Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Huntsman obviously has no idea how to win a GOP primary, and he's just engaging in the media-driven elevation of Rick Perry to "assumed nominee" status.
The story is no longer who the nominee is; it's about why the GOP nominee couldn't win the presidency. I think that's getting ahead of the game a bit, but if they want to do that, I say go ahead...
As a former Texas science teacher who taught the theory of Evolution as a part of HS biology classes, I'm not sure why this is important in the overall presidential politics discussion. I am more interested in the economics background of the candidates, as in who has a history of job creation in their state greater than any other state. Evolution vs creationism is just noise in the background in a country crumbling under the present "leadership".
Perry got a D in economics and doesn't deserve any credit for the job growth in Texas, which can all be attributed to other factors.
Personally, I am most interested in defeating the current president as I fear where this country would be if Obama gets four more years. Based on that I want someone who has "fire in the belly" which huntsman has not shown. I think if he is the nominee then Obama gets a second term and lord help us!
i understand. i'm not; I like Huntsman and I like Paul, but I would vote for Obama before I voted for Perry.
Huntsman is a nobody. No one cares about him. He is polling at less than 3%. His support isn't going to climb, because we are already flooded with better candidates than Huntsman. Thus my statement of "Who is John Huntsman?" I am not asking because I don't know, I am stating the question to show he is a nobody.
I disagree. I believe Huntsman's support will grow exponentially during the next eight to ten weeks. I guess we'll just have to wait and see whether you're right or whether I am.
I disagree. I believe Huntsman's support will grow exponentially during the next eight to ten weeks. I guess we'll just have to wait and see whether you're right or whether I am.
That's quite a prediction.
First of all, no candidate is going anywhere exponentially until somebody drops out. Second, when someone drops out, where will there supporters go? Bachmann supporters won't go to Huntsman. Neither will Paul supporters. So what can he get? Gingrich's couple of percent? Cain's?
No way Huntsman will be in the race longer than Romney, which is the only person who could drop out and give any significant amount of supporters over to Huntsman.
So right now, it's unclear what Huntsman is trying to do... run for Democrat ticket VP maybe?
i understand. i'm not; I like Huntsman and I like Paul, but I would vote for Obama before I voted for Perry.
Paul supporters (who actually are interested in Paul's issues) would have to vote Perry over Obama. No one else comes close to Paul's very, very pro-life position. Also, no other candidate has been as harsh on the Fed as Perry has, which is another key Paul position.
Now the crazy, conspiracy theorist Paul supporters won't go to Perry. But they won't go to Obama, either, as he's as "Bilderberg" and "Globalist" as they get . So those folks will probably vote independent, or not vote at all.
Paul supporters (who actually are interested in Paul's issues) would have to vote Perry over Obama. No one else comes close to Paul's very, very pro-life position. Also, no other candidate has been as harsh on the Fed as Perry has, which is another key Paul position.
Now the crazy, conspiracy theorist Paul supporters won't go to Perry. But they won't go to Obama, either, as he's as "Bilderberg" and "Globalist" as they get . So those folks will probably vote independent, or not vote at all.
Paul is not Pro life. Where did you get that Idea. He is pro-choice. That is that States should have the choice as to make it legal or illegal. That is not pro life. Pro life is about making it illegal everywhere.
First of all, no candidate is going anywhere exponentially until somebody drops out. Second, when someone drops out, where will there supporters go? Bachmann supporters won't go to Huntsman. Neither will Paul supporters. So what can he get? Gingrich's couple of percent? Cain's?
I think you're saying that people don't change their allegiance once they've commited to a candicate or that there aren't an awful lot of people who are, at this point, still undecided. If that's what you're saying, I disagree. One way or the other, I don't believe Huntsman stands a chance of actually getting the nomination, but I do think his support will grow to be significantly more than 2% to 3%.
Quote:
So right now, it's unclear what Huntsman is trying to do... run for Democrat ticket VP maybe?
As I've said before on this forum, my own personal feelings are that Huntsman expects Obama to be re-elected and serve for another four years, at which time both parties are going to be starting from scratch, so to speak. I'm thinking he's running this time primarily to get some name recognition for next time around. Of course he'd like to get the nomination, and I think he'll do what he can to promote himself, but I don't think he's under any great illusion that he's going to be the Republican candidate against Obama.
Well, Huntsman is down to 1 percent. Other beats him. At 3 percent Santorum more than doubles Huntsman's number so "splitting the vote"...I don't think so. If he drops out, his family will have to vote for Obama.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.