Huntsman's decision to quit presidential race 'came from his gut'

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Article-Reader Spanish Fork, UT
    Jan. 18, 2012 7:17 p.m.

    @My Two Cents

    Obama has yet to give congress a budget. He lets them spend and spend and spend. He also has yet to veto a spending bill that hasn't come from Republicans. Obama never met a dem spending project he didn't love. He has yet to produce a Jobs plan, and he has yet to reign in any spending. He talks talks talks of compromise, yet has vetoed every republican bill that hits his desk. Compromise doesn't mean that you get what you want at the expense of the republicans. It means both sides give and take. Obama is all take, no give. Time to "Give" him the boot!

  • Vince the boonies, mexico
    Jan. 17, 2012 7:22 p.m.

    Lack of funding is right. He wouldn't accept millions from the "big" boys that call the shots and be indebted like all of these others. And the payola beat goes on just like it has big time since Bush-Cheney! Disgusting mongrels. Flaunt, demand and worry about #1 only. What a mess. Jon was the "only" qualified rep for sure!

  • awsomeron Waianae, HI
    Jan. 17, 2012 4:14 p.m.

    How about Reality and lack of funding...

  • ksampow Farr West, Utah
    Jan. 17, 2012 2:53 p.m.

    The first good thing Huntsman has done since he declared his candidacy!

    A great governor and ambassador, he was a poor candidate for President. Maybe he'll learn before the next time around.

  • ksampow Farr West, Utah
    Jan. 17, 2012 2:51 p.m.

    Reagan's tax cuts helped stimulate the economy. Tax REVENUE went up after tax RATES went down.
    The deficit spending during that time was for defense, to win the Cold War. The resulting "peace dividend" from the collapse of the Soviet Union made Clinton look good on the economy, although it was not his doing. More of the credit belonged to Reagan and the Congress that worked with him.

  • lket Bluffdale, UT
    Jan. 17, 2012 12:13 p.m.

    the rich own almost all repuplicans because of a paper they signed saying they would never raise taxes. the group that gets them to sign it will not let anyone know who pays for it. it is large corporations just like the super pac money. the average person has no idea how they go after someone that raises taxes. remember that the govenment is made of people also. when you down size it is more layoffs and not a cost saver in the long run because if they cant get a job they will be on unemployment. corporations will never let the goverment get smalll anyway because they make money on big government just like the never ending wars. the next will be iran just watch. those bad people. people are not evil only individuals.

  • Anti Bush-Obama Washington, DC
    Jan. 17, 2012 11:47 a.m.

    When his campaign makes a racist video and blames Ron Paul for it, it serves him right.

  • my two cents worth Ridgefield, WA
    Jan. 17, 2012 11:32 a.m.


    I agree. Presidents don't spend our tax dollars. So will the GOP candidates correct themselves about their view that Obama has spent us into oblivion?

  • Thinkman Provo, UT
    Jan. 17, 2012 11:18 a.m.

    Huntsman would have been much much better than Obama, that is clear. Was he the strongest to defeat BHO? Certainly not.

    Don't be surprised if he is tapped for the Secretary of State position should a Republican win the Presidency in 2012.

    Huntsman seemed to finally learn how to debate with effectiveness in the 2 New Hampshire debates. Had he debated in the previous 10 debates like he did in those 2 debates, he may actually have been a serious contender as he could have joined the "anybody but Mitt" gang of Republican presidential hopefuls who enjoyed the top spot in polls like Bachman, Newt, Cain, Perry did for a time.

  • TandJ LaVerkin, Utah
    Jan. 17, 2012 11:05 a.m.

    Jon drops out like he did from high school many years ago. He dropped out of high school to join a rock group. Wonder if he and his wife plan to start a new rock group now? They could call it the Ken and Barbie show.

  • AlanSutton Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 17, 2012 10:56 a.m.

    I'm glad he's gone, for three reasons.

    One, he was in no position to give other candidates advice about how to campaign. His campaign was just as "toxic" as the others, especially his comments - and those of his father - about Mitt Romney.

    Two, he lacks the personal qualities and experience necessary for the job. Everything he has ever done in life has come from his father's money, from his work on Reagan's campaign to his two ambassadorships. And he would never have been elected as Utah's governor if not for his father's reputation.

