Assessing Jon Huntsman Jr. and the Republican Party: Is 2020 his year?

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • SoCalChris Riverside, CA
    April 3, 2013 10:01 a.m.

    I'm all for a center right candidate. But Huntsman has become more of a sell-out. He's just trying to hard to be cool.

    Disappointing for me because I liked him until he started moving more and more to the left and became less of a team player. It now seems to be all about him.

  • Bebyebe UUU, UT
    Jan. 4, 2013 9:30 a.m.

    John Huntsman would have been a much better candidate than Mitt Romney. The race would have been much closer. He was the only reasonable one in the bunch.

  • aceroinox Farmington, UT
    Jan. 2, 2013 12:21 p.m.

    Oh, please! Why are we giving Huntsman hacks the time of day? His candidacy did not make sense in 2012, and it will make even less sense in 2020. Let's just let this sleeping dog lie.

  • Say No to BO Mapleton, UT
    Jan. 2, 2013 11:02 a.m.

    Jon Huntsman Jr.
    Utah's very own Joe Lieberman.
    But he's a man without a party.

  • TopCat772 Patchogue, NY
    Jan. 1, 2013 12:34 p.m.

    Rubio may be a serious contender by 2020. Huntsman's best shot may be in 2016, if he can build a groundswell of popular support before then.

  • BYUalum South Jordan, UT
    Dec. 30, 2012 5:50 p.m.

    I wouldn't vote for Jon Huntsman, Jr. for dog catcher. Too self serving and left-leaning!

  • RGP Vista, CA
    Dec. 30, 2012 3:57 p.m.

    Republican or Democrat, I could not vote for someone who so lightly values his heritage and religious upbringing.

  • Kent C. DeForrest Provo, UT
    Dec. 30, 2012 2:51 p.m.

    "Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, said what the GOP needs to do is sell its message better, not change what it stands for to try to appease voters."

    Note to Jason: It's rather difficult to market irrational economic policies, idiotic blanket pledges, and offensive immigration stances to most Americans. It's not about selling. It's about getting back in touch with reality.

  • Duckhunter Highland, UT
    Dec. 30, 2012 12:34 p.m.


    There are 28 state legilastures controlled by Republicans, 21 by democrats, and one officially non partisan (Nebraska)although affiliated Republicans out number Democrats on that legislature 30-17 so that one is republican as well.

    For state senates Republicans control 29 of them while dems only control 18 of them. If we count Nebraska Republicans control 30 of them while there are two states that have coalition senates.

    By my count that means republicans control 58 state legislative bodies while democrats only control 39. Pretty resounding.

    There are 24 state governments wholly controlled by Republicans (governnor, sentate, house) while only 12 states are wholly democrat controlled. Of the states with split party control republicans still lead in total governerships plus either house or senate by 2-1.

    Republicans control 29 governorships, democrats have 20.

    That means of elected state bodies republicans control 89 and democrats control 59 of them. Not even close. Republicans GAINED governorships and state houses this last election.

    Don't buy into the democrat and media propoganda that Republicans "lost" and need to change themselves. They won far more than the democrats won.

  • red state pride Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Dec. 30, 2012 11:39 a.m.

    So let me get this straight : The Republican party nominated Mitt Romney (former Governor of super-blue Mass) as it's Presidential candidate. Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan campaigned on saving Medicare as currently structured for those 50 and older. But the Republican party has moved "too far right"?
    At the Democrat National Convention in Charlotte they had a voice vote to not include God in the party's platform and to not recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. But the Republican party is the "extreme party"
    Andrew Cuomo (Democrat Governor of NY) openly admits gun confiscation "may be an option". But the Republican party is the extreme party.
    I don't know what Norm Ornstein's claim to fame is but he's obviously big on talking points and not real big on facts on the ground.

  • vdubbin' Ogden, UT
    Dec. 30, 2012 11:32 a.m.

    I pray that the Republican Party doesn't abandon it's line, because honestly, that's the only thing keeping this country together. Dems gave shown their willingness to subjugate our sovereignty, abandon basic American values, and utterly disregard the Constitution they have sworn to uphold. If they move an inch to the left, so will the dems. And if that happens, we will be looking at British socialism at best, and at worst... I shudder to think.

  • DonO Draper, UT
    Dec. 30, 2012 9:25 a.m.

    Whether Huntsman or someone of his ilk is an answer I cannot say. What is certain is that both parties need to pull their collective heads out of the ideological sand and learn that "compromise" is not a dirty word. History teaches that the country was built on it. The "fiscal cliff" debacle is the most recent case in point. IMO, if the political parties continue to put immovable ideological stakes in the ground our democracy is doomed.

  • Aggielove Cache county, USA
    Dec. 30, 2012 9:14 a.m.

    Good looking spouse.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    Dec. 30, 2012 8:15 a.m.

    It's a little early for the return of Romneymania, isnt it?

