Who’s responsible for Huntsman flameout?

posted at 8:50 am on January 16, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

I mean apart from the candidate himself, of course, who strode through the Republican primary process like an long-jilted boyfriend attending the wedding of a high-school sweetheart trying to prove that the bride was making a terrible mistake.  It didn’t take long for consensus to form online as to who gets the blame, both for Jon Huntsman’s failure and for convincing Huntsman to make a fool of himself in the first place.  Ben Smith at BuzzFeed says to look no further than John McCain’s old campaign adviser, John Weaver:

Weaver, a rangy, 52-year old Texan has a storied and controversial career in Republican politics, and now an uncertain future. And the Huntsman campaign is the latest and purest version of a strategy that he’s been pressing since he was at John McCain’s right hand in 2000: A Republican campaign that embraces the mainstream media, sets itself against elements of conservative dogma, and builds a coalition of moderate Republicans and independents that – if it could only survive the primary – would be formidable in a general election. The campaign’s birth in baroque intrigue and its high-level infighting are also Weaver signatures.

“You get a lot of good out of the guy, you get a lot of brilliance out of the guy – but you get a lot of dysfunction out of the guy,” a Republican who has often worked with Weaver said Sunday night, after the news of Huntsman’s departure had broken. Members of Huntsman’s family blame what they saw as a debacle on Weaver, the Republican said. “It’s really going to get ugly.”

To Weaver’s critics, he’s a “Svengali,” as one said, persuading a wealthy, talented former governor to blow his money and his name on a lost cause. To his admirers, Weaver had the right strategy — to nip Romney in New Hampshire – and a message that would have made Huntsman formidable in November, and was let down by the candidate and his wealthy father.

“This should have been a well-funded campaign,” said a Weaver ally. “There was no reason this should be a penniless campaign.” (Weaver’s June monthly retainer from Huntsman was $20,000; it had declined to $14,500 by fall, according to the most recently financial disclosure report, filed in October.)

It wasn’t the funding that was the problem.  It was the fact that Republicans got the clear message from Huntsman and the campaign that the candidate really didn’t like Republicans.  Huntsman didn’t hide his disdain during the debates, and Weaver made that an explicit message for the campaign:

But the core complaint about Weaver’s strategy – which seems to have matched Huntsman’s own views – is that the consultant was running for the nomination of a party whose leaders and members he seemed to view at times with disdain.

“”There’s a simple reason our party is nowhere near being a national governing party,” Weaver told Esquire in June. “No one wants to be around a bunch of cranks.”

Conservatives obviously disagree.  First, the GOP did pretty well in 2010 without much help from either Weaver or Huntsman, flipping more House seats in a midterm election than any other in the last 72 years.  Second, we tried the Democrat Lite approach from 2001-6, and it resulted in significant growth in spending and regulation and the loss of both chambers of Congress to actual Democrats.

As far as dysfunction, that was apparent to the very end.  How did the senior staff find out about Huntsman’s decision?  One had to hear it from a Romney adviser:

Huntsman decided “days ago” — shortly after the New Hampshire primary — that he would not go on with his campaign, according to a high-level source close to the campaign.

Senior staffers in South Carolina say the campaign struggled to get Huntsman to campaign in the state following his third-place finish in New Hampshire. They say the campaign had no infrastructure in the state and suffered from lack of resources and communication issues. Not even signs had arrived yet from New Hampshire. Many volunteers had no work assigned to them. …

NBC’s Garrett Haakereports that Huntsman’s campaign advance director was told the candidate was dropping out by a Romney staffer, who had been told by an NBC reporter minutes earlier. According to that Romney staffer, Huntsman campaign staff were at the debate walk through (there’s a debate tomorrow night) asking “real” questions and were seemingly fully involved.

Much, if not all, of the Romney campaign team was also unaware — despite Huntsman endorsing him tomorrow. The campaign’s political director, for example, found out via a news alert.

David Freddoso has it correct.  The next Republican who hires John Weaver should be considered to have conducted an act of self-identification as unelectable and unsupportable.

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

what’s a Huntsman

Red Cloud on January 16, 2012 at 8:52 AM

My first guess would be “Huntsman.”

RoadRunner on January 16, 2012 at 8:52 AM

He was in the wrong Primary.

kingsjester on January 16, 2012 at 8:54 AM

So when does Huntsman go back to work for Obama?

ctmom on January 16, 2012 at 8:55 AM

“”There’s a simple reason our party is nowhere near being a national governing party,” Weaver told Esquire in June. “No one wants to be around a bunch of cranks.”
John Weaver

Obviously us Republicans are too thin skinned for constructive criticism.

listens2glenn on January 16, 2012 at 8:55 AM

Was there ever a flame to begin with?

gophergirl on January 16, 2012 at 8:57 AM

Who’s responsible for Huntsman flameout?

Dumbass Republicans who think a the Godfather of Obamacare is a conservative but think a guy with a solid conservative record is a liberal because he dared work for Obama.

That’s who.

angryed on January 16, 2012 at 8:57 AM

Who’s responsible for Huntsman flameout?

I blame Skip Huntsman’s dancing eyebrows…

Fallon on January 16, 2012 at 8:58 AM

Was there ever a flame to begin with?

gophergirl on January 16, 2012 at 8:57 AM

: )

listens2glenn on January 16, 2012 at 8:58 AM

Perhaps Huntsman will enter as a third-party candidate and drain votes from Obama.

austinconservative on January 16, 2012 at 8:59 AM

My first guess would be “Huntsman.”

RoadRunner on January 16, 2012 at 8:52 AM

^

Good article Ed. I haven’t heard of this Weaver fellow before, but if he’s partly responsible for the idiocy that is (was) the Huntsman campaign, I’ll remember the name.

Mr. Prodigy on January 16, 2012 at 8:59 AM

“”There’s a simple reason our party is nowhere near being a national governing party,” Weaver told Esquire in June. “No one wants to be around a bunch of cranks.”
John Weaver

Meet the actual worldview of the Republican establishment. Weaver forgot rule #1 – you’re not supposed to say these things in public.

As for Huntsman, there was no flameout – he never caught fire to begin with. Perhaps if the campaign had gone a bit longer he might have had his day. Towards the end he began doing some things right (such as his debate with Gingrich).

Ah well, too bad. One less obstacle to slow down Romney.

Doomberg on January 16, 2012 at 9:00 AM

Especially early on, Huntsman acted like he thought Republicans were the problem, and the fact that he presented himself as a supposedly “better kind” of Republican seemed to show that he was looking at things from a MSNBC-style perspective. He seemed to want to go out of his way to distance himself from the Tea Party and those angry with Obama. Rather than validate voters’ anger with Obama or show that he understood it, Huntsman seemed to accept as true the left’s caricatures of conservatives, who he almost seemed to be running against. He also sounded and looked too much like Mr. Rogers and kissed up to Obama.

bluegill on January 16, 2012 at 9:00 AM

I’m gonna miss the humor in the posts on HA about Huntsman, because the coronation of Mr. Romney is well, boring and depressing.

txmomof6 on January 16, 2012 at 9:01 AM

A Republican campaign that embraces the mainstream media, sets itself against elements of conservative dogma, and builds a coalition of moderate Republicans and independents that – if it could only survive the primary – would be formidable in a general election. The campaign’s birth in baroque intrigue and its high-level infighting are also Weaver signatures.

The Definition of Insanity!

CoffeeLover on January 16, 2012 at 9:01 AM

Conservatives obviously disagree. First, the GOP did pretty well in 2010 without much help from either Weaver or Huntsman, flipping more House seats in a midterm election than any other in the last 72 years.

And? Romney is the nominee. Boehner is about to ignore the TP freshmen and get bills passed with the help of Nancy Pelosi.

2010 is a distant memory for the RNC.

angryed on January 16, 2012 at 9:01 AM

What is weird about all this is that Huntsman was a pretty reliable conservative as Governor. He had enough to work with to win the Republican primary. So I would agree that Weaver deserves most of the blame for wasting Huntsman’s strengths…

RedSoxNation on January 16, 2012 at 9:02 AM

WHO???????????

SDarchitect on January 16, 2012 at 9:03 AM

If JH hired McLame’s former manager, that should have told us all we needed to know about him. JH also left out repealing Ocare with his list of the first 3 things he would do on day one. Where has that promise gone?

Kissmygrits on January 16, 2012 at 9:03 AM

The funny thing is Romney DID as governor what Hunstman SAID as a candidate while Huntsman DID as governor what Romney have seen SAYING as a candidate.

Republicans are an odd bunch.

angryed on January 16, 2012 at 9:04 AM

Who’s to blame for Huntsman going on past when Pawlenty got out?

Speakup on January 16, 2012 at 9:05 AM

I mean apart from the candidate himself, of course

Why would anyone but the candidate be responsible?

Dante on January 16, 2012 at 9:06 AM

I leave you all for one night and barnaby huntsman is leaving

Working for dear leader did not help one bit

cmsinaz on January 16, 2012 at 9:07 AM

He demonstrated he didn’t like us. We demonstrated we didn’t like him. It’s as simple as that.

Flora Duh on January 16, 2012 at 9:07 AM

CATO RATINGS:

Perry: “B”
Huntsman “B”
Romney “C”
Pawlenty “C”

Perry and Huntsman were run out of town as too liberal. Pawlenty is a wet dream of what could have been. And Romney is the nominee.

Republicans are an odd bunch.

angryed on January 16, 2012 at 9:07 AM

…the candidate really didn’t like Republicans. Huntsman didn’t hide his disdain during the debates, and Weaver made that an explicit message for the campaign:

Same strategy he tried with McCain. And he had the same kind of candidate.

BacaDog on January 16, 2012 at 9:07 AM

Crappy way to treat his campaign staff…but there it is.

workingclass artist on January 16, 2012 at 9:07 AM

Boehner is about to ignore the TP freshmen and get bills passed with the help of Nancy Pelosi.

2010 is a distant memory for the RNC.

angryed on January 16, 2012 at 9:01 AM

Yup, one of the best TP freshmen has already been set up by Boehner to lose his district.

Fallon on January 16, 2012 at 9:07 AM

flameout? that candle was never lit in the first place.

Steven McGregor on January 16, 2012 at 9:08 AM

So glad this guy exited the race

blatantblue on January 16, 2012 at 9:10 AM

The look on morning Joe faces

Priceless :)

cmsinaz on January 16, 2012 at 9:10 AM

Yup, one of the best TP freshmen has already been set up by Boehner to lose his district.

Fallon on January 16, 2012 at 9:07 AM

And this is a surprise?

Deficit…nothin’ to see here move along

workingclass artist on January 16, 2012 at 9:10 AM

Huntsman entered the race at obama’s behest, and obviously, Huntsman dropped out at obama’s behest. Huntsman’s entire faux campaign was well scripted, but it did not achieve the desired effect, and apparently, obama no longer required Huntsman’s services.

Pork-Chop on January 16, 2012 at 9:10 AM

Who’s Joe Huntsman?

JimK on January 16, 2012 at 9:10 AM

He was a plant and never was serious about winning. If his wife’s chest wasn’t so nice I would have stopped listening a long time ago.

tomas on January 16, 2012 at 9:12 AM

He was in the wrong Primary.

kingsjester on January 16, 2012 at 8:54 AM

Money.

Taco Bob on January 16, 2012 at 9:12 AM

吹罗姆尼 Suckas! – Huntsman’s Pending Endorsement of Mitt Romney

workingclass artist on January 16, 2012 at 9:14 AM

Dumbass Republicans who think a the Godfather of Obamacare is a conservative but think a guy with a solid conservative record is a liberal because he dared work for Obama.

That’s who.

angryed on January 16, 2012 at 8:57 AM

Maybe if you say it in Mandarin you can convince a few of us.

Naturally Curly on January 16, 2012 at 9:14 AM

Huntsman was what the Mittbots claim Romney to be. A solid conservative with real appeal to indies and Dems. All that without the Bain baggage and the flip flops.

And when the MSM tried to paint him as a racist, radical, klansman, all Huntsman had to say was….well then why did Barrack hire me? It was the perfect defense against any of the typical MSM Republican stereotypes.

