Ryan/Huntsman in 2016?

[TNF]

I don't see Huntsman being on any national ticket. Too moderate, and he'd piss off the base.

Huntsman is to the right of Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum on economic issues.

Just let that sink in for a moment.

[afleitch]

I don't see Huntsman being on any national ticket. Too moderate, and he'd piss off the base.

Huntsman is to the right of Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum on economic issues.

Just let that sink in for a moment.

But he's happy with gays marrying and women using the pill. That's what would kill him.

[Sol]

I don't see Huntsman being on any national ticket. Too moderate, and he'd piss off the base.

Huntsman is to the right of Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum on economic issues.

Just let that sink in for a moment.

Yeah, but that's not what the base cares about. What they don't want a VP candidate who supports civil unions. He's too moderate on social issues.

[Maxwell]

Huntsman/Ryan, for sure. I wouldn't like Ryan at the front of the ticket.

[5280]

Huntsman is the future of the GOP if they play their cards right. Social-cons needs to form their own party.

[Cryptic]

Huntsman is the future of the GOP if they play their cards right. Social-cons needs to form their own party.

I actual suspect you're right, in the sense Huntsman's positions will become more dominate in the GOP in another 10-20 years.  While the social-cons still hold power, they are on the decline. 

As for Huntsman himself making it onto a ticket, maybe.  I'm a little skeptical, since I feel he needed to get a little more exposure in the primaries earlier this year to build a foundation to work off of.  Also, as I said, the social-cons still hold power, enough to deny him the nomination.  I think we'll see a GOP nominee in the mold of Huntsman sometime in the 2020's, but not necessarily Huntsman himself.   

Ryan would be a mistake to head a national ticket.  Now, I am a liberal and someone who votes Democratic and obviously have a number of ideological disagreements with Ryan.  But even if I was a Republican, I still think I'd be against Ryan simply because there are stronger, more charismatic candidates in the possible 2016 lineup, like Chris Christie and Marco Rubio.  Ryan comes off too stiff and doesn't really seem inspiring, at least in my opinion. 

[TJ in Oregon]

Huntsman is just obviously not a team player. At least in the way he has carried himself in public, he has shown himself to be culturally closer to the people we should be opposing. There are acceptable and unacceptable ways to criticize the party. For example, Jeb Bush and Lindsay Graham, both excellent Republicans, give very good critiques about the position of many GOPers on immigration.

Huntsman, in his campaign, went out of his way to essentially belittle the rank and file in order to draw support from a narrow group of cultural leftists. He is completely disqualified from being the standard-bearer of our party.

In short, no matter what his policies are, I can't view him as "one of us".

^^^This. Huntsman is a great candidate as long as you agree with him on every issue, but he comes off pointed and harsh, so much so that it's hard to watch him give an opinion on any issue I don't completely agree with him on and not view him as bitter and antagonistic.

I'd obviously still vote for Huntsman, I just don't think he'd be a good candidate. He does well with wonks and no one else. He'd be a media favorite/crash again. If you guys think Romney was bad at connecting with people then we need to realize Huntsman would be even worse.

[Mister Mets]

I could see it.

Paul Ryan would be a strong candidate in a 2016 Republican presidential primary, due to his name recognition, resume (Congressman since 1998, Chairman of the Budget Committee) and credibility with conservatives.

Huntsman would be a solid running mate. As a former Governor with foreign policy and private business experience, he's strong where Ryan is weak. And he has some bipartisan credibility that would help get some voters who supported Obama in this cycle and the last one.

That said, there would be a lot of competition, when some of the candidates who may not have been seen as experienced enough in the current cycle have gotten reelected as Governor, or are finishing their first terms as Senators.

[pbrower2a]

Maybe if it was switched to Huntsman/Ryan, but I'd prefer someone other than Ryan.

Huntsman is not going to make the mistake of nominating an active member of the House of Corporate Lobbyists.

[BM]

Is this the least likable ticket of nerds ever created?

Go for it!

[Averroës Nix]

Is this the least likable ticket of nerds ever created?

Good post.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Not supporting any ticket with Huntsman on it.

Thankfully, you're Canadian.

Glad to see the forum has come around.

I agree with R/R 2012.

Again, I don't understand the fact that he likes Romney but hates Huntsman.

A lot of people love Huntsman because he's a "true conservative" or something based on his record, but it's hard to not govern as a conservative in Utah. Plus, I don't really consider myself an American conservative, so it's an irrelevant argument to me.

Huntsman is just obviously not a team player. At least in the way he has carried himself in public, he has shown himself to be culturally closer to the people we should be opposing. There are acceptable and unacceptable ways to criticize the party. For example, Jeb Bush and Lindsay Graham, both excellent Republicans, give very good critiques about the position of many GOPers on immigration.

Huntsman, in his campaign, went out of his way to essentially belittle the rank and file in order to draw support from a narrow group of cultural leftists. He is completely disqualified from being the standard-bearer of our party.

In short, no matter what his policies are, I can't view him as "one of us".

Because he believes in evolution?

It's the way he talks about it.

I like Huntsman generally and was rooting for him in the primaries, but I completely understand where culturally conservative critics of Huntsman are coming from. I do find this irritating about him, but I don't find it disqualifying.

[Scabr]

Huntsman will not be on any national ticket, except for possibly the Democratic one, his entire campaign was based on being an utter prick to the actual people in the Republican Party, on how Republicans are too opposed to science, we 're not civil enough, on how we need to act like adults blah blah blah. If he were on the ticket, I would probably have to vote Libertarian. His entire campaign was based on being a MSNBC Republican.

Ryan is of course, awesome.

Huntsman is the future of the GOP if they play their cards right. Social-cons needs to form their own party.

You're a fool if you think Republicans can win without social conservatives.

[freefair]

how Republicans are too opposed to science, we 're not civil enough, on how we need to act like adults

You're a fool if you think Republicans can win without social conservatives.

As a right winger myself, all of these accusations are true about the Federal Party (though less so about many of the state ones). I find it funny that you'd have changed your vote to a secular, pro science, civil party whose voters probably have the highest average IQ's of any US party's voters (it correlates with social liberalism , and support for free enterprise tends to come from those smart enough to make it in such a system)

And as you sure as hell can't win with SocioCons, why not just try for one election to reach out to social libertraians (you didn't win legitimately in 2000, 2004 was a squeaker, and the last times the Federal GOP won landslides was 1980-88, when Conservatism was Fiscal or Foreign Policy.

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

The GOP will either try to play to social conservatism more and bring in the Hispanics, or they will moderate and try to win back the suburbs.  They have to do something, because another cycle of the current extremist platform and they will turn into a non-factor.  They're too far right, and I don't understand why anyone could have a hard time seeing this. 

Huntsman is too far to the right on economic issues, but I like him personally and he's a prog rock fan, which means he's AT LEAST getting a good look from me on the national stage. 

EDIT: and he supporter a federal minimum wage increase?  He a Mormon Utah governor and he'd actually have a decent shot at my vote against a Democrat I don't like.  If that doesn't tell you the GOP would be wise to run him, I don't know what would.