  • RBB Sandy, UT
    Dec. 30, 2012 7:06 a.m.

    Duckhunter - The Republicans did lose (nationally) because they failed to clearly state the message. The majority of the campaign was about whether we should tax "rich" people more. The real message of conservatism goes back to Thomas Jefferson - That Government governs best which governs least. Instead of playing the "get a bigger piece of the pie" game the Democrat handout machine relies on - we need to educate the people that low tax rates and personal responsibility grow the pie. Everyone should be able to get more - without taking from others. The interesting thing to watch over the next 4 years will be the growing divide between states with conservative goverments and those who are doubling down on failed liberal policies. Can we avoid being dragged over the cliff by California, etc.? Lets hope so.

  • RBB Sandy, UT
    Dec. 30, 2012 6:43 a.m.

    Can someone tell me about the radical shift to the right of the Republicans. Apparently I missed it. The Republicans spent 8 years under Bush running $500B deficits. Now Obama is running deficits of $1,000,000,000,000 or more every year and a FEW Republicans have stood up and said that is too much. Every request by Obama to raise the debt ceiling has been passed. The Republicans are terrified of being blamed for the "fiscal cliff" where - horrors - Americans will be forced to pay the tax rates implemented by Bill Clinton. While I think those rates are too high, they are nothing compared to Obama's budget. Adjusted for inflation, Obama is spending more than 50% more than Clinton did. Tax the "rich" at 100% and it will still not balance the budget.

    If John Huntsman is the future of the Republican party - the party should just change its name to the Demo-lites. Their campaign slogan can be - "The Democrats will bankrupt us in 5 years - on our plan it will take 7 to 10."

  • 1aggie SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    Dec. 29, 2012 9:12 p.m.


    Democrats GAINED seats in both the House and Senate, while Republicans lost seats in the House and Senate. More Republicans lost seats to Democrats than Democrats lost to Republicans. Additionally, there were 1.5 million more votes for Democrats in the House than votes for Republicans. As for governorships, Democrats lost 1, while Republicans gained 1.

    My guess is the next GOP nominee for Pres. is going to have brown skin, since the overall belief by Republicans is they lost the election due to losing the Latino vote. They will try to rectify that for the next presidential election. Alternatively they could try to attract the Latino vote by passing immigration reform.

    As can be seen by the comments on these boards, Huntsman doesn't have a chance in becoming the GOP nominee for Pres.

  • mark99 LINDON, UT
    Dec. 29, 2012 6:55 p.m.

    Why the plethora of articles about Huntsman, he is not a great statesman, just the son of a rich man. ad nauseum

  • UTAH Bill Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 29, 2012 6:51 p.m.

    Huntsman listens to what the public wants and is willing to go against the party if the party is wrong. People tend to forget Reagan was known for doing the same. I'd vote for Huntsman and think he'd be a draw for Moderates and Independents. The problem would be getting Huntsman through the far Right-dominated primaries.

  • GiuseppeG Murray, Utah
    Dec. 29, 2012 6:38 p.m.

    @Reagonconservative: Not knowing about his personal life or circumstances, I'm not going there. I'm just not going to vote for someone who bailed on his commitment to the Utah people as governor to seek out a better opportunity for himself and then bailed on that commitment to run for President. In my book, that kind of behavior indicates someone who is self-serving and NOT my choice for leading the country.

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    Dec. 29, 2012 6:31 p.m.

    Huntsman is too good for the GOP.

  • wer South Jordan, UT
    Dec. 29, 2012 6:21 p.m.

    It would be easier to predict correctly the opponents in the 2020 national championship basketball game than nominees for the president.

  • higv Dietrich, ID
    Dec. 29, 2012 6:20 p.m.

    The reason Huntsman lost in the primaries got clobbered is in this article here.

  • xscribe Colorado Springs, CO
    Dec. 29, 2012 5:46 p.m.

    @The Truth: Thanks for the laugh!

    2016, Hillary and Jeb Bush. Whoever wins, stays in office in 2020!

  • the truth Holladay, UT
    Dec. 29, 2012 5:31 p.m.

    This country has drifted so far left,

    a strong shift to right is what is need for correction.

    But the radical left continues to demonize the right and any one who desires that needed correction.

    While the right seems radical to the far left, it is what is good and right.

    Please wake up and realize the terrible path of hate and deprivation of freedom the left is taking us and this country.

    The fight for the Republican party is the fight for heart and soul of this country.

    If there is no longer any right, those that love freedom and goodness, all that will be left will be the cold-hearted liberals and progressives, the 'Kingmen' of this day and age.

  • MapleDon Springville, UT
    Dec. 29, 2012 4:34 p.m.

    What's with the almost daily articles about Jon? Has the DesNews become Jon's public affairs departments?

    Enough already. Move on. This isn't news.

    Dec. 29, 2012 4:26 p.m.

    Second article based on one persons opinion of a person left of center? Wanting immigration laws enforced is the hardest of hard approach? Shouldn't this be an editorial?