    Three, his personal dislike for Mitt Romney was becoming more evident each day. When the 2002 Olympics problems first came about, he announced that some people close to hime, people he did not name, were encouraging him to seek the job as head of the Olympics. He worked hard behind the scenes to get the job. But as we all know, the governor chose Mitt Romney. After that, he and his father have held a grudge against Mitt Romney.

    Now I'm afraid that we haven't heard the last of him; he'll keep coming back, with his father's money, looking for more political positions.

  • rogerdpack2 Orem, UT
    Jan. 17, 2012 9:46 a.m.

    @gacanepa I think some LDS sentiment is less because he was pretty moderate (at least in my eyes) when governing Utah, and that didn't come across well to some conservatives.

  • Article-Reader Spanish Fork, UT
    Jan. 17, 2012 9:46 a.m.


    Presidents can not spend 1 dime of our tax dollars. They can ask congress to spend and they can produce budgets, but congress ultimately is the spender, not the president. To accuse Reagan of deficit spending is irresponsible on your part. Reagan did raise taxes, in a compromise that the deems in congress didn't keep to. They promised to cut spending, but alas they lied. . . What has changed?

  • rogerdpack2 Orem, UT
    Jan. 17, 2012 9:45 a.m.

    wow seems like an honorable move.

  • Go Big Blue!!! Bountiful, UT
    Jan. 17, 2012 9:38 a.m.

    It is the first political announcement from Huntsman I can get behind. I will admit that he made a good departure. I wish him the best.

  • podunk utah DRAPER, UT
    Jan. 17, 2012 9:13 a.m.

    i think the decision came from his pocketbook. He was not going to win, why waste the cash.

    he would have been good though, but Romney already had the infrastructure in place

  • Runner Chandler, AZ
    Jan. 17, 2012 9:11 a.m.

    I just don't understand why the people of Utah are so enamored with this guy. He left after one year of being reelected, i.e., he goes around the state campaigning and telling the people of Utah about his grand vision, and then after they put their trust in him, he bolts for an ambassador position. It was not even a cabinet position but one that would get his name out there and further drive his ego and personal aspirations. Now, although he has a legal mailing address in UT, he doesn't even live in the state, and he says that he wants no part of Utah politics. Apparently UT is not big enough, in his mind, to catapult him to the next level. And while he continues to use and play the people of UT, they love him. Why is that?

  • Doug10 Roosevelt, UT
    Jan. 17, 2012 9:08 a.m.

    Dear Barney,

    It was Ronald Reagan who increased taxes not once but twice. It was he who spent the country into oblivion, all the while telling USA it was necessary in order to beat Russia. In reality Russia had beat themselves and they were broke.

    Ron Reagans biographer stated that Ron Reagan did not have an extreme conservative bone in his body but was more middle of the road. Sorry Tea Party people but Reagan was never in your camp.

    History shows that even with Reagans tax increases the country still floundered financially.

    The problem is not too high of taxes, the problem is the way taxes are spent, propping up big business, the over spending military, over sized government, poor health care.

    There is not anyone running or elected who you would trust to spend wisely, if there were, taxes would be collected from a much happier people.

  • So. Cal Reader San Diego, CA
    Jan. 17, 2012 9:07 a.m.

    RE: I Bleed Blue--"There goes the best man for the job." Glad to see a comment from one of the 4% nationally behind Huntsman. With as much as Huntsman struggled from the get-go, he NEVER connected with a wide array of voters, how anyone can say he was the "best man" for the job is beyond me. Enjoy joining Huntsman on his "ticket to ride" wherever.

  • mohokat Ogden, UT
    Jan. 17, 2012 8:15 a.m.

    "Huntsman put everything into New Hampshire He sure did, his ego and other peoples money.

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    Jan. 17, 2012 8:09 a.m.

    Maybe he should have tried Pepto-Bismal.

  • Ok Salt Lake City, Utah
    Jan. 17, 2012 7:38 a.m.

    At least Jon Huntsman doesn't have to worry about having enough money to feed, clothe, and house his family. I'm not sure Jon can truly understand the economic issues facing the nation right now. I'm glad he stepped down.

  • Barney Google Beaver, UT
    Jan. 17, 2012 7:06 a.m.

