@ Pack, yes is your answer to GaryO. What an improvement!As to
Huntsman and Romney, ain't going to happen. Period. Get over it.
@lost in DC 10:32 a.m. May 10, 2014Furrythanks for the
laugh.But I see you single out huntsman as the only one with
convictions that they honor. I'm pleased to see you have such a low opinion
of hillary. weclome to the club!-----------------------My assessment of Huntsman is accurate -- sorry if you can't see the
truth. If the election is between Hillary and Huntsman, I would
happily vote for Huntsman. If the election is between Hillary and anyone else,
I would do what I did in the last two elections -- either write in Huntsman as I
did in 2012 or write in "none of the above" as I did in 2008 UNLESS my
vote would have an impact on the selection of electoral count votes (it really
doesn't in Utah). If my vote would work to keep any of the currently
running or potentially drafted Republican candidates out of the White House
(yes, that includes Romney) then I would hold my nose and vote for Hillary
because, bad as I find her to be, the others would be infinitely worse as people
and candidates and, specifically, would be infinitely worse for the United
States as its President.
Huntsman is my favorite Mormon presidential candidate, but neither he nor Romney
can win under the current political atmosphere.The majority of
Republicans are too stubborn to see that only a centrist candidate can win a
national election and so will continue to nominate conservatives. It's a
simple numbers game, there aren't enough Republicans to win a presidential
election. They need moderates from both parties to be excited about their
candidate. Huntsman would certainly be more successful in that
regard than Romney was. But he'll never be nominated. Republicans have no
one to blame but themselves. They'd rather nominate candidates who
can't get elected and complain about the result than nominate someone who
could win.BTW, I typically vote Republican on the national ticket
(understanding the futility) and Democrat in Utah races. When I lived in CA I
was more of a straight ticket voter for Republicans...Georgia was the most
interesting place to live...voted for lots of Democrats and lots of Republicans.
Hey Pack - ' . . . and our current POTUS has been good for
America and the world"Absolutely. It goes in cycles,
doesn't it?Clinton left GW a nation at peace, with solid
international allies, and a good economy.GW DESTROYED IT ALL, and
left a hole where the twin towers had been, a nation mired in two senseless
wars, international opinion turned against us, the worst financial crisis since
the Great Depression, a DOUBLING of the national debt, and higher health care
costs than anywhere else in the world.With a Obama in charge the
nation is coming back and working in common with other nations to advance sane
environmental practices, albeit slowly because of the "Conservative"
predilection for obstructionism, and destruction, and bad governance in
general.Definitely, our current POTUS has been good for America and
the world.Thanks for asking.It goes in cycles . . .
Responsible governance when the Dems are in control and utter devastation to
the nation when the Repubs take over.The simple solution is too
keep Republicans far, far away from the reins of power.I'm glad
I could help.
I voted for Jon Huntsman Jr. in 2012, I will vote for him again in
2016.But I think the GOP will nominate another unelectable fringe
candidate -- Palin, Bachmann, Trump...When the country was MOST
divided, Abraham Lincoln (R), selected Andrew Johnson (D) for his Vice
President.To Lincoln, Uniting America was more important than petty
politics.John Kerry (D) floated this idea with John McCain (R)So, I't not unimaginable for a Clinton/Huntsman
ticket.Democrats, Women, Minorities, Moderates, Independents, and
Center-Right Republicans.That would leave the GOP with about 11% of
Sorry... I don't like Obama but I would rather have him in office than a
self-serving progressive person like HUntsman..
Furrythanks for the laugh.But I see you single out
huntsman as the only one with convictions that they honor. I'm pleased to
see you have such a low opinion of hillary. weclome to the club!
@lost in DC 7:46 a.m. May 10, 2014I'd have to look for a
candidate that honors his convictions. But I miss speak; we need candidates who
HAVE convictions and honor them. And those convictions should be honorable. We
do not have that in Huntsman. We have too many like BO who lie through their
teeth and their convictions are contrary to the good of the nation.-------------------------Unfortunately, we don't have any
good ones (except for Huntsman, if he runs, who does have convictions and does
honor them) who have convictions and honor them. Sad.
@GaryO, and our current POTUS has been good for America and the world?
I'd have to look for a candidate that honors his convictions. But I miss
speak; we need candidates who HAVE convictions and honor them. And those
convictions should be honorable. We do not have that in Huntsman. We have too
many like BO who lie through their teeth and their convictions are contrary to
the good of the nation.
Huntsman is capable of being a very impressive centrist candidate.A
few years ago, when he was governor, he introduced the first screening at
Sundance, and he charmed the socks off of the lefty movie crowd! I thought he
was a great governor, and he was very fiscally conservative.Huntsman's problem is that he doesn't seem to have the gravitas
required of a presidential candidate. Maybe if he had served in the Senate a
couple of terms, and mixed things up, and gotten his hands dirty, he might be
more impressive as a candidate.I think Huntsman looks like a
conservative JFK who has relied on his families' wealth and has never
really had to pay his political dues.Huntsman seems so moderate,
that if Hillary doesn't run, he would make a great Democratic candidate.
Huntsman had the most conservative record in 2012. The best managed state and
the number 1 job creator in the US. He also has corporate and Foreign Policy
experience so this man may have been the most overqualified person in history to
I won't vote for Huntsman for anything.
@Mamamama 6:03 p.m. May 9, 2014Huntsman would have been a much
better candidate in 2012 than Romney.--------------Agreed. and Huntsman, unlike Romney would have been an excellent President.
Huntsman was the absolutely best candidate in the field. Too bad rational
moderate candidates can't get through the Republican primary process. The
party and the country are worse off as a result.
Huntsman would have been a much better candidate in 2012 than Romney.
I would like to see both Romney and Huntsman run.Clearly Huntsman
would have a terrific shot of winning in the General Election if he could make
it past the primaries, which he absolutely will not do.Romney, on
the other hand, probably could not make it through the primaries either, and he
would have NO chance in the General Election, but I've grown fond of
watching him run . . . And lose.Neither will beat the Democratic
contender.Why? Because they're Republican, and more and more
Americans are rightfully concluding that Republicans in national government are
just plain bad for America and the World.The rest of the world
already knows that.
Romney would be a better president than any other possible candidate.