White House “furious”: Huntsman resigns as Obama’s ambassador to China

posted at 9:35 pm on January 31, 2011 by Allahpundit

So this presidential run is really happening, huh?

Maybe we’re inside the Matrix after all.

Jon M. Huntsman Jr., the U.S. ambassador to China, sent a resignation letter to President Barack Obama on Monday, the White House said. Huntsman now is likely to explore a Republican presidential bid, according to supporters.

In a letter hand-delivered to the White House, the former Utah governor said that he wants to return to the United States by May. The letter thanks Obama for the opportunity to serve the country and praises the U.S. embassy staff in Beijing.

If Huntsman won the GOP nomination, he would be challenging the reelection of his former boss. White House officials are furious at what they consider an audacious betrayal, but know that any public criticism would be likely to benefit Huntsman if he enters the primaries.

“Betrayal”? One of the reasons they made him ambassador was to take him out of the field for 2012. They tried to use him, and instead he used them to burnish his foreign policy cred. Turnabout, fair play, etc.

So let’s see where we are. Within the past five days, we’ve had (a) a prominent “true conservative” candidate in Mike Pence declare that he’s not running; (b) a well qualified centrist in Huntsman all but declaring that he is; (c) another well qualified centrist in Mitch Daniels starting to sound like a candidate; (d) a major lower-court ruling against ObamaCare — and a pointed dig from David Axelrod — reminding the base why they don’t like Romney; and (e) a surprisingly strong final-month fundraising haul for SarahPAC in which she actually topped the Romney money machine. All good news for Palinistas, especially the sudden competition for votes among centrists. For awhile it looked like all the action in the primaries would be among candidates on the right, with Romney as the Great Moderate Hope, but now it’s RINOpalooza! And even more good news, via Jim Geraghty: If you’re worried about DeMint jumping in and splitting the “true conservative” vote, there may be good reason to believe that South Carolinians will keep him out.

Exit question one: Are we seeing RINOpalooza now only because centrists have become convinced that a “true conservative” (Palin especially) isn’t a lock for the nomination? Exit question two: Are we sure Huntsman’s going to run as a Republican instead of as a third-party candidate? Remember, he’s filthy rich and now has true bipartisan cred per his work for Obama.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Wow… that’s a good plan. Is that why they changed to proportional voting in primaries? So, even if Sarah has won all the primaries, she’ll still be tied up with these bozos and they’ll have a brokered convention? Riots will ensue.

promachus on January 31, 2011 at 10:30 PM

I was thinking of that data point when I was writing the post. the fact that we are going proportional voting means that the chance of a brokered convention is higher. Look at clinton/Obama and how the dems picked Obama once they got to the “rules” committee by giving him votes form MI where he wasn’t even on the ballot.

You draw off enough support form certain regions and no one can “win” the nomination out right….

unseen on January 31, 2011 at 10:34 PM

Nixon was Ike’s VP lost to JFK then won in 1968

unseen on January 31, 2011 at 10:28 PM

Right, but he didn’t beat JFK and he was actually vice president for 8 years. I’m talking about a person who lost in the election on the bottom of the ticket being the person on the top next time around and being successful. Obama’s already beaten a ticket with Palin on it. Sure, it’ll be a different campaign, but you’d think both she and other conservatives know that it’s already tough when you’ve lost to the guy once even without the media BS.

She strikes me as someone building up a lot of support and then unleashing it on a lesser known conservative candidate by announcing her support, just like she helped Ryan’s Roadmap get more play last year.

cpaulus on January 31, 2011 at 10:34 PM

Well i dind’t say they cared if the people like it or not. truthfully I don’t think the gop establishment wants to win in 2012. IMO if the choice is between a POTUS Palin or waiting 4 years to get JEB in the WH they would be willing to wait….

unseen on January 31, 2011 at 10:31 PM

Let me put it this way – If the GOP tries it, it may be the end of the GOP as one of the two major parties because the people who normally vote GOP will be OVERWHELMINGLY PISSED at the GOP power-brokers who undercut their voices.

teke184 on January 31, 2011 at 10:35 PM

Jump in, Jon. The water’s good. Let’s see how you do.

petefrt on January 31, 2011 at 10:35 PM

I read somewhere that we got tons of VP’s candidates but not one POTUS candidate as a serious frontrunner. Do y’all agree?

ProudPalinFan on January 31, 2011 at 10:35 PM

Which would mean that when the convention starts it would be a brokered convention and then the party leaders can nominate whoever they wish. If this is their plan its a good one.

unseen on January 31, 2011 at 10:24 PM

If this is their plan they are so screwed, Third Party, Tea Party baby on the national level!

