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,
“…and probably not one that will be won…”
Well, at least you’re realistic … 🙂 … off to clean!
SwM,
Gotta clean my kitchen (made cupcakes and the 3 year old ran the mixer) but I recorded it and will watch when I’m done.
Obama gave an excellent speech tonight. None of the clowns from last night could have delivered it. They have no plan for jobs just tax cuts for the wealthiest of citizens.
So I guess SWM can’t say anything good about Obama….only dismissing other candidates with not much thought or reason….This is very much a GOP Technique…and strategy….
Blouise,
I have not done any name calling, I generally don’t. I still want to know why if my point of view differs from someone else that I am called names, specifically to wit: 1) A Republican; 2) a Misogynist and 3) a person viewed with ASKANCE…..
This is not debate unless you are maybe a Teabagger in disguise….it is my opinion that this is subterfuged dialogue…just like a troll…
I hope that makes sense…
It is not a battle I started…and probably not one that will be won…But I want to know why?
anon nurse
1, September 8, 2011 at 6:52 pm
lottakatz,
Thanks for the clarification… In the future when I hear any mention of Galileo/science and Huntsman…, vaginas will probably come to mind
=========================================================
anon nurse
as a man i can honestly say that no matter what the subject
vagina’s will probably come to mind.
SwM,
You’re fine …
You should hear what some people call me! 🙂
SWM,
BTW, I will keep inquiring as to why said these about me that I was a: 1) Republican; 2) Misogynist and 3) a person viewed with ASKANCE…..this is subterfuged dialogue…just like a troll…
I have nothing but time on my side….until I either get tired myself or you give me a straight answer… I am sure people on this blawg will get tired of it before I do…
Goody now answer why you attacked me?
Now, I am still waiting for you to explain to me why you said these: 1) Republican; 2) Misogynist and 3) a person viewed with ASKANCE…..this is subterfuged dialogue…just like a troll…
Unless you don’t have an answer…and its just your nature…
Noah V,
A truer statement could never be said….A Bill Clinton he is not…He knew how to get things done even while his feet were to the fire with the impeachment indictment….
blouise, I have been in this fight since 1980 when I worked for a Health and Welfare Committee.
Blouise,
While in law School I wrote a paper on women rights as related to election law….surprise it was an election law class….Something I have stated before on here after the passage of the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments…everyone had the right to vote, except white women….that came later…Now whether they could exercise that right was a different story….
Anonymously Yours said, “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.”
I have to agree. I think he disappointed his followers. It seems he and the Congress couldn’t focus or decide what to do. He seems more a cheerleader than an innovator. He waited for Congress to formulate something, while they waited to be sent some legislation.
Obama appears more shaped to be a mediator than a CEO.
Stating your opinion and attacking me are two separate things…Other people attacking you is beyond my control. If you will note, when your were attacked in an uncivil manner, I did defend the uncivil portion. The rest, your posts speaks for themselves…I can assure you and people who have access can also confirm I did not post under any other names today, not that I have not in the past.
If you disagree with the professor then say so…Please don’t attack me for the professors view points. I am not a Ron Paul fan, but he does have some good ideals…State your opinion, be original….Don’t attack someone just because they disagree with what you hold near and dear….That sounds too much like a Teabagger…which I do not think you are….Abortion is a state issue…the Feds set the floor and the states sets the ceilings….This is a local issue as far as the Feds are concerned…Now they can limit federal funding for that, which is true…Your beef is with the state you live in..not me…
Now, I am still waiting for you to explain to me why you said these: 1) Republican; 2) Misogynist and 3) a person viewed with ASKANCE…..this is subterfuged dialogue…just like a troll…
SwM,
Right on sister, right on
lottakatz,
Well said. (post at 6:30 pm)
Here is a link discussing women voting … it’s a well written and informative piece. Notably the republican party has difficulty attracting the female vote because they have difficulty understanding the issues that drive women to the voting booth. The republican war on women is very real but we have the numbers and the determination needed to continue advancing in spite of all the efforts to return us to pre-19th amendment. Some men like to think we vote with our vaginae but those semantics are always accompanied by a smirk which gives us the definite advantage which we use most effectively. 😉
http://grounds-strategy.com/files/gender-and-voting.pdf
Don’t agree with the professor about Ron Paul either. Was attacked by the other anon on that too. Will continue to state my opinion on these candidates if I so chose. The republican governors made anti-family planning and ant-abortion legislation a priority.
When we weigh the merits and faults of our next presidential candidates, let’s not forget to give voice to the millions that have lost their lives, their homes, their jobs, and their dignity.
LK,
I will again state that the NCSL is pretty much a good organization…SWM is, or should be very familiar with what the NCSL does…I am waiting on her response after personal attacks on me as being a 1) Republican; 2) Misogynist and 3) a person viewed with ASKANCE…..
Apparently, she has failed to read what the professors views are in regards to Huntsman…Maybe, I misread what they professor posted or was attacked for having similar or somewhat the same viewpoints….It is your call, I’ll let the thread and posts speak for themselves…
You know, I don’t expect everyone to agree with everyone about what anything else that they post. What I do not expect is subterfuged attacks, reminds me of Kderossa…I dislike intellectual dishonesty, bigotry, racism and misogynist… I hope you understand my point…
Like you, as well as others do, if you disagree with something someone has posted..You are point blank about it…Not spurious and accusatory with hyperbole attached and then lash out in all other directions and then accuse the other of misconstruing the issue…That is intellectual dishonesty….pretty much like a troll…
However, thank you for you point of view…
anon nurse
1, September 8, 2011 at 1:51 pm
Agree completely with AY… Civility is the norm here…
======
But not an absolute 🙂
————————–
lottakatz,
Thanks for the clarification… 🙂 In the future when I hear any mention of Galileo/science and Huntsman…, vaginas will probably come to mind…