  • Duckhunter Highland, UT
    Dec. 29, 2012 4:19 p.m.

    @free agency

    I am amused at those that keep claiming that the Republicans "lost". Perhaps you didn't pay attention in Novemeber but last I checked Republicans won more overall elective offices than democrats did. For instance Republicans won far more house seats than democrats did. Republicans won far more governorships than democrats won. Republicans won far more state legislatures than democrats won. I believe Republicans won about 2/3rds of the overall elective offices in the entire country.

    Now a democrat did win the presidency. Yay? The democrats did retain the senate, picked up a couple of seats even. Congratulations?

    So your point is that because Republicans only won about 66% of the total elective offices in the entire country they should change themselves to be more like democrats who only managed to win about 33% of the total elective offices in the entire country?

    Nice try

  • HaHaHaHa Othello, WA
    Dec. 29, 2012 4:18 p.m.

    Interesting how "Agency" parses a difference between murder of the born and unborn, and how one view in his thinking is holy, and worthy of holding public office, and the other is not. Huntsman is a democrat at heart, save us all a lot of time and just change parties. He wouldn't be the first and wouldn't be missed! Im with AZ, I want nothing to do with a Huntsman republican party.

  • Free Agency Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 29, 2012 3:43 p.m.

    Reaganonservative, if you mean the covenants a candidate makes with God in terms of his *private* life (such as his marriage vows), I could certainly go along with that.

    But if you mean he should also extend those into public policy platforms when it comes to, e.g., abortion and gay marriage, I'd say that he'd better keep out of public life altogether.

    In public life, a politican must honor diverse values, even if they don't agree with his own religious values. I know that's hard to do if you have deep convictions, but again, it's a requirement for political office.

    And that's why the Republicans lost: because they said, our way or the highway. Alas, they, themselves, wound up on the highway. (It's also known as separation of church and state.)

    A politician should certainly bring ethics into the arena--no stealing, no cheating, no lying. And boy, do we need such politicians! But let society and the Supreme Court decide what our country's social values should be.

  • azreader1 tucson, AZ
    Dec. 29, 2012 3:17 p.m.

    Seriously, JHJ? He who is a hair's breath away from defecting to the Democrats, and whose stand on social issues makes him pretty much in line with the Democrat platform? I find it very difficult to believe he would receive any more support in the future over what he had in the presidential race, which wasn't much. Or to put it a little differently: if Jon Huntsman becomes the face of the Republican Party keeping his professed stance on social issues, it won't be a Republican party I'll want to have anything to do with.

  • Free Agency Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 29, 2012 3:11 p.m.

    Chaffetz is dreaming if he thinks the Republicans lost not because of their platform, but because they simply didn't "communicate it better."

    I'd say they communicated their platform very well--and it was rejected by a majority of voters, particularly young voters.

    Chaffetz's statement is like someone saying that vaudeville is going to come back, we just need to make it more entertaining.

    I nominate him for poster boy of everything that's wrong with the Republican Party at the moment, and why it's headed for extinction if it doesn't finally lose the extremists and wake up to th reality of America today. It doesn't have to be what it's not--but it should focus on fiscal responsibility and leave the "social values" alone.

  • Reaganconservative Sandy, UT
    Dec. 29, 2012 3:04 p.m.

    I am one Republican who would find it hard to support any candidate who chooses not to keep the covenants he has made with God. This is true,no matter what religion the candidate professes. This is not a matter of mixing religion with politics, it is a matter of ethics. I would also say that serial adulterers such as Gingrich would not receive my support. The promises we make to God and our spouse should be our highest priority. Compared to them. what is an oath of office. I long for candidates who will keep their promises and respect the Constitution. Paul Ryan is an example of the type of future nominee I would like to see.

  • Mark B Eureka, CA
    Dec. 29, 2012 2:20 p.m.

    Does this article mean that DN readers are going to be seeing Huntsman articles for the next eight years whether or not there is any news? Oy.

  • barndog48 AMERICAN FORK, UT
    Dec. 29, 2012 2:14 p.m.

    John Huntsman could be elected president, theres just some baggage thats preventing him from being elected. He could easily dump it all by becoming a democrat.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 29, 2012 2:11 p.m.

    At the rate the Republican party is moving farther and farther to the right I'm pretty sure if that trend continues Huntsman would be a Democrat by 2020.

  • toosmartforyou Farmington, UT
    Dec. 29, 2012 2:02 p.m.

    Everybody (especially the liberal media) wants to critisize anyone that finds the government isn't effective or squeaky clean. (I can only imagine what they'd say about Brigham Young's views of how the government treated the early Latter-Day Saints in the 1800's.)

    What we need is solutions and that involves statesmanship, non-partisanship and leadership. Those apperar to be nada, null and the empty set in today's Waahington DC office-holders. Don't even get me started on the entrenched bureaucrats!