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.
I really am writing this out of pure curiosity. After listening to the "talking heads" on both sides of the equation go on and on about how Romney is not wanted and both Perry and Cain have messed up so bad that they can't get elected so now Romeny is the only hope of the Republicans, I can't help but wonder......why do none of them mention Huntsman?
Just as an outsider looking in, it would appear to me that Huntsman is the most qualified of any of the Republican candidates and would give Obama the most trouble in a general election. So, why is he ignored?
I agree. Huntsman far exceeds the field. My only guess is that he doesn't have the right backing behind him. He's not endorsed by the right people, people who would influence the media. He doesn't have enough money. Damn shame. It really is very obvious that Romney, Cain, Perry, Paul, Bachmann, and Limbaugh don't even belong in the race.
I think you might be off by a few zeroes there. Obama's '08 campaign raised about $700 million with an m and are expecting to pass the billion with a b mark this time around. Still a disgusting amount of money.
The trillion+ includes the indirect bailouts that the Obama administration has given to the Fed to loan to those that they deem worthy without congressional oversight. The irony of the Hope and Change president being the bought and paid for.
I agree. Huntsman far exceeds the field. My only guess is that he doesn't have the right backing behind him. He's not endorsed by the right people, people who would influence the media. He doesn't have enough money. Damn shame. It really is very obvious that Romney, Cain, Perry, Paul, Bachmann, and Limbaugh don't even belong in the race.
Huntsman could self fund if he wanted..afterall his family are billionaires.
There used to be laws to prevent monopolies; the idea of having only a few choices is anti-capitalist. Family farms, small restaurants and neighborhood grocery stores, bakeries and other small businesses are virtually gone, but you can go to any Wal-Mart and find all of the above and much more. The economy cannot thrive without competition, without much choice in terms of where our products and produce originate...they should be originating here, and not in China or Guatemala, or elsewhere. And we should have more choices than either a) Wal-Mart or b) Sam's Club. Big whopping choice. Huntsman's position resonates with those of us who have seen our Main Streets go empty because small businesses can't compete with the shabbily made and very inexpensive goods made elsewhere, or imported food that's contaminated.
Huntsman and you share the same folly in that you believe monopolies are the creation of the marketplace which is never the case. The government creates monopolies through favorable tax breaks, regulations, and legislation all with the purpose of stacking the deck in favor of whomever donates the most to their campaigns. Using more government intervention into the marketplace to cure an ill created by government intervention in the marketplace is akin to hiring the fox to investigate the sudden disappearance of chickens on your farm.
I really am writing this out of pure curiosity. After listening to the "talking heads" on both sides of the equation go on and on about how Romney is not wanted and both Perry and Cain have messed up so bad that they can't get elected so now Romeny is the only hope of the Republicans, I can't help but wonder......why do none of them mention Huntsman?
Just as an outsider looking in, it would appear to me that Huntsman is the most qualified of any of the Republican candidates and would give Obama the most trouble in a general election. So, why is he ignored?
Short time governor a smaller state in the West. Mormon and not evangelical. Not known beforehand on the national stage. If Cain were mormon, he wouldn't be getting traction like Romney does either.
Huntsman and you share the same folly in that you believe monopolies are the creation of the marketplace which is never the case. The government creates monopolies through favorable tax breaks, regulations, and legislation all with the purpose of stacking the deck in favor of whomever donates the most to their campaigns. Using more government intervention into the marketplace to cure an ill created by government intervention in the marketplace is akin to hiring the fox to investigate the sudden disappearance of chickens on your farm.
Sorry, NorthGA; I was too beat to give your post the kind of response it deserves. Anyway, had a cup of tea...here goes.
I essentially agree with your stance that the government creates monopolies and in what manner, but would add that deregulation is part of the problem as well; as the laws preventing the growth of monopolies were struck down, we saw the growth of Big Pharma, Big Agra and of course, Big Oil. To take the discussion back to the differing philosophies of Hamilton and Jefferson, I find that I lean toward Jefferson; perhaps it's because I live in a rural area and have seen first-hand the loss of family farms and the closure of many small businesses who can't compete with the area Wal-Marts and Sam's Clubs. I would be remiss if I didn't mention the inordinate influence of lobbyists as well. The current rate of joblessness highlights the fact that there is a great accumulation of wealth, but far too little reinvestment in jobs in America that provide both products and produce of American origin. I'm mindful that supply and demand shows that we will buy lower-priced goods and foods from other countries because they're so readily available. Do I think that this situation will change in the near future? Not in a pig's eye. I do, however, believe that neither economies nor societies are static, and am curious to see how this global problem will play out. It would be quite interesting if American citizens began to demand goods and services made here, by their neighbors, families and friends. I hope you can make some sense of this.
2. Because he sent President Obama a handwritten note saying Obama is a remarkable leader and in case Obama didn't get the point, he underlined remarkable. I'm still waiting for some competitor or debate moderator to ask him exactly what he thought was remarkable about President Obama if he's criticizing him now. However, he has been so low in the polls it could just be no one thinks it's worth the effort.
3. He also said Hillary Clinton was personable and charming and people may consider that a judgment flaw since I doubt her own family would use those words to describe her.
4. Or, people may view 2 and 3 above as an example of sucking up for a job.
Thank you for the best LOL of the day ! To the point....
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.
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's position resonates with those of us who have seen our Main Streets go empty because small businesses can't compete with the shabbily made and very inexpensive goods made elsewhere, or imported food that's contaminated.
