Wednesday, August 17, 2011

Huntsman for GOP Presidency Nod

Watching the Republican debate last week, I was - like many voters - profoundly disappointed in the field .... with one exception. John Huntsman was the one candidate who came across as honest, forthright, and genuine. Unlike Michelle Bachman who "wished the United States had defaulted" or Newt Gingrich who was offended by questions about his record or Ron Paul who (God love him) simply misunderstands national economics in the twentieth century or Mitt Romney who seems to be running from his record and confused about who he is, John Huntsman is the one man who presented a practical and clearly stated philosophy and who is "standing by his record" and "running on his record."

Huntsman can honestly defend his support for the deficit reduction bill and TARP and the stimulus plan. He can openly acknowledge his support of cap and trade legislation on climate change - especially because he can point out it was the Heritage Institute's idea. He can stand by his position on civil unions - because even that should be seen as conservative. He can look at conservatives and say, "Hey, this was our idea" and it's still a good one even if the Democrats embraced it. That's the same thing Mitt Romney should have said about the individual mandate. Instead of running from it, he should have stood his ground and said, "Hey! This is a conservative idea. This started with the Heritage Institute. It's still a good idea - even if Obama adopted it."

So, as an unaffiliated independent - one who is moderate with a strong fiscal conservative foundation who has much to criticize about the Democrats at the federal level - I will say this: In a contest between Huntsman and Obama today, I would be likely to vote for Huntsman. In a race between Obama and anyone else on the stage, my vote would go with Obama running away. If the GOP really wanted to appeal to the independents, they'd go with someone like Huntsman - or Johnson out of New Mexico.

But they won't. So, at this point I am stuck with the Democrats.


Anonymous said...

Fiscal conservatism in the light of 9% unemployment, 17-20% underemployment and huge private debts needs some rethinking. Huntsman doesn't realize this (but then neither does Obama). It's one of these things that *seems* sensible, but isn't.

I'd vote for Huntsman if he got educated on macro-econ, but I doubt I'll get the chance.

Darren said...

So if you can't get what you consider a conservative, you'll go with the crazy socialist? I don't understand that thought process.

mmazenko said...

Your understanding of economics and political theory is so naive and limited as to be laughable. Crazy socialist? You know nothing ... and you seem to have no interest in learning.

Darren said...

So if you can't counter the argument, you attack the "arguer"?

There's certainly a (valid and strong) argument to be made that the current president is a socialist. That *you* disagree with that doesn't make *me* an idiot. On the contrary... :-)

mmazenko said...

D., we've been down this road before, and I didn't want to repeat the definition of socialism and socialist. So, instead I simply pointed out that you don't acknowledge the reality of the political system.

There is no "valid argument" that Obama is a socialist. Simply calling someone a socialist - or pointing out that he told Joe the Plumber he wanted to "spread the wealth around" does not make him a socialist. Hell, Reagan said he wanted to "share the wealth" because a rising tide raises all boats. That was the point of his supply side cuts - that it would boost economic activity and spread the wealth.

Obama is not a socialist no matter how hard you want him to be. And pointing out that a moderate and independent voter like me will choose a moderate Republican or stay with the moderate President is pretty rational. Calling someone a crazy socialist is not.

Darren said...

There are 10s of millions of us who think this president is a crazy socialist; wishing that away doesn't show a firm grip on reality.

mmazenko said...

No, there are tens of millions who oppose his views. A much smaller number believe he is a socialist. And numbers mean squat, my friend. Millions of people believe the earth is about 5000 years old, and we both know they're wrong. Millions of people though Mao Zedong would lead them to the Promised Land. Fat chance.

Not a socialist and you're really continuing to show your naive understanding of economics and politics. He's not a socialist, D. The government sold its shares of GM even though the right wing crazies said it's the beginning of a socialist plot to take over business.

Not socialism, my friend. Not even close.

And that doesn't really explain your problem with my support of Huntsman. I'm a man of the middle, and Huntsman and Obama are the two most moderate voices.