The Repugnantcans have shown they are not fit to lead, they allowed the blood libel against not just Sarah but against We The People and they refuse to fight, fight,fight! If gas goes to $5.00 Sarah will own them all on energy alone and she will have the creds!

dhunter on January 31, 2011 at 10:36 PM

Anyways, Steelers are gonna win-and I don’t even know if cheesehead follows football. Greta must be mega uber-static. Brett Favre must be bangin’ his head on walls.

*sorry for the minor hijack*

ProudPalinFan on January 31, 2011 at 10:33 PM

as a born and raised western PA native I agree Steelers will win number 7 placing them as the top NFL team of all time….

unseen on January 31, 2011 at 10:37 PM

Obama is just furious that another Republican squish has entered the race. He had such a hard time with the last one he faced.

Mormon Doc on January 31, 2011 at 10:38 PM

I read somewhere that we got tons of VP’s candidates but not one POTUS candidate as a serious frontrunner. Do y’all agree?

ProudPalinFan on January 31, 2011 at 10:35 PM

Tons of VP candidates? Yes.

Not one POTUS candidate? Depends on your perspective.

Every potential POTUS candidate I see has major flaws either in job preparation or support, but most aren’t fatally flawed given that they’re running against the current jackhole in the White House.

teke184 on January 31, 2011 at 10:39 PM

I read somewhere that we got tons of VP’s candidates but not one POTUS candidate as a serious frontrunner. Do y’all agree?

eh, Obama was thought of as a prime VP pick two years before the election too. This feels like an election where someone comes out of the blue, like the Dems in 92 with Clinton after Cuomo decided not to run. There are a few potential guys like that in the party, they just have to run.

cpaulus on January 31, 2011 at 10:40 PM

dhunter on January 31, 2011 at 10:36 PM

Third party?..Let me show you thes charts..Ross Perot..:)

Dire Straits on January 31, 2011 at 10:41 PM

dhunter on January 31, 2011 at 10:36 PM
Third party?..Let me show you these charts..Ross Perot..:)

Dire Straits on January 31, 2011 at 10:41 PM

Sorry for typo!..:)

Dire Straits on January 31, 2011 at 10:41 PM

She strikes me as someone building up a lot of support and then unleashing it on a lesser known conservative candidate by announcing her support, just like she helped Ryan’s Roadmap get more play last year.

cpaulus on January 31, 2011 at 10:34 PM

no named Nixion because he was the closest to what you asked. Palin would be the first in a long time indeed. But then just because something hasn’t been done before doesn’t mean it can’t. Edwards tried it and was doing well until he destroyed himself. i could see Palin doing either or. either running herself or trying to be kingmaker. It all depends on a lot of things like her family, the field etc. Right now there isn’t anyone she could endorse running at the moment or even thinking of running. I think she could have endorsed Pence if push came to shove. but right now besides Cain who has no chance of winning there just isn’t a conservativ ein the filed besides Palin herself. she may be forced to run….

unseen on January 31, 2011 at 10:42 PM

If this is their plan they are so screwed, Third Party, Tea Party baby on the national level!

The Repugnantcans have shown they are not fit to lead, they allowed the blood libel against not just Sarah but against We The People and they refuse to fight, fight,fight! If gas goes to $5.00 Sarah will own them all on energy alone and she will have the creds!

dhunter on January 31, 2011 at 10:36 PM

Yeah but you are going on the assumption they care about the outcome of 2012.

unseen on January 31, 2011 at 10:43 PM

Let me put it this way – If the GOP tries it, it may be the end of the GOP as one of the two major parties because the people who normally vote GOP will be OVERWHELMINGLY PISSED at the GOP power-brokers who undercut their voices.

teke184 on January 31, 2011 at 10:35 PM

I agree but like those riding the Titanic I don’t think that thought has enetered into their heads.

unseen on January 31, 2011 at 10:45 PM

Dire Straits on January 31, 2011 at 10:41 PM

These are different times!
The two major Parties are bleeding support as both have been found to be corrupt game players with Americans holding the bill.
The Tea Party is not Repug or Dem it is Fiscally Conservative, constitutionally minded and America First.
Sarah is just the person to take the lead and rock both corrupt Parties socks!

dhunter on January 31, 2011 at 10:46 PM

You’re not going to get a perfect candidate but the Republican establishment know that. They smell blood in the water and feel they can throw a McCain-like candidate up and beat Obama. They’ll rely on us not staying home.

A Paul Ryan is a lot better than a Newt Gingrich any day.

