cult member running the country. A Mormon Democrat would stand a better chance because the Democrat's are more accepting of differences then the GOP will ever be.

Page:
1
2
3
Next >

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.