Romney is still the one to beat, for sure. Many say Huntsman can’t win because he’s too moderate. Maybe, but don’t count him out. He moves between all the levels of the different political strata effortlessly, is low-key, likeable, and seems to be aided by as yet unseen forces. What people are saying about him now is what they were saying about Obama early in the 2008 campaign.
Some have their undies in twist because two Mormons are running, just like happened when JFK, a Catholic, ran in 1960. Otherwise sensible folks howled if JFK was elected then the Pope would control the White House. The fears were silly then and they’re silly now.
Unlike Mr. FlipFlop, my experience of Huntsman is that he is a decent man. And he may be to the left of Bush-clone Obama. Huntsman does, after all, believe that global warming is a problem and should be addressed. Obama gave us the toothless and pointless Copenhagen agreement. I don’t agree with Huntsman on everything, but I do believe that he believes something, and is less likely to be whatever you want him to be to get elected.
You say he may be too moderate to get elected. It’s sad when our system has become so warped that you have to be an extremist to get the nomination, and a centrist who might actually represent a majority view can’t get on the ticket.
With the two national parties less and less distinguishable from each other, perhaps it’s time to abandon party affiliation and vote for the most decent candidate. I don’t know if that’s Huntsman or not, but it might be. I voted for Obama last time, but probably won’t again. Put Huntsman up against Obama and it becomes a no-brainer. And I might even register GOP so I could vote for Huntsman in the primary.
Agreed, and I think Huntsman could be a real sleeper candidate here at first, just like Obama was. What I want to know is, who is behind him? He’s getting help and support from somewhere (and I don’t think it’s LDS either.)
I mean, Obama’s rise to power was greased by Wall Street. So, I wonder about Huntsman too.