Christie/Huntsman?

[Farage]

Do you think that it could be a strong ticket?

[eric82oslo]

Do you think that it could be a strong ticket?

Definitely! Any ticket with Jon Huntsman, Condoleezza Rice or Colin Powell on it, is by definition lethal.

[Donerail]

Wouldn't happen.

[Ransom]

Could someone explain to me what Jon Huntsman brings to any presidential ticket? I'm referring to the actual awkward fish we saw in 2012, not the super hero moderate I see political junkies fantasize about on the internet.

[Mister Mets]

It may be a good ticket. It depends largely on the environment in 2016.

As a former western governor, Huntsman brings regional balance to the ticket. And his work in the Obama administration turns a Utah Republican into a figure with bipartisan credentials. And he also has some foreign policy expertise, since China is likely to come up in policy discussions.

Huntsman obviously has weaknesses. This would be a ticket with two middle-aged white guys. There is also the impression that Huntsman just doesn't like cultural conservatives. That could affect turnout, especially with some conservatives upset at Christie for hugging Obama.

[eric82oslo]

Could someone explain to me what Jon Huntsman brings to any presidential ticket? I'm referring to the actual awkward fish we saw in 2012, not the super hero moderate I see political junkies fantasize about on the internet.

He's actually an intellectual in a non-intellectual party. I think that's what makes people's eyes pop out like crazy basically. Same thing goes with the two others I mentioned, Rice and Powell. I think I would add Jeb Bush to that list as well actually, despite him being George's brother and all.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Oh sure, put two people on the ticket, who are both viewed by the party as having gotten too close to Obama one way or the other.

Thus it is a very good ticket if you want Ted Cruz and Nathan Deal to run as an independent ticket.

There are only two types of people who can be nominated by this party and have a chance of winning. They are someone of the base who realizes there is more to electorate then just them (like a Rand Paul) or someone of the establishment who respects the base as it disagrees with it (like what Romney tried to do, but he never found a way to disagree with them on anything major). You can't run a ticket that contains people who want to beat it to death with a sledge hammer, because then you won't have a base anymore. You have to play to both, you have to get the indepenents and conservative Democrats and bring the base along for the ride, because if you do one at the expense of the other you will die. Those who say you have to chose between them are trying to destroy the party and probably on purpose. When you have a divide, and you need both, the stupidest thing in the world is to pick one over the other, you have to transcend the divide.

I also think you will have a hard time with a ticket composed of people from not only the same faction of the party, but the same sub-faction (the open-borders, COC wing of the Country Club faction), of the party.

If you want balance regionally for a Chris Christie, go for someone that at least has appeal to some other faction of the party like the Social Conservatives or the limited Gov't Tea Party types or both. I would say John Thune for the former and Scott Walker for the latter group. That way at least you have someone who either voted no, or whose position is rather unknown on the immigration bill, as well, and you have someone that the base will like as well.

The days of Bush-Cheney are over. You have to bring unity to the party through the ticket and the VP has to complement and fill in the gaps of the appeal of the guy on top, especially if the top of the ticket is suspect.

[sentinel]

Do you think that it could be a strong ticket?

Definitely! Any ticket with Jon Huntsman, Condoleezza Rice or Colin Powell on it, is by definition lethal.

Any ticket with Colin Powell on it is probably lethal. Any ticket with Huntsman or Rice has perks but it doesn't equate with invincibility.

[California8429]

Half of the republicans wouldn't vote. Christie could be the nominee and win only if he has a extremely conservative VP

[Cobbler]

Am I the only one that thinks that the potential backlash from the base is greatly overestimated? I think that both Christie and Huntsman will still draw out the base should they be the nominee, especially if Mitt Romney did. I don't see evidence that they loathe either candidate so much that they'd stay home.

[eric82oslo]

Am I the only one that thinks that the potential backlash from the base is greatly overestimated? I think that both Christie and Huntsman will still draw out the base should they be the nominee, especially if Mitt Romney did. I don't see evidence that they loathe either candidate so much that they'd stay home.

I agree. If Huntsman could be elected governor of possibly the most conservative of US states, I see no reason why most tea partiers and religious nuts would prefer to rather stay home than go and cast a simple vote. If not for anything else, at least to keep the other party from winning.

[barfbag]

We've had some moderates lately in our party and they've lost. Now it's not only because they're moderates, but part of the margin they've lost by has been because conservatives haven't been motivated to vote for their candidate, only against Obama. History has shown that people can't just not like who they're voting against, even though it works for me. In 2004 the Democrats had a raging hatred for our commander in chief and they were still outnumbered on election day because Kerry didn't get the job done with motivating his base. McCain had a history of being a Democrat half of the time and the Republicans responded in poor numbers for him. Romney did a little better than the previous two mentioned candidates as far as appealing to voters, but his religion wasn't the religion of our party and he was notorious for being a RINO as governor of Massachusetts. Off topic, I think Romney had outstanding politics in Massachusetts and did a fantastic job for having to deal with 85% Democrats in his legislature. Anyways, it takes a conservative Republican to win an election for the GOP. Christie could disguise himself as being more conservative than he's been in the general election, but he'd have to actually change to win the primaries because Republican voters are just too smart and well informed for a camouflaged candidate. Jon Huntsman is too wooden and you can't convince me that his strings aren't being pulled by the Democratic Party. I mean really, when is he ever conservative? He's nothing more than a party spoiler the same as Zell Miller would be if he ran for the Democrats. Why not have Newt Gingrich switch to Democrat just so he could be different kind of Democrat in comparison with Huntsman being a "Republican." What someone calls themselves and what someone is, don't have to always be the same thing. Besides, I don't think Huntsman and Christie even know each other. Having said all this, Jon Huntsman would make a great Secretary of State.

[Cobbler]

We've had some moderates lately in our party and they've lost. Now it's not only because they're moderates, but part of the margin they've lost by has been because conservatives haven't been motivated to vote for their candidate, only against Obama. History has shown that people can't just not like who they're voting against, even though it works for me. In 2004 the Democrats had a raging hatred for our commander in chief and they were still outnumbered on election day because Kerry didn't get the job done with motivating his base. McCain had a history of being a Democrat half of the time and the Republicans responded in poor numbers for him. Romney did a little better than the previous two mentioned candidates as far as appealing to voters, but his religion wasn't the religion of our party and he was notorious for being a RINO as governor of Massachusetts. Off topic, I think Romney had outstanding politics in Massachusetts and did a fantastic job for having to deal with 85% Democrats in his legislature. Anyways, it takes a conservative Republican to win an election for the GOP. Christie could disguise himself as being more conservative than he's been in the general election, but he'd have to actually change to win the primaries because Republican voters are just too smart and well informed for a camouflaged candidate. Jon Huntsman is too wooden and you can't convince me that his strings aren't being pulled by the Democratic Party. I mean really, when is he ever conservative? He's nothing more than a party spoiler the same as Zell Miller would be if he ran for the Democrats. Why not have Newt Gingrich switch to Democrat just so he could be different kind of Democrat in comparison with Huntsman being a "Republican." What someone calls themselves and what someone is, don't have to always be the same thing. Besides, I don't think Huntsman and Christie even know each other. Having said all this, Jon Huntsman would make a great Secretary of State.

Stances like this that make me want to leave the Republican Party.

[barfbag]

We've had some moderates lately in our party and they've lost. Now it's not only because they're moderates, but part of the margin they've lost by has been because conservatives haven't been motivated to vote for their candidate, only against Obama. History has shown that people can't just not like who they're voting against, even though it works for me. In 2004 the Democrats had a raging hatred for our commander in chief and they were still outnumbered on election day because Kerry didn't get the job done with motivating his base. McCain had a history of being a Democrat half of the time and the Republicans responded in poor numbers for him. Romney did a little better than the previous two mentioned candidates as far as appealing to voters, but his religion wasn't the religion of our party and he was notorious for being a RINO as governor of Massachusetts. Off topic, I think Romney had outstanding politics in Massachusetts and did a fantastic job for having to deal with 85% Democrats in his legislature. Anyways, it takes a conservative Republican to win an election for the GOP. Christie could disguise himself as being more conservative than he's been in the general election, but he'd have to actually change to win the primaries because Republican voters are just too smart and well informed for a camouflaged candidate. Jon Huntsman is too wooden and you can't convince me that his strings aren't being pulled by the Democratic Party. I mean really, when is he ever conservative? He's nothing more than a party spoiler the same as Zell Miller would be if he ran for the Democrats. Why not have Newt Gingrich switch to Democrat just so he could be different kind of Democrat in comparison with Huntsman being a "Republican." What someone calls themselves and what someone is, don't have to always be the same thing. Besides, I don't think Huntsman and Christie even know each other. Having said all this, Jon Huntsman would make a great Secretary of State.

Stances like this that make me want to leave the Republican Party.

It takes people a while to really understand me. Sometimes I'm sarcastic and other times I come off in certain ways to make Democrats get pissy. There's no real religion of our party, but if I come out and say there is, then Democrats get upset. They're easy to fluster and take themselves way too seriously. What do you make of the motivation though? Moderates clearly do poorly in Democratic Primaries and General Elections. I'm alright with them though and think McCain and Romney would have made outstanding presidents.

[Mister Mets]

We've had some moderates lately in our party and they've lost. Now it's not only because they're moderates, but part of the margin they've lost by has been because conservatives haven't been motivated to vote for their candidate, only against Obama. History has shown that people can't just not like who they're voting against, even though it works for me. In 2004 the Democrats had a raging hatred for our commander in chief and they were still outnumbered on election day because Kerry didn't get the job done with motivating his base. McCain had a history of being a Democrat half of the time and the Republicans responded in poor numbers for him. Romney did a little better than the previous two mentioned candidates as far as appealing to voters, but his religion wasn't the religion of our party and he was notorious for being a RINO as governor of Massachusetts. Off topic, I think Romney had outstanding politics in Massachusetts and did a fantastic job for having to deal with 85% Democrats in his legislature. Anyways, it takes a conservative Republican to win an election for the GOP. Christie could disguise himself as being more conservative than he's been in the general election, but he'd have to actually change to win the primaries because Republican voters are just too smart and well informed for a camouflaged candidate. Jon Huntsman is too wooden and you can't convince me that his strings aren't being pulled by the Democratic Party. I mean really, when is he ever conservative? He's nothing more than a party spoiler the same as Zell Miller would be if he ran for the Democrats. Why not have Newt Gingrich switch to Democrat just so he could be different kind of Democrat in comparison with Huntsman being a "Republican." What someone calls themselves and what someone is, don't have to always be the same thing. Besides, I don't think Huntsman and Christie even know each other. Having said all this, Jon Huntsman would make a great Secretary of State.

Stances like this that make me want to leave the Republican Party.

It takes people a while to really understand me. Sometimes I'm sarcastic and other times I come off in certain ways to make Democrats get pissy. There's no real religion of our party, but if I come out and say there is, then Democrats get upset. They're easy to fluster and take themselves way too seriously. What do you make of the motivation though? Moderates clearly do poorly in Democratic Primaries and General Elections. I'm alright with them though and think McCain and Romney would have made outstanding presidents.

I think the argument that moderate candidates do worse is overblown.

With Dole, McCain and Romney, there's a Catch-22. Republicans tend to nominate moderates in elections that the party is likely to lose. It's been a while since there was a Goldwater style blowout.

Romney did better than many conservatives running in open statewide elections. He won Indiana by ten points, while Mike Pence won by three. And let's not talk of the other statewide candidate in Indiana.

[barfbag]

We've had some moderates lately in our party and they've lost. Now it's not only because they're moderates, but part of the margin they've lost by has been because conservatives haven't been motivated to vote for their candidate, only against Obama. History has shown that people can't just not like who they're voting against, even though it works for me. In 2004 the Democrats had a raging hatred for our commander in chief and they were still outnumbered on election day because Kerry didn't get the job done with motivating his base. McCain had a history of being a Democrat half of the time and the Republicans responded in poor numbers for him. Romney did a little better than the previous two mentioned candidates as far as appealing to voters, but his religion wasn't the religion of our party and he was notorious for being a RINO as governor of Massachusetts. Off topic, I think Romney had outstanding politics in Massachusetts and did a fantastic job for having to deal with 85% Democrats in his legislature. Anyways, it takes a conservative Republican to win an election for the GOP. Christie could disguise himself as being more conservative than he's been in the general election, but he'd have to actually change to win the primaries because Republican voters are just too smart and well informed for a camouflaged candidate. Jon Huntsman is too wooden and you can't convince me that his strings aren't being pulled by the Democratic Party. I mean really, when is he ever conservative? He's nothing more than a party spoiler the same as Zell Miller would be if he ran for the Democrats. Why not have Newt Gingrich switch to Democrat just so he could be different kind of Democrat in comparison with Huntsman being a "Republican." What someone calls themselves and what someone is, don't have to always be the same thing. Besides, I don't think Huntsman and Christie even know each other. Having said all this, Jon Huntsman would make a great Secretary of State.

Stances like this that make me want to leave the Republican Party.

It takes people a while to really understand me. Sometimes I'm sarcastic and other times I come off in certain ways to make Democrats get pissy. There's no real religion of our party, but if I come out and say there is, then Democrats get upset. They're easy to fluster and take themselves way too seriously. What do you make of the motivation though? Moderates clearly do poorly in Democratic Primaries and General Elections. I'm alright with them though and think McCain and Romney would have made outstanding presidents.

I think the argument that moderate candidates do worse is overblown.

With Dole, McCain and Romney, there's a Catch-22. Republicans tend to nominate moderates in elections that the party is likely to lose. It's been a while since there was a Goldwater style blowout.

Romney did better than many conservatives running in open statewide elections. He won Indiana by ten points, while Mike Pence won by three. And let's not talk of the other statewide candidate in Indiana.

Oh this hits the nail on the head. You're very correct. I've said all along moderate Republicans are very underrated. What I should have stated was Democratic moderates do poorly in primaries and therefore don't make it to the national election. Republican moderates do poorly in national elections, but like you said it's been more when they're nominated than the candidates themselves. Whether we nominate a moderate or a conservative, the liberal media will turn them into the devil so we might as well nominate who really matches our ideology and principles. I happen to have been very pleased with McCain and Romney as our nominees but a lot of conservatives weren't or at least not at first. In 1996 and 2008 we weren't going to win because of the nature of the times. 2012 we had no business losing after the Fort Hood Massacre where Obama refused to use the word "terrorist," Obamacare, the BP oil spill made Obama look like a total mad man wanting to know "whose ass to kick," the finding of Bin Laden just happened to be on the 8 year anniversary of Bush landing on the aircraft carrier and on Holocaust Remembrance Day, he told people who employ others they "didn't build that bridge" to throw a bone to his unemployed base, and worst of all he let people die in Ben-Ghazi so he wouldn't have to deal with criticism from an international crisis while running for re-election. Did I mention the unemployment rate was worse than in 2004 when Bush was re-elected?

[Rocky Rockefeller]

I would Love to see that ticket!

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

We've had some moderates lately in our party and they've lost. Now it's not only because they're moderates, but part of the margin they've lost by has been because conservatives haven't been motivated to vote for their candidate, only against Obama. History has shown that people can't just not like who they're voting against, even though it works for me. In 2004 the Democrats had a raging hatred for our commander in chief and they were still outnumbered on election day because Kerry didn't get the job done with motivating his base. McCain had a history of being a Democrat half of the time and the Republicans responded in poor numbers for him. Romney did a little better than the previous two mentioned candidates as far as appealing to voters, but his religion wasn't the religion of our party and he was notorious for being a RINO as governor of Massachusetts. Off topic, I think Romney had outstanding politics in Massachusetts and did a fantastic job for having to deal with 85% Democrats in his legislature. Anyways, it takes a conservative Republican to win an election for the GOP. Christie could disguise himself as being more conservative than he's been in the general election, but he'd have to actually change to win the primaries because Republican voters are just too smart and well informed for a camouflaged candidate. Jon Huntsman is too wooden and you can't convince me that his strings aren't being pulled by the Democratic Party. I mean really, when is he ever conservative? He's nothing more than a party spoiler the same as Zell Miller would be if he ran for the Democrats. Why not have Newt Gingrich switch to Democrat just so he could be different kind of Democrat in comparison with Huntsman being a "Republican." What someone calls themselves and what someone is, don't have to always be the same thing. Besides, I don't think Huntsman and Christie even know each other. Having said all this, Jon Huntsman would make a great Secretary of State.

Stances like this that make me want to leave the Republican Party.

It takes people a while to really understand me. Sometimes I'm sarcastic and other times I come off in certain ways to make Democrats get pissy. There's no real religion of our party, but if I come out and say there is, then Democrats get upset. They're easy to fluster and take themselves way too seriously. What do you make of the motivation though? Moderates clearly do poorly in Democratic Primaries and General Elections. