Buzzfeed: Jon Huntsman Trashes GOP, Expresses Campaign Regrets

[Corcaigh]

I liked Huntsman.

When Obama and Romney debate, it would be really cool if somebody asked about Evolution. Would anybody have the courage to saw that they really think? Probably not. I could be fun watching them squirm.

That could create a real dilemma for Romney. "My opponent's belief that he is descended from an ape is in fact shared by many of my supporters on the right." :evilg:

[Thiebear]

I thought he was one of two best candidates: But you can't throw 3rd Party out there and not expect retaliation.

I mention it in here twice a year and the same people posting in this thread laugh.

McCain lost by so much you can't blame a VP pick. Not possible.

McCain refused to actually run for office. He sat back being nice and old.

[visionary]

I liked Huntsman too...but:

There's something a bit off about a guy who's supposedly trying to get elected and spends most of his time complaining about his party, the people he needs to vote for him, and his rivals. If he had spent half as much time actually campaigning and talking about Obama, as he did bashing Republicans, he might have done better.

[The Evil Genius]

So when he does get the nomination in 8 years, we won't see a McCain like reversal from the media/libs at that point?

McCain was everyone's favorite Republican in 2000

edit...As has been stated already...if only the same McCain would have ran.

[88Comrade2000]

So when he does get the nomination in 8 years, we won't see a McCain like reversal from the media/libs at that point?

McCain was everyone's favorite Republican in 2000

If Romney pulls the upset and wins; in 8 years, Hillary will be running for reelection. She will beat Romney in 2016.

If Obama wins; his successor will be running for reelection in 2020. Odds are there will not be an opening for him either.

The GOP is heading for an eventual split between the old time GOP and the right wing dominating it now. When that happens, depends on the election of course. I personally thought it would've happened already.

People like Huntsman need to go third party.

---------- Post added April-23rd-2012 at 08:42 PM ----------

I thought he was one of two best candidates: But you can't throw 3rd Party out there and not expect retaliation.

I mention it in here twice a year and the same people posting in this thread laugh.

McCain lost by so much you can't blame a VP pick. Not possible.

McCain refused to actually run for office. He sat back being nice and old.

Mccain showed in 2008 that he was mentally incompetent. He didn't have the mentality to be president and as bad as Obama has been; Mccain would've had is in WW3 by now.

[Koolblue13]

Yes a laughing stock who's candidate is running neck and neck with Obama. I think it's dangerous and partisan to dismiss the GOP candiates based upon some of their whackadoodle policies. Fact is what they are selling appeals to many Americans.

Americans buy pajama jeans, they'll buy an empty suit in front of a camera. Obama and Clinton were as left as Bush was conservative. The dancing with the stars voting force just loves the dog and pony show. An empty suit for an empty headed mass. They'll buy it.

[AsburySkinsFan]

The GOP is heading for an eventual split between the old time GOP and the right wing dominating it now. When that happens, depends on the election of course. I personally thought it would've happened already.

People like Huntsman need to go third party.

IMO a legitimate 3rd party would be viable from Centerist Republicans and Bluedog Democrats split both of those from thr main parties and they share more in common with each other than they do with the supposed bases of their parties. This IMO seems a lot more reasonable as an alternative than the Libertarian party does in that the Libertarians are seen more for their perceived radical agendas.

[Jumbo]

I have to say there have been more intelligent posts in this thread in the first four pages than I expected. I started with a favorable multi-quote noting reasonable views from leftwing, rightwing, and middle of the bird, when it came to where I was basically quoting the whole thread. It's like seeing a unicorn. :pfft:

But it WILL regress, I’m sure. :evilg:

I, too, like Huntsman, But agree with Kilmer17 to an extent on how many otherwise complimentary dems/left/libs who say they'd strongly consider voting for him would be far less kind once it came down to the wire. I don't even see that as some scathing indictment. It's just normal and even reasonable. The most recent version of this is how Fox News had so many of its pundits roasting Romney regularly (that’s for you, Spiro) but now they’re all properly lined up since he’s their official candidate.

But the favor Huntsman received from the “other side” still reflects well on him in being notably more moderate (a "positive" IMV) than the other candidates, including the flip-flopping empty suit.

Side note---typical how the GOPers found “flip-flopping“ to be about as unholy as child molestation when it was assigned as a trait in Kerry, but it will be (however grudgingly) much more accepted when it‘s a major quality of their own boy, as declared by their own words.

All parties/politicians have a healthy dose of hypocrisy in their make-up, but the current GOPers are like the Godzilla of the trait with the Dems more like Mothra (I live for precision analogies).

And I also really was someone leaning more to McCain, even with his 2008 version being way less appealing to me in character (not just ideology) than the earlier version. I was also one of those for whom the Pain nomination was like dropping a nuke on that idea.

Assuming the GOP loses this time around (still hard to believe to me given what a disaster so many claim Obama is), I expect to see more formidable candidates in 2016. But I also think it can easily get much closer between Romney & Obama than some seem to think.

[Larry]

I, too, like Huntsman, But agree with Kilmer17 to an extent on how many otherwise complimentary dems/left/libs who say they'd strongly consider voting for him would be far less kind once it came down to the wire.

I have observed for some time that people's fondness for a politician tends to decrease, the more they know about him.

IMO, the classic example of this was Colin Powell, who had something like 80% of voters saying that they'd vote for him for President, before they even knew which Party, if any, he might be thinking about running for.

I still remember a joke about that, saying that Powell isn't sure which Party to run for, because he can't figure out which would be less awkward: A black man at the Republican convention, or a military man at the Democratic one.

My theory is that, with an unknown candidate, people tend to project themselves into the candidate. To assume that the candidate agrees with them.

Every time a candidate takes a position, some of the members of his audience will react with "I never knew he supported that!", and will throw up their hands, and leave.

This is also why I think there's so much negative advertising. Politicians try very hard not to associate themselves with any strong positions. (Because every time they do, they lose voters.) Instead, they try very hard to associate positions to their opponent.

[AsburySkinsFan]

I have observed for some time that people's fondness for a politician tends to decrease, the more they know about him.

Sure, and for just the reasons that you stated, when the candidate is an unknown then people really do project themselves onto the candidate, which certainly makes them much more likeable. Where we get into trouble is when we fall in love with the image and become committed to that image in spite of revelations about that candidate that would otherwise cause us to think twice.