Vince on January 31, 2011 at 10:47 PM

I agree but like those riding the Titanic I don’t think that thought has enetered into their heads.

unseen on January 31, 2011 at 10:45 PM

Which is a serious problem, as they seem to think that whatever they do will not have major consequences.

teke184 on January 31, 2011 at 10:47 PM

Which is a serious problem, as they seem to think that whatever they do will not have major consequences.

teke184 on January 31, 2011 at 10:47 PM

and why the phrase power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutly came about…

unseen on January 31, 2011 at 10:50 PM

dhunter on January 31, 2011 at 10:46 PM

I agree that the times are different..But if someone goes third party I refer to my back to..Let me show you these charts..Ross Perot

Dire Straits on January 31, 2011 at 10:50 PM

dhunter on January 31, 2011 at 10:46 PM
I agree that the times are different..But if someone goes third party I refer to back to..Let me show you these charts..Ross Perot

Dire Straits on January 31, 2011 at 10:50 PM

Sorry..:)

Dire Straits on January 31, 2011 at 10:51 PM

Sarah said she liked to run outside the Box, maybe outside the Two Party box, if the Repugnants keep playin their little games!

dhunter on January 31, 2011 at 10:51 PM

I agree that the times are different..But if someone goes third party I refer to my back to..Let me show you these charts..Ross Perot

Dire Straits on January 31, 2011 at 10:50 PM

Undercutting a sitting president, a la Perot with Bush 41 or Teddy Roosevelt with Taft, is slightly different than running a 3rd party candidacy when the “official” candidate against an incumbent never had a mandate and is greatly disliked by the base.

Perot also had a chance to win it all before he bizarrely dropped out of the race and then re-entered because his name was still on the ballot.

teke184 on January 31, 2011 at 10:52 PM

Maybe Rove and Gilespie found their sugar daddy in Huntsman else Huntsman just wants to be Senator in a majority Senate!

dhunter on January 31, 2011 at 10:55 PM

Perot also had a chance to win it all before he bizarrely dropped out of the race and then re-entered because his name was still on the ballot.

teke184 on January 31, 2011 at 10:52 PM

and even after he was shown to be crazy he still got 20% of the vote. i wonder if he was considered sane at election time if he would not have been number 2 instead of number 3. Bush beat him by 17% it doesn’t take that much to move 9% of the vote to your side. and if the goal becomes not defeating Obama but wiping out the GOP then a 3rd party run would be the way to do it.

unseen on January 31, 2011 at 10:56 PM

White House “furious”

Mmm-hmmm. Playing “bad cop”. (Oh how sweet to have one of their own in the race.) Gee, do we hate him!

Marcus on January 31, 2011 at 10:57 PM

A Paul Ryan is a lot better than a Newt Gingrich any day.

Vince on January 31, 2011 at 10:47 PM

Paul Ryan is the best candidate we could have. He actually has a solution to our debt problem he can articulate and has shown that there is a difference between the two parties instead of the bipartisan blather. He’d beat Obama by 8 points and win 36 states.

cpaulus on January 31, 2011 at 10:57 PM

Anybody will beat OBlahBLah!
The bloom is off that rose and now its just sticks and thorns!

the Messiah is no more the Emperor has no cloths no matter what the Presstitutes say!

dhunter on January 31, 2011 at 10:59 PM

Anybody will beat OBlahBLah!
The bloom is off that rose and now its just sticks and thorns!

Dems said the same thing about Bush in 04. We need a real alternative that can articulate. That’s how Reagan beat Carter.

cpaulus on January 31, 2011 at 11:03 PM

That’s how Reagan beat Carter.

cpaulus on January 31, 2011 at 11:03 PM

No reagan beat carter by giving the people a real choice bold colors not pale pastels.

unseen on January 31, 2011 at 11:05 PM

What’s this? An Allahpundit post shoehorning the name “Palin?”

Knock me over with a feather.

AnonymousDrivel on January 31, 2011 at 11:09 PM

This RINOweenie is going nowhere but back to Salt-free Lake City.

Jaibones on January 31, 2011 at 11:10 PM

Remember, he’s filthy rich and now has true bipartisan cred per his work for Obama.

Bipartisan cred is not a feature. Just so ya know.

pugwriter on January 31, 2011 at 11:14 PM

Remember, he’s filthy rich and now has true bipartisan cred per his work for Obama.

He may be rich but he’s not filthy rich. When he became gov of Utah he sold his stock in daddy’s company for an estimated 15 to 25 million. He even sold his private residence in Salt Lake when he moved into the governor’s mansion.

SaintGeorgeGentile on January 31, 2011 at 11:15 PM

No reagan beat carter by giving the people a real choice bold colors not pale pastels.

That’s exactly what I said. He gave them a bold choice between two different policies of governance. In order to do that he had to articulate what it meant to be conservative without getting wrapped up petty personal politics.

cpaulus on January 31, 2011 at 11:16 PM

Maybe Rove and Gilespie found their sugar daddy in Huntsman else Huntsman just wants to be Senator in a majority Senate!

dhunter on January 31, 2011 at 10:55 PM

I don’t think Huntsman has the balls to take on Hatch.

SaintGeorgeGentile on January 31, 2011 at 11:17 PM

A Paul Ryan is a lot better than a Newt Gingrich any day.

Vince on January 31, 2011 at 10:47 PM

Paul Ryan is the best candidate we could have. He actually has a solution to our debt problem he can articulate and has shown that there is a difference between the two parties instead of the bipartisan blather. He’d beat Obama by 8 points and win 36 states.

cpaulus on January 31, 2011 at 10:57 PM

Any bloke or blokette that has ever had to balance a checkbook has the solutions to our debt problem. Courage is the telling characteristic needed in a good president

pugwriter on January 31, 2011 at 11:22 PM

cpaulus on January 31, 2011 at 11:16 PM

I have no idea what you mean. the only person giving the people a real choice atm is Palin, but your post gives the impression that there isn’t an articulate candidate on the stage yet. So if you say you want a person to give a real choice there is only one that should get your support.

unseen on January 31, 2011 at 11:23 PM

PALIN

katy the mean old lady on January 31, 2011 at 11:30 PM

One “Manchurian Candidate” against another “Manchurian Candidate”…

… It really looks like we will have to learn how to speak Chinese after all!

Seven Percent Solution on January 31, 2011 at 11:37 PM

Unseen,

I’m a big supporter of Palin, I was one of the couple hundred writing letters to the Mccain camp urging him to pick her because i thought it was his only chance. However, shely struggles at time to articulate policy initiatives in detail. She’s very good at broad speeches but struggles with the how part of the speech after she explains the why part of the speech (unless its about energy, which she knows like the back of her hand).

It’s my biggest concern about her right now. If she does gain the nomination she’s going to have to have her VP be a policy wonk I think to have a chance at overcoming the big obstacles of trying to unseat Obama.

cpaulus on January 31, 2011 at 11:37 PM

Any bloke or blokette that has ever had to balance a checkbook has the solutions to our debt problem. Courage is the telling characteristic needed in a good president

I know we like to say that, but it is actually a little more complicated than that. We don’t have a dictatorship where we can just say, no more money here or there, plus we have commitments to elderly and near-retirement citizens that we need to honor. You don’t a person with an addiction to hard drugs cold turkey because it can cause relapse. Same is said for government spending or you risk Democrats winning because of the short-term pain and never achieving your goals

There are ways to have a social safety net without destroying the budget, so far Ryan’s plan is the only one who’s got a serious policy initiative to do it.

cpaulus on January 31, 2011 at 11:45 PM

It’s my biggest concern about her right now. If she does gain the nomination she’s going to have to have her VP be a policy wonk I think to have a chance at overcoming the big obstacles of trying to unseat Obama.

cpaulus on January 31, 2011 at 11:37 PM

while I see what you are saying I have never seen Palin have a moment when she is looking for an answer. She does not use umm, urrr etc. Far from struggling to articulate policy, it appears to me that Palin has trouble trying to condense what she knows done too the alotted time. like the absentminded professor that tries to explain his entire topic in a 30 second answer. In fact Palin’s speaking style is how most highly intelligent people speak. Using alot of tangent points and having issues staying on topic.

which is why her writting is so different. Writting forces the highly intelligent to condense and structure their thoughts. the page is a physical space restraint on those people so that they have to limit what they wish to talk about.

If you read her facebook posts, op-eds, books you have no trouble seeing her articulate policy in detail.

Palin is the biggest policy wonk on the stage at the moment. She just needs to learn to stay on topic in live interviews.

unseen on January 31, 2011 at 11:49 PM

unseen on January 31, 2011 at 11:49 PM

That is true, I think she tries to say too much at once sometimes. As someone who has similar issues, I think her accent and dialect hurt her when she’s giving interviews. I also don’t think she really wants to be president.

cpaulus on February 1, 2011 at 12:08 AM

I also don’t think she really wants to be president.

cpaulus on February 1, 2011 at 12:08 AM

agreed which is one of the big reasons I support her. those that serve because they are called instead of those that seek office for personal fullfillment are the best types of leaders. Look at Washington.

unseen on February 1, 2011 at 12:12 AM

The Tea Party is not Repug or Dem it is Fiscally Conservative, constitutionally minded and America First.
Sarah is just the person to take the lead and rock both corrupt Parties socks!

dhunter on January 31, 2011 at 10:46 PM

While I may share your enthusiasm for a shift to the right, it’s not going to happen. I don’t even know where to begin to tell you why a serious third party will not happen. Take that to the bank.

slug on February 1, 2011 at 12:20 AM

Take that to the bank.

slug on February 1, 2011 at 12:20 AM

Hold on a minute!..Let me show you these charts!..Ross Perot

Dire Straits on February 1, 2011 at 12:30 AM

Hold on a minute!..Let me show you these charts!..Ross Perot

Dire Straits on February 1, 2011 at 12:30 AM

If only ross wasn’t batsh*t crazy……

unseen on February 1, 2011 at 12:39 AM

If only ross wasn’t batsh*t crazy……

unseen on February 1, 2011 at 12:39 AM

IF..:)

Dire Straits on February 1, 2011 at 12:42 AM

Alright, I have to be missing something here. The only legitimate gripe I’ve seen with him is cap and trade. Other than that – he was an ambassador for Obama? Is that actually considered a strike against him? Is it a strike if someone served in the military under Obama? I can’t wrap my head around that.
Other than that, I’ve only seen references to rhetorical issues with him.
I really hope there’s something that he did as governor, some huge fiscal con sin he’s committed as governor that has motivated all of this ill-will towards him, because if this is really all because of his ambassadorship…I really just don’t know.

galenrox on February 1, 2011 at 12:43 AM

So Obama, the Republican King Maker!

Interesting.

I know nothing about Huntsman’s politics… I know he has lots of kids. The Whitehouse would be full of kids. Interesting.

Since he is more familiar with the Chinese now than any other American alive, and they are our biggest creditors… that is also interesting. Very interesting.

He was by all accounts a popular governer in the most conservative state in the country. I don’t know how anyone could call him a RINO… but whatever.

He may have dirt on Obama. Seriously. I think Judd Greg or Greg Judd or whatever his name is, that first said yes, and then said no, to Obama, learned stuff that helped Republicans stick together through these two years.

Let’s not make the man sorry he’s a Republican, cause even if he doesn’t win he could be a good guy to have around. He may know where the bodies are buried.

(Fictional bodies of course, I would hope he would be more forthcoming about any real bodies… Utah is not Chicago.

petunia on February 1, 2011 at 12:52 AM

This is getting complicated. Who’s on first?

DrStock on January 31, 2011 at 9:39 PM

Who went home to China.

First is open, but Huntsman is taking a walk.

Yoop on February 1, 2011 at 1:02 AM

galenrox on February 1, 2011 at 12:43 AM

prochoice too. and a two time quitter. pro illegeal amnesty

that’s 4 strikes he’s out…

unseen on February 1, 2011 at 1:14 AM

petunia on February 1, 2011 at 12:52 AM

Huntsman’s been positioning himself as a centrist for at least two years, talking about how the GOP needs to open up the big tent, how he’s a big believer in regional cap-and-trade, etc.

In other words, exactly what we DON’T need if we’re trying to position the party as something different from what Obama’s selling. It would be McCain Lite, which didn’t work in 2008 even with Palin ginning up enthusiasm for the base.

As far as Judd Gregg goes, it was more a matter of Gregg taking a deal from Obama and then being publicly screwed before it was final. Gregg was going to resign his Senate seat, let a Dem appoint his replacement in New Hampshire, and then take over Commerce. Obama blew it by making Gregg defend some of his BS in the Senate and then publicly taking away the biggest duty from Commerce, the 2010 Census, and trying to put it under the White House instead.

That’s not anything “super secret” Gregg learned about Obama… that’s Gregg learning that Obama will stab you in the back if you attempt to cut a deal with him and letting everyone else in the Senate know it. It helped with solidarity only in that people learned between what happened with Gregg and what happened when Arlen Specter flipped that the Dems will stab them in the back the first chance that they get.

teke184 on February 1, 2011 at 1:18 AM

unseen on February 1, 2011 at 1:14 AM

Two time quitter strike is BS. One time quitter, maybe, but he was asked by his President to serve as ambassador to the the biggest non-American power in the world.
Any citation on the abortion claim? I googled around for a bit, all I found was he signed a parental consent law in Utah (pretty standard either way) and he’s a mormon (which would make one assume he’s pro-life, barring evidence to the contrary).
On immigration, obviously it’s not great he dumped on the Arizona law while serving in his role as ambassador, but what do you want, it was the position of the administration. Maybe he should have dumped on the President instead?
And on immigration reform, all I saw is that he supports “immigration reform”. You don’t? You think the system runs perfectly as is? Do you think we should ship them all out? Or what?

Cap and trade is a legit strike. Dumping on the Arizona law is a meh strike. If there’s something else on immigration or abortion than what I found, I am legitimately curious, but I’m getting the impression that there’s a lot of the “the bastard was in the Obama administration so the bastard’s gotta pay” sentiment going on.

galenrox on February 1, 2011 at 1:26 AM

galenrox on February 1, 2011 at 12:43 AM

Supporting Cap and Tax would be a major fiscal con sin and puts him square in the center of big government lovers. I flat refuse to support anyone that suffers these problems.

chemman on February 1, 2011 at 1:28 AM

galenrox on February 1, 2011 at 1:26 AM

t w o t i m e QUITTER. He bailed on the people of UTah to take a better gig and he bailed on his POTUS again for a possible better gig. he quit for personal gain TWICE. that’s a pattern. He is a quitter.

as far as the pro-choice I was repeating what I heard on another blog. I assumed it was correct but didn’t double check it myself so you could be right on that point.

unseen on February 1, 2011 at 1:36 AM

teke184 on February 1, 2011 at 1:18 AM

I got the impression that Gregg took the measure of Obama’s leadership and was quite helpful in convincing Republicans in the House and Senate that he was not invincible… only a man.

It took some guts to back out. It was one of the first embarrassments Obama suffered. I liked it.

I am not appalled at a centrist title. Cap and trade is pretty much dead as far as I can see, and many many many politicians bought into the scam… does he still like it? I doubt it.

My guess is Huntsman would not be coming home from China unless he was unhappy with the President’s policies. That means he has seen up-close how this President operates and wants no part of it.

Two years is not very long as an ambassador. And anyone beating a sitting President is a long shot. If ambition was all that was driving Huntsman he would wait until 2016 or even 2020.

No, I think their is something else that is making him quit. He has to have some good reason for quiting that job. And it isn’t a dislike of China.

Remember Obama ran as a centrist… that is a meaningless term and simply riles up the people who have that “only true conservative psychosis”.

There is no such thing as a true conservative… because my definition and everyone else’s would differ at least in priorities.

Some people who have commented here before are nothing but cultists for one candidate or another and do not have a clue how their positions really rate on some fictional conservative scale.

They only consider some one conservative enough if they have never faced the reality of living in a liberal society. It is not a test at all if you have never had to deal with people whose opinion differs with you. That is not conservative that is inexperienced.

petunia on February 1, 2011 at 1:39 AM

chemman on February 1, 2011 at 1:28 AM

It sure isn’t good, but I know a lot of otherwise good right thinking libertarians who support cap and trade. That’s a question of whether you buy the global warming issue, if you do, releasing carbon into the atmosphere creates an externality, who should reasonably be compensated.

Point being I question the validity of cap and trade as a litmus test for conservatism. If cap and trade is actually your number 1 issue, like you own a coal mine or something like that, fine, but if you’re going for the predictive value of a litmus test, cap and trade is definitely not up to snuff.

It’s a legitimate strike against him, but I’d say the “I’d never support someone who’d support cap and trade” without similar statements on entitlement reform, Chinese currency reform, the federal reserve, moral hazard, etc. goes a bit too far.

galenrox on February 1, 2011 at 1:42 AM

unseen on February 1, 2011 at 1:36 AM

Dude, whether or not you like the President, if he asks you to serve as him ambassador to China you do it. He didn’t quit on the people of Utah any more than Petraeus quit on CENTCOM.
On the abortion thing, I honestly don’t know, I just haven’t seen anything to make me think he’s in the extremely small minority of pro-choice mormons.

galenrox on February 1, 2011 at 1:47 AM

galenrox on February 1, 2011 at 12:43 AM

Supporting Cap and Tax would be a major fiscal con sin and puts him square in the center of big government lovers. I flat refuse to support anyone that suffers these problems.

chemman on February 1, 2011 at 1:28 AM

+100

Geochelone on February 1, 2011 at 2:41 AM

My oPinion is that the candidate that finds the next Lee Atwater will go the furthest.

JAW on February 1, 2011 at 2:54 AM

DRILL, BABY, DRILL is sounding pretty good to me right now.

stenwin77 on February 1, 2011 at 7:30 AM

Herman Cain, 2012!

Dandapani on February 1, 2011 at 7:51 AM

Alright, I have to be missing something here. The only legitimate gripe I’ve seen with him is cap and trade.galenrox on February 1, 2011 at 12:43 AM

Cap and Trade is a deal killer for Huntsman for me. Support for Ethanol is a deal killer for Gingrich for me. Romneycare is probably a deal killer for Romney with me. I want a real free market moderate like Rudy.

KW64 on February 1, 2011 at 8:19 AM

It’s my biggest concern about her right now. If she does gain the nomination she’s going to have to have her VP be a policy wonk I think to have a chance at overcoming the big obstacles of trying to unseat Obama.

cpaulus on January 31, 2011 at 11:37 PM

Thanks for admitting you’re a concern troll.

fossten on February 1, 2011 at 8:28 AM

t w o t i m e QUITTER. He bailed on the people of UTah to take a better gig and he bailed on his POTUS again for a possible better gig. he quit for personal gain TWICE. that’s a pattern. He is a quitter.

He quit in order to take on other service for his country. Palin is the one who quit solely for the money. I think you have things mixed up, and your unhealthy desire for Palin really clouds your judgment.

AngusMc on February 1, 2011 at 8:43 AM

People keep telling that Huntsman is “center-right”. He still looks pretty left to me. Must be my glasses.

SKYFOX on February 1, 2011 at 8:56 AM

How can running for the office of the president be a ”
betrayal”?
This child in the Whitehouse really has to grow up…people have aspirations, just because you appoint them, it doesn’t mean they no longer can pursue their dreams.
Besides, isn’t it Obama who disqualified one of his best friends and allies through the years, when he wanted to run for the state senate? Isn’t that a “betrayal” of a greater sense?

right2bright on February 1, 2011 at 9:12 AM

Dude, whether or not you like the President, if he asks you to serve as him ambassador to China you do it.

Bullsh*rt, “dude.” you make that move only if you are an unprincipled opportunist. Judd Gregg got offered a job with Obama and passed. Your guy Huntsman jumped on board the Socialist Express when things were looking rosy for socialists. Now he’s a “conservative,” right?

Your guy Huntsman’s enthusiasm for amnesty, and his hostility to the Arizona law may be “meh” to you, but it’s going to be a dealbreaker for conservatives.

Ditto cap n trade. You sure you’re in the right party?

james23 on February 1, 2011 at 9:13 AM

james23 on February 1, 2011 at 9:13 AM

Oh wow! Have I been given the honor of meeting he who defines all that is conservatism? Should I take off my shoes? What is the protocol for meeting his royal highness of conservatism?

Before we even get to the fact that I don’t have a guy for 2012 yet, answer me this: WHY is that a dealbreaker?

galenrox on February 1, 2011 at 9:42 AM

Sarah said she would run if there’s nobody else out there that is conservative or could win. Don’t think she’ll like any of those mentioned above well enough to stay out. Looks like all her ducks are getting into a row.

Kissmygrits on February 1, 2011 at 9:42 AM

KW64 on February 1, 2011 at 8:19 AM

That’s fair enough. It’s a legit strike.

galenrox on February 1, 2011 at 9:43 AM

No, Ed, we are seeing RINOpalooza now because the socialists in the media desperately want another McCain disaster. So they are trying to pick our candidate.

It won’t work this time. None of the RINO’s are going anywhere.

In NH all the old school GOP RINOs are being replaced by the TEA party. That is the real pattern.

dogsoldier on February 1, 2011 at 9:44 AM

What exactly is Huntsman’s claim to being a moderate? Policy wise I mean.

I mean, Huntsman was the Governor of Utah not Massachusetts. You don’t stay a popular governor of Utah if you are a moderate on policy.

The only thing I can remember him really being a squish on was immigration.

The rest of his “moderation” as I recall was just tone. He’s not a a bare knuckled partisan. But I don’t care about tone, I care about policy. Reagen made nicey nice too, but he was good on policy.

Maybe I’m wrong, or maybe I missed something about Huntsman, I’m not particularly tuned into Utah politics, so I might have. I’d like to hear what the actual policy of Huntsman was.

Sackett on February 1, 2011 at 10:18 AM

In NH all the old school GOP RINOs are being replaced by the TEA party. That is the real pattern.

dogsoldier on February 1, 2011 at 9:44 AM

And someday soon the elephant will again have teabag reference stones.

horatio on February 1, 2011 at 10:29 AM

Palin Narrowly Outraises Romney at End of 2010

And what hasn’t been mentioned else where she didn’t have state PACs as Romney did where even greater amounts could be contributed. Don’t these people know she can’t win? Answer; NOPE! GO SARAH!

Herb on February 1, 2011 at 10:40 AM

It’s my biggest concern about her right now. If she does gain the nomination she’s going to have to have her VP be a policy wonk I think to have a chance at overcoming the big obstacles of trying to unseat Obama.
cpaulus on January 31, 2011 at 11:37 PM

Gee thanks for reminding me that the seas are receding, smart power is winning the peace and all is quiet in the middle east, great speeches (with columns and all), making kissy face with Muslim nations, dissing Israel, Britain and any one else a long time ally of US. Yeah she could never handle that.

Herb on February 1, 2011 at 10:47 AM

no he plays third base

unseen on January 31, 2011 at 9:43 PM

Its “Who’s on first?”

“What’s on second?”

“Idon’t know”! Third base.

44Magnum on February 1, 2011 at 10:51 AM

JON HUNTSMAN – GLOBAL WARMING ACTIVIST.

Mutnodjmet on February 1, 2011 at 10:55 AM

Quitting is a good thing when anyone but Palin does it. Her, not so much.

SurferDoc on February 1, 2011 at 11:09 AM

eh, Obama was thought of as a prime VP pick two years before the election too. This feels like an election where someone comes out of the blue, like the Dems in 92 with Clinton after Cuomo decided not to run. There are a few potential guys like that in the party, they just have to run.

cpaulus on January 31, 2011 at 10:40 PM

IMHO, cpaulus nailed it. Sarah Palin didn’t know how to handle the media when she was announced as McCain’s VP nominee, and has zero support among Independent voters, unless she does something NOW to gain their support. With the public revulsion against ObamaCare, Romney has little credibility after he signed something similar in Massachusetts. Huckabee is a has-been, and all those prisoners he pardoned in Arkansas are bound to haunt him.
Huntsman? Does anyone really know him outside of Utah and China?

Palin, Romney, and Huckabee are all FORMER Governors, and can they run in 2012 on their pre-2008 records? Or will a CURRENT Governor suddenly catch fire with the public–somebody like Rick Perry of Texas, Mitch Daniels of Indiana, Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, or even Chris Christie of New Jersey?

It’s much too early to tell. Huntsman probably doesn’t have a snowball’s chance in #3!! of being President, although snowballs are plentiful these days. Huntsman probably resigned for personal reasons, like not wanting to be associated with Obama’s bumbling foreign policy, and he might have wanted Obama to stand up more strongly to Hu Jintao. If Huntsman doesn’t get anywhere as a Presidential candidate, Utah will gain a House seat in 2012, and Huntsman can always run for it!

Steve Z on February 1, 2011 at 11:15 AM

As far as Judd Gregg goes, it was more a matter of Gregg taking a deal from Obama and then being publicly screwed before it was final. Gregg was going to resign his Senate seat, let a Dem appoint his replacement in New Hampshire, and then take over Commerce.

There was probably a lot of pressure from Senate Republicans behind the scenes for Gregg to stay in the Senate, otherwise the Dems would have had a filibuster-proof majority much earlier than after Specter flipped.

Gregg probably caught on to what Obama was trying to do early on, didn’t want to be a part of it, and became an outspoken opponent (in the Senate) of ObamaCare and the GM and Chrysler takeovers. He probably regrets having resigned from the Senate now, as Republican Kelly Ayotte won his seat by 20 points, but she has much less seniority in the Senate than Gregg would now have.

Steve Z on February 1, 2011 at 11:27 AM

Axelrod for China ambassador. Rahm will be too busy piping “finders fees” from Chicago to the Caymans.

curved space on February 1, 2011 at 11:41 AM

How is Mitch Daniels a centrist?

therightwinger on February 1, 2011 at 12:15 PM

So this “Who in Hades is Huntsman” person is going to try a third party,but that girl Sarah “that no one in America knows” can’t make it if she goes third party? Strange prognostication indeed.

Don L on February 1, 2011 at 12:57 PM

Not that I’d vote for the guy, but since America is still free & anyone can run for POTUS, there is no betrayal.
I guess if they were of the same political party it might be, but it is amusing to watch the naked arrogance come out of the white house.
These people are disgusting.

Badger40 on February 1, 2011 at 2:40 PM

All good news for Palinistas, especially the sudden competition for votes among centrists.

Lovin’ it!!

HondaV65 on February 1, 2011 at 2:46 PM

Unseen,

If you haven’t seen it in the headlines, I think the major fiscal con sin has been discovered!

galenrox on February 1, 2011 at 3:28 PM

Sarah Palin … has zero support among Independent voters, unless she does something NOW to gain their support…

It’s much too early to tell. Huntsman probably doesn’t have a snowball’s chance in #3!! of being President, although snowballs are plentiful these days.

Steve Z on February 1, 2011 at 11:15 AM

Right. We must decide on Palin NOW, but Huntsman? Well he’s got time.

alwaysfiredup on February 1, 2011 at 5:35 PM

Here we go again. In the last Presidential election Republicans ran John McCain, why, he is the biggest RINO in the Party. Because the News Media latched onto him from day one and the built him up a little as the took his opponents to the wood shed, in other words they convinced the majority that McCain was the best Candidate running. They, not us, picked the Republican Candidate for President. The media is in bed with the Democrats so in fact the opposition picked who they would get to run against. They are trying to do it again with Romney and Palin. Romney already proved that he is a RINO when he signed into law as Governor “Romney Care”. DO NOT PAY ATTENTION TO MEDIA, RESEARCH CANDIDATS FOR YOURSELF. Listen to what they say, Obama told everyone he was going to do exactly what he has done but nobody paid attention. Look at what they have done in the past, Palin I think drives the Left nuts, so did Ross Perot but you remember how that turned out. She has already quit her post once without serving close to a full term, do we trust her to finish what she starts? I do not know who to back at this point, Pence was going to be a lifesaver for the Party but he is not going to run, can’t say I blame him the way Republican are drug through the mud buy the Democrats, even if the mud was made up by the Democrats. Remember the paper that was forged on Bush? We are in trouble if all we have are Centrist, we will be right back where we were with Bush, spinning our wheels. I have no answer, just questions and beliefs.

old war horse on February 1, 2011 at 11:29 PM

Does this guy have any chance? He is for:
Carbon Cap and Trade
Government Supported Green Energy
Carbon Tax
Pro Stimulus (Keynesian)

Who knows what else? Oh, he worked for Obama.

JeffVader on February 2, 2011 at 11:59 AM

Comment pages: 1 2