    @ I Bleed Blue

    Your user name is fitting, if we as a society continue down Obama's path we will all be singing the Blue's. Republicans speak of tax cuts for a reason. It was through supply side economics that Ronald Reagan brought this country out of a similar economic melt down, his economic plan designed by William A. Niskanen it is a counter-intuitive set of policies that aims to increase revenues by decreasing taxes. It works by significant tax cuts that lead to greater economic activity, since people have more money to spend and invest, which in turn can lead to greater tax revenues for the government and this helps stimulate the economy.

    Entitlements and Food Stamps does not help!

    Bleed Blue, Higher Taxes = BAD! Lower Taxes = GOOD!

  • Itsjstmeagain Merritt Island, Fl
    Jan. 17, 2012 7:01 a.m.

    I bleed blue.
    I agree. The others are having a "race to the extreme". The party just doesn't get it that an extreme right candidate will only attract their own kind and not the more Republican moderates and independents. They are killing themselves with their own words.
    Maybe Corporations are people and will demand 1 million votes, or they will move to India.

    Cougar. Business is successful when they have a demand for their goods or services. That comes from millions of people with disposable income. Today, that will happen when jobs are made by Govt intervention. Corp. are holding 1.7 Trillion in cash. Create the jobs or sink.

  • Esquire Springville, UT
    Jan. 17, 2012 6:22 a.m.

    This was a pragmatic decision based on not wanting to be bested by Stephen Colbert. And he should have made Romney earn the endorsement. Romney wasn't even around when Huntsman gave it. Very poorly played, especially after the day before, Huntsman was saying Romney was unelectable. I previously respected Huntsman even though his party prefers less desirable candidates, but Huntsman showed a lack of consistency in the way he handled this that hints of the lack of a strong core which is so evident in Romney. This surely must be a Republican attribute which crushes any temptation to consider the GOP for President.

  • cambodia girl Phnom Penh, Cambodia
    Jan. 17, 2012 6:17 a.m.

    I'm happy Huntsman got out of the race, he was becoming just like some of the others with the negative ads and statements that were pretty unbecoming of someone of his heritage. I often wonder how these candidates can ever forgive each other for the hurtful things being said. I hope the nomination ends soon and the healing can begin in the Republican party.

  • gacanepa Villa Mercedes, San Luis, Argentina
    Jan. 17, 2012 6:15 a.m.

    Even though I am not directly concerned about this election (I live in Argentina and am not an american citizen) I find it interesting to know about American politics anyway.
    From what I've been able to read in the DS, I can see the newspaper is more pro-Romney and, as far as I've seen in this site, church members are more likely to support Mitt instead of Jon Huntsman. I was just wondering if this is due to the fact that Huntsman seems to be (again, according to what I've read here and other US newspapers, and I'm not saying this is the way it is) a little weak in the faith as reflected on his views of moral issues such as abortion and gay marriage. On the other hand, Romney seems to be a faithful LDS.
    Feel free to correct my views. Remember. I was just wondering, not stating facts.

  • raybies Layton, UT
    Jan. 17, 2012 6:15 a.m.

    At least he's not delusional, I was worried after the "Ticket to Ride" comment. Clearly this first race was to get his name out there, perhaps some other day he'll go further, as people have a chance to mull him over...

  • JoeBlow Miami Area, Fl
    Jan. 17, 2012 5:45 a.m.

    How about the all or nothing approach we look to compromise?

    Those that take unwavering positions will get us nowhere.

    How about we push for reasonable spending cuts and reasonable tax increases.

    We put mechanisms in place to insure that the spending cuts must continue to occur and that the tax increases go in part to pay down the deficit.

    Instead, we have idealogues who take a hard, uncompromising position.

    We can work thru the countries problems, but we need reasonable people to do so.

    Instead, we are moving in the opposite direction.

  • Riverton Cougar Riverton, UT
    Jan. 16, 2012 11:55 p.m.

    Would you rather us spend our way out of debt? If so, I have the perfect guy for you to vote for.

  • I Bleed Blue Las Vegas, NV
    Jan. 16, 2012 10:58 p.m.

    There goes the best man for the job. Not so far to the right. Now we are left with a bunch of pretenders. Listened to the debate tonight. Loved everyone saying lower taxes while we drown in debt.