You wanted electability, Huntsman was it. But no, he worked for Obama. Therefore he was the devil himself. Let’s instead go with the guy who created the health insurance mandate. Much better.

angryed on January 16, 2012 at 9:15 AM

A Republican campaign that embraces the mainstream media, sets itself against elements of conservative dogma, and builds a coalition of moderate Republicans and independents that – if it could only survive the primary – would be formidable in a general election. The campaign’s birth in baroque intrigue and its high-level infighting are also Weaver signatures.

The Definition of Insanity!

CoffeeLover on January 16, 2012 at 9:01 AM

This is the Mitt Romney election campaign strategy in a nutshell. And Obama is so bad, there is a chance for it to work.

This is why I laugh at people who say “Surely Romney will repeal Obamacare and cut spending!”

His whole campaign is about NOT doing these things and running as “the competent Obama.”

Doomberg on January 16, 2012 at 9:16 AM

Was there ever a flame to begin with?

gophergirl on January 16, 2012 at 8:57 AM

You commented sixth but answered it best.

dddave on January 16, 2012 at 9:17 AM

Huntsman (75%)

(a) for ignoring his own record as governor

(b) doing a bad Fonzie imitation at the debates

(c) acknowledging that he knew who Weaver was, much less hiring him

Peeps (25%)

(a) for failing to see dude’s ambassadorship as a strength, not a weakness.

Huntsman wins culpability in 3-to-1 a landslide.

kunegetikos on January 16, 2012 at 9:17 AM

Maybe if you say it in Mandarin you can convince a few of us.

Naturally Curly on January 16, 2012 at 9:14 AM

Oh My God!! That’s right Hunstman speaks Chinese. He musts be a communist!!!!!

angryed on January 16, 2012 at 9:18 AM

They pick Corn in Iowa – They pick Presidents in New Hampshire.

Perry/West 2012!

Dr Evil on January 16, 2012 at 9:19 AM

So this Weaver guy is a democrat after all.

bgibbs1000 on January 16, 2012 at 9:19 AM

The current state of politics does not like guys like Huntsman. The fact that someone like Bachmann got more support is quite telling.

With Huntsman out, there are two intelligent candidates left in the race – Romney and Gingrich. One is our version of John Kerry. The other has an ego that makes Obama look humble. Heaven help us.

McDuck on January 16, 2012 at 9:19 AM

I feel kinda bad. I never read his book.

bloggless on January 16, 2012 at 9:20 AM

You wanted electability, Huntsman was it. But no, he worked for Obama. Therefore he was the devil himself.

angryed on January 16, 2012 at 9:15 AM

So, in a way, Obama (Axelrod) is responsible for his flameout? Out-Manchurianed…

Fallon on January 16, 2012 at 9:22 AM

Santorum will be next…he’s got no money.

workingclass artist on January 16, 2012 at 9:22 AM

It wasn’t the funding that was the problem. It was the fact that Republicans got the clear message from Huntsman and the campaign that the candidate really didn’t like Republicans. Huntsman didn’t hide his disdain during the debates, and Weaver made that an explicit message for the campaign:

That was the vibe he sent, well evidenced by Angryed’s love for him. If he were just a bit more elitist and condescending, he might have passed as a modern liberal, as it was,… he insulted conservatives, repeatedly, and expected they as the party’s base would then vote for him.

insane is the only word that fits.

mark81150 on January 16, 2012 at 9:23 AM

They pick Corn in Iowa – They pick Presidents in New Hampshire.

Perry/West 2012!

Dr Evil on January 16, 2012 at 9:19 AM

yeah.

I like how they stoodup for the kids and called the liberals on their over the top rehtoric.

workingclass artist on January 16, 2012 at 9:24 AM

Zero name recognition, zero charisma, condescending, smartass I found him not likeable. Answer Huntsman.

ldbgcoleman on January 16, 2012 at 9:25 AM

Woo hoo! Romney/Huntsman 2012!

I guess it’s “President for Life” Obama. It really is burning down now, isn’t it?

Harbingeing on January 16, 2012 at 9:26 AM

John Weaver is an Aggie who has been extremely effective in keeping the stereotype alive and well.

Ultimately, though, it is apparent that Texas A&M is responsible for the flameout.

MessesWithTexas on January 16, 2012 at 9:27 AM

Now that that is all said and done, where does Huntsman end up after Romney wins the White House??? Ambassador to China – LOL!

Bob in VA on January 16, 2012 at 9:27 AM

Flame out? Huntsman?
How can a pilot light…flame out?

KOOLAID2 on January 16, 2012 at 9:27 AM

He was in the wrong Primary.

kingsjester on January 16, 2012 at 8:54 AM

exactamundo KJ

cmsinaz on January 16, 2012 at 9:28 AM

angryed on January 16, 2012 at 9:15 AM

I’m curious, I may have missed them, but I don’t remember seeing any comments from you extolling the best qualities of Amb. Huntsman, no comparisons between him and the other candidates, and why you felt he was the better choice.

All I can recall seeing from you is negativity (notice I didn’t say attacks) directed towards Governor Romney. After a while it grew repetitive so I started to ignore your comments, which could be why I missed your supportive comments concerning Mr. Huntsman.

Flora Duh on January 16, 2012 at 9:28 AM

Maybe if you say it in Mandarin you can convince a few of us.

Naturally Curly on January 16, 2012 at 9:14 AM

Oh My God!! That’s right Hunstman speaks Chinese. He musts be a communist!!!!!

angryed on January 16, 2012 at 9:18 AM

At this rate you must not expect to be here long.

Huntsmans repeated insults directed at both republicans and conservatives in particular don’t even factor in on your home world do they?

He threw it away by running from his conservative record like it was a disease, and you can’t see that?

I know you’re just trolling here, but damn,.. talk about avoiding reality.

mark81150 on January 16, 2012 at 9:29 AM

You wanted electability, Huntsman was it.

angryed on January 16, 2012 at 9:15 AM

LMAO!

Dante on January 16, 2012 at 9:30 AM

Huntsmans repeated insults directed at both republicans and conservatives in particular don’t even factor in on your home world do they?

He threw it away by running from his conservative record like it was a disease, and you can’t see that?

I know you’re just trolling here, but damn,.. talk about avoiding reality.

mark81150 on January 16, 2012 at 9:29 AM

Being a climate change acolyte didn’t help much either.

workingclass artist on January 16, 2012 at 9:32 AM

The look on morning Joe faces

Priceless :)

cmsinaz on January 16, 2012 at 9:10 AM

I hope someone is hiding their razor blades.

BuckeyeSam on January 16, 2012 at 9:32 AM

He was in the wrong Primary.

kingsjester on January 16, 2012 at 8:54 AM

So is Romney. Even a liberal like Huntsman didn’t order price controls on power plants. Then again, Huntsman didn’t dump tens of millions of dollars of CO2 emissions regulations on those power plants, either.

Do we want a presidential candidate that’ll hurt Senate candidates or a candidate that’s skilled at creating wave elections?

LFRGary on January 16, 2012 at 9:33 AM

I’m all for piling on Weaver, but let’s face it: Huntsman showed in the debates and speeches that he’s a 3rd tier talent. Had he followed another strategy – running as a conservative highlighting his record on Utah – he’d still be a non-factor because he simply lacks charisma. He’d be like a lesser version of Pawlenty with the ability to speak in Chinese.

joana on January 16, 2012 at 9:33 AM

Honestly the only thing I will remember about Huntsman is his two daughters (can I get an Amen from the dogpound?). He might have been great for all I know. He just never made an impact or his presence known.

dddave on January 16, 2012 at 9:33 AM

we tried the Democrat Lite approach from 2001-6, and it resulted in significant growth in spending and regulation and the loss of both chambers of Congress to actual Democrats.

Thanks for acknowledging that W (and the GOPpers in Congress who gave him the time of day) destroyed the party. McCain was a rounding error.

O is just W raised to the second power.

kunegetikos on January 16, 2012 at 9:34 AM

angryed on January 16, 2012 at 9:15 AM

I’m curious, I may have missed them, but I don’t remember seeing any comments from you extolling the best qualities of Amb. Huntsman, no comparisons between him and the other candidates, and why you felt he was the better choice.

All I can recall seeing from you is negativity (notice I didn’t say attacks) directed towards Governor Romney. After a while it grew repetitive so I started to ignore your comments, which could be why I missed your supportive comments concerning Mr. Huntsman.

Flora Duh on January 16, 2012 at 9:28 AM

Yep, you are on to something there. This angryed person just seems like a character created by someone with a lot of free time. Sometimes they’re in character, sometimes they get lazy and don’t post in character. I wouldn’t be surprised if they’re an Obama supporter.

bluegill on January 16, 2012 at 9:35 AM

LMAO!

Dante on January 16, 2012 at 9:30 AM

A Ron Paul fan is the last person who should be laughing at a comment about electability.

McDuck on January 16, 2012 at 9:36 AM

But. . . but. . . he was endorsed by The Boston Globe!

MrLynn on January 16, 2012 at 9:37 AM

Goodbye Huntsman,… hope you enjoy a loooooooong retirement. Maybe you and Obama can golf together, I have it on good authority he’ll have lots of leisure time next year.

You can swap stories,.. share your contempt for those angry peasants, and crack a beer.. oh wait, sorry, share a nice bottle of WHINE…

You might as well play as lit as you governed O,.. and Huntsman, well, I’m sure he really didn’t want the job anyway…

else he might have campaigned like he wasn’t a halfwit.

mark81150 on January 16, 2012 at 9:39 AM

mark81150 on January 16, 2012 at 9:39 AM

Nah, I’m pretty sure we’re getting four more years of Obama thanks to the GOP.

McDuck on January 16, 2012 at 9:41 AM

I’m curious, I may have missed them, but I don’t remember seeing any comments from you extolling the best qualities of Amb. Huntsman, no comparisons between him and the other candidates, and why you felt he was the better choice.

All I can recall seeing from you is negativity (notice I didn’t say attacks) directed towards Governor Romney. After a while it grew repetitive so I started to ignore your comments, which could be why I missed your supportive comments concerning Mr. Huntsman.

Flora Duh on January 16, 2012 at 9:28 AM

Yep, you are on to something there. This angryed person just seems like a character created by someone with a lot of free time. Sometimes they’re in character, sometimes they get lazy and don’t post in character. I wouldn’t be surprised if they’re an Obama supporter.

bluegill on January 16, 2012 at 9:35 AM

LOL. Of course. Anyone who doesn’t love Romney is a communist, free market hating Obama supporter. You’ve found out my big secret.

I’ve posted lots of times that I like Huntsman and it was too bad he was dismissed outright because he dared work for Obama. I would have gladly supported him against Obama.

angryed on January 16, 2012 at 9:42 AM

Looks like he’s finally getting some attention. He’s #7 in Twitter’s list of 9 top trending topics. Located between “Golden Globes” and “Page 16 of 366″.

Flora Duh on January 16, 2012 at 9:43 AM

Appearances are everything.

1. He took a job as ambassador for an administration that we knew would be crooked and destructive long before it took office. That told me Huntsman was about Huntsman and padding his resume. no principles.

2. I couldn’t get passed the shiny veneer. There was something synthetic about him. Regardless of what came out of his mouth, I couldn’t stop getting the feeling that this guy loves himself way too much.

3. See #1.

DLEW on January 16, 2012 at 9:43 AM

Huntsman was guilty of the very things some here erroneously accuse Romney of: While both have liberal tendencies on some issues, Huntsman’s tendencies come from a deeply self-conscious belief that conservatism is icky. Those who do not bow down at the Global Warming temple “don’t believe in science,” he presents himself as “calm” and “reasoned,” not to counter those qualities against the frothing, big-spending democrats, but rather against the Tea Partiers whom he sees as “angry.” Well, yeah Jon. Why aren’t you angry? You can’t run a successful campaign to represent a party you are ashamed of. You can disagree on party positions from time to time, but you cannot act like you’d rather be running in the other party because you like those folks better.

Rational Thought on January 16, 2012 at 9:43 AM

At this rate you must not expect to be here long.

Huntsmans repeated insults directed at both republicans and conservatives in particular don’t even factor in on your home world do they?

He threw it away by running from his conservative record like it was a disease, and you can’t see that?

mark81150 on January 16, 2012 at 9:29 AM

Dude, look at the RECORDS. Huntsman RECORD is solid. Romney’s record is to the left of Obama.

Why do you people insist on overlooking records and relying on campaign rhetoric? Do you really think what someone says is more valid than what they did?

angryed on January 16, 2012 at 9:43 AM

A Ron Paul fan is the last person who should be laughing at a comment about electability.

McDuck on January 16, 2012 at 9:36 AM

Maybe you should pay more attention to what’s going on.

Dante on January 16, 2012 at 9:44 AM

I’ll take Who is John Huntsman for $1,000 Alex.

D-fusit on January 16, 2012 at 9:44 AM

angryed on January 16, 2012 at 9:42 AM

I want you to know that bluegill’s opinions are strictly their own, and do not reflect mine in any way, shape, or form.

Flora Duh on January 16, 2012 at 9:45 AM

Maybe you should pay more attention to what’s going on.

Dante on January 16, 2012 at 9:44 AM

LOL. Again, funny coming from someone like you!

McDuck on January 16, 2012 at 9:45 AM

Speaking of electability or lack thereof….

In an Obama-Romney race, 46 percent say they would vote for the president, while 45 percent say they would back Romney, the Fox News poll finds. But the president enjoys more positive support than the former Massachusetts governor, with 74 percent of his supporters saying they would be voting “for” Obama and 21 percent saying they would be voting “against Romney.” Among the GOP hopeful’s supporters, just 33 percent said they were “for Romney,” while a whopping 58 percent said their vote was more “against Obama.”

Good luck with that.

angryed on January 16, 2012 at 9:47 AM

You have to have been on fire at some point to flame out. Mike Huntsman never ignited enough to flame out. He was a dud from the start. He can go back to working for the Indonesian Imbecile, now.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on January 16, 2012 at 9:47 AM

SO now he’s angling for Romney’s Sec State?

BKeyser on January 16, 2012 at 9:48 AM

You have to have been on fire at some point to flame out. Mike Huntsman never ignited enough to flame out. He was a dud from the start. He can go back to working for the Indonesian Imbecile, now.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on January 16, 2012 at 9:47 AM

Perfect summation of the thinking in the GOP. He worked for Obama. That’s an unpardonable offense.

But Raising taxes as gov of MA? Increased spending by 30% as gov of MA? Romneycare? Gun ban? Pro-abortion? Meh, what’s the big deal? Romney’s the next Reagan donthca know?

angryed on January 16, 2012 at 9:50 AM

BuckeyeSam on January 16, 2012 at 9:32 AM

heh :)

cmsinaz on January 16, 2012 at 9:52 AM

Juanita Huntsman, god love ya we never knew ya.

CorporatePiggy on January 16, 2012 at 9:52 AM

buckeye, i see huntsman as a regular on morning joe pretty soon, no?

cmsinaz on January 16, 2012 at 9:52 AM

SO now he’s angling for Romney’s Sec State?

BKeyser on January 16, 2012 at 9:48 AM

I think, maybe ambassador to China.

KOOLAID2 on January 16, 2012 at 9:54 AM

Thanks for acknowledging that W (and the GOPpers in Congress who gave him the time of day) destroyed the party. McCain was a rounding error.

O is just W raised to the second power.

kunegetikos on January 16, 2012 at 9:34 AM

It really depresses me to have to agree with that.. I still like George Bush as a person, respect alot of what he did on the WOT,. and I had such high hopes for him in 03,04… aw well….

He was a classy guy in many ways,.. certainly vastly superior to any democrat in his personal charity work, and his work to curb AIDS in Africa earned us most of the good will we have there, such as it is.

Still, you can’t help but feel things would have been nitemarishly worse with Gore in charge.

mark81150 on January 16, 2012 at 9:55 AM

But Raising taxes as gov of MA? Increased spending by 30% as gov of MA? Romneycare? Gun ban? Pro-abortion? Meh, what’s the big deal? Romney’s the next Reagan donthca know?

angryed on January 16, 2012 at 9:50 AM

Who is pro-Romney?

Bachmann was the only candidate who actually knew what was truly important (repealing ObamaCare and rolling back all the un-American, stupid stuff Barky and his junta have done (often illegally) over the past three years) but she was chased out of the race for going after Perry’s demented Guardisil coercion. I hope everyone is proud of that. Big mistake.

The only decent candidate left is Santorum. The rest of them aren’t worth the time of day.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on January 16, 2012 at 9:55 AM

“No one wants to be around a bunch of cranks”, No Weaver, this is just you projecting. Unfruitfull I might add. The only “crank ” is you dude. We saw you and McCain as RINO’s. McCain did a whole lot of bumbling too. I mean what were those people thinking that voted for him in the primary’s? So this time we see Huntsman as the RINO.

jake49 on January 16, 2012 at 9:57 AM

angryed on January 16, 2012 at 9:42 AM

I want you to know that bluegill’s opinions are strictly their own, and do not reflect mine in any way, shape, or form.

Flora Duh on January 16, 2012 at 9:45 AM

Actually, bluegill and some of the more, shall I say boisterous supporters of Governor Romney, may want to think about the repetition factor I mentioned.

After a while people get tired of their attacks, yes, attacks, against anyone who dare to voice a dissenting opinion about Governor Romney, and simply ignore them. Therefore missing anything of worthy significance about him that they may post.

Flora Duh on January 16, 2012 at 9:58 AM

If gas prices get as bad as they say…He can win.

tomas on January 16, 2012 at 9:59 AM

Huntsman entered the race at obama’s behest, and obviously, Huntsman dropped out at obama’s behest. Huntsman’s entire faux campaign was well scripted, but it did not achieve the desired effect, and apparently, obama no longer required Huntsman’s services.

Pork-Chop on January 16, 2012 at 9:10 AM

The above may be a conspiracy theory, but at least it makes sense, unlike Huntsman’s campaign, which, on the surface and a few feet below, was completely incomprehensible. Ben Smith writes that a frightened Obama administration sent Huntsman to China to get him out of the way, as if Huntsman were a lance corporal being re-assigned to the Afgan theater. Please. They did, however, call him back.

Contrary to what the Mitt-haters think, Obama wanted to run against a conservative whom he could have painted as a Bush clone. Had there been a stronger conservative in the race; had Paul not come out of nowhere to double his support from previous races; had Romney not improved so dramatically from 2008; and had Huntsman not sucked balls as a candidate, he could have peeled off enough of Mitt’s support to get a Bush III nominated. Instead, the conservative field ended up a fragmented pack of losers, Paul became a real factor, Huntsman was a record in search of a candidate, and Romney consolidated support early. After failing the New Hampshire test, there was no reason for Huntsman to continue, and he bailed.

I’d like to know what Huntsman was promised by the Obama machine for his efforts. The VP slot?

Mr. Arkadin on January 16, 2012 at 9:59 AM

Still, you can’t help but feel things would have been nitemarishly worse with Gore in charge.

mark81150 on January 16, 2012 at 9:55 AM

Gore with a GOP house/senate would have been a continuation of the late 90s. Which IIRC were pretty good times with a balanced budget and stuff.

angryed on January 16, 2012 at 10:00 AM

I think he pulled out in SC to make Romney look worse.

tomas on January 16, 2012 at 10:01 AM

I’d like to know what Huntsman was promised by the Obama machine for his efforts. The VP slot?

Mr. Arkadin on January 16, 2012 at 9:59 AM

A pat on the head. Mike Huntsman’s a cheap date.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on January 16, 2012 at 10:05 AM

Why do you people insist on overlooking records and relying on campaign rhetoric? Do you really think what someone says is more valid than what they did?

angryed on January 16, 2012 at 9:43 AM

Candidates’ records are usually the absolute last thing in peoples’ minds when they vote. When I talk to people, this is what I find, in decreasing order of importance:

1. How they look on TV, and how they sound and come across
2. What the MSM says about them
2b. Scandals
3. Who the party tells me to vote for
4. Whether I really hate the other party’s candidate
5. Whether I think candidate X can win
(a very distant) 6. Their actual record of legislation/governance

Doomberg on January 16, 2012 at 10:06 AM

Where in the world is Carmen SanHuntsman?

Common Sense Floridian on January 16, 2012 at 10:07 AM

Comment pages: 1 2