Former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman took a startling position in the GOP debates last night — he suggested that the party not “run from science.” After candidates have lined up to reject everything from global warming to evolution, Huntsman is a standout in his Galileo moment in the GOP.
Huntsman stated:
“Listen, when you make comments that fly in the face of what 98 out of 100 climate scientists have said, when you call into question the science of evolution, all I’m saying is that, in order for the Republican Party to win, we can’t run from science. We can’t run from mainstream conservative philosophy. We’ve got to win voters.”
Wow.
I have long admired Jon Huntsman after we testified together before a House Committee when he was still governor of Utah. We then by coincidence flew back to Utah on the same plane. I found him very bright and engaging. I have little doubt that, if the GOP nominated Huntsman, they would win the White House — with many independent and Democratic votes going to Huntsman. He is moderate on many issues and exceptionally knowledgable about business issues. He also believes in science — a promising factor for a president. It is remarkable that such a position would make Huntsman a standout, but that is a measure of the times in which we are living. Of course, he lost the Pope Urban VIII vote.
With Obama at record lows in the polls, the Democrats are hanging their hopes on the GOP selecting an extremist and rejecting Huntsman. It has been pretty clear for months that Democrats are not going to be given a choice in their own party despite the desire of some to dump Obama. The problem is that Obama is now so unpopular that even some of the more extreme candidates might be able beat him.
Last night, Ron Paul won the straw polling after the debate.
Source: CBS
AY, Are you joking? Look what happened with the budget last month. The tea party blocked any revenue raising measure. We will see what they do with the jobs bill. Actually think he got more done with Rahm than Bill Daley.
SWM,
Obama is Not blocked anymore than than Clinton was…Obama may be smart but he is not smart enough to pull off a Presidential address before the start of the NFL….That is a Stoooooppppiiidddd Move….He is just as smart as his advisers…NOT TOO SMART….
Frankly, Although I think Obama wasted many opportunities in the past. Now he IS really blocked by congress.
Frankly,
I did not say that I was not going to vote against Obama…I have said that we need a better liar than what we presently have. As noted by the professor and I have said this man times..Huntisman is the brightest of the litter….I did not say that he could win…
I supported Paul Tsongas….He too was bright…But did not stand a chance in hell of winning…As you can see, I don’t just jump on the band wagon and stay…I did not vote for Obama the first time. I cast a vote for Nader….I did not trust Obama then, I do not trust him now nor do I trust him in the future. I did support John Edwards….Ok, so he had affairs…So what…The bottom line is I believe McCain was a better choice as President than Obama….But once Palin was selected as Veep…I voted for neither and Nader fit the bill….
So exactly how worse can it get….the middle class are going down….is that Obamas fault…Not at all….but what has he done to stop the letting…Not a DAMN thing…
I am not defending Obama but he never had a filibuster proof Senate. Obama is not right to work and anti- abortion as Huntsman is. Obama has appeared to be too weak of a democrat in many ways to me. I could say the same thing about Perry as you are saying about Huntsman – at least you know what you are getting. Perry will give you something different if that is what the goal is. Running for election and actually governing are so different that no one really knows what these folks will do if they are elected.
AY – the only difference 4 more years of Obama will make is that things will not get as bad as they would have if one of the loons wins. Notice I did not say they will get better because they won’t. They just won’t get as gawd-awful ugly as they could have.
Damning with faint praise will be the Obama legacy I’m afraid.
SWM,
That may be true, but at least you know what you are getting. Obama, not so much. And exactly, how is Obama’s actions any different than Huntsman…. I realize he had a crappy economy coming in…but so did Clinton….at least Obama had a Democratic House and Senate when he took office…He should have been able to use that to his advantage and he wasted it…Clinton did not have that luxury…So, I am just trying to figure out how 4 more years would be different?
It is true that” beauty is in the eye of the beholder”.
“Last night, Ron Paul won the straw polling after the debate.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/huntsmans-campaign-might-be-moderate-but-his-economic-plan-isnt/2011/08/25/gIQAp9bKuJ_blog.html?wprss=ezra-klein Agree with Ezra Klein on Huntsman plan. It hurts the poor and middle class.
Ok, read the article….it does not state the basis…I however do not disagree that he might have said that…but just because someone else says you said it does not make it so….
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/08/31/1012302/-Jon-Huntsmans-economic-plan:-Tax-cuts-for-rich,-tax-increases-for-everyone-else
Perry is scary…He actually came off as reasonable yesterday…
While I am still in support of Huntsman…as I view him as a person of integrity, I realize he does not stand a chance in hell of winning the nomination….But then again, anyone with half a brain is not in politics…nor would they want the office of president of the US…I think this was proved with both Bush and Cheney….
Obama may not be a lot of folks first choice…but he might have to be the last option….
I have a feeling that last nights debate put Sarah Palin in a position that she didn’t want to be in.And by that I think she like others who have jumped on Perrys band wagon,buying the “pig ina poke”and felt he would take the debate hands down and therefore she could endorse him and remain relevant and be seen as a “Kingmaker”Now I think the pressure is really going to be on her to put up or shut up.
Its getting to be really entertaining.
The GOP debate was better than I expected. They all seem to have had some notion of civility, even though there was a fairly wide gap on some issues between the candidates.
I know they must have been coached into that methodology, because when their rhetoric was running wild in the weeks and months prior to the debate, they were whacking any chance they had to prevail in the general election.
The new direction will cause Obama problems, yet as it stands now I still give Obama a win by 3%.
http://www.rawstory.com/rawreplay/2011/09/gop-debate-audience-cheers-perrys-execution-record/ What is wrong with them?
If you claim to respect the science and then act as if you don’t, or are politically powerless to do anything either, what does it matter?
For the USofA at the moment, it doesn’t matter who is in “power” because the plutocrats get what they want….
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2011/sep/08/rick-perry-climate-change-sceptic The world needs to prepare for a climate change skeptic to become US president according to the Guardian.
Huntsman is ant-abortion and for right to work laws. Obama does not hold these views. It is a two man race in any case. Have to see the polls today to see if the ponzy scheme statement hurt Perry or if the base liked it. Ron Paul came off as crazy as Bachmann last night.
And yet he polls around 1% in the GOP . . . whos new motto is “Ignorance is knowledge”
His only hope would be that the crazies go down in flames in 12 (and there is a good chance they won’t, which would be a real catastrophe for the nation) and the party elders will want sane in 16. But, given that Huntsman is basically a Mormon version of Obama can the nation take another President who does not want to upset the status quo? The country is in worse shape than it should be because of the current leadership (saying it is better off than it would be if McCain had won is ‘damning with faint praise’). Following him with Huntsman would ensure another decade of slow death.
While a moderate could win the election, he probably couldn’t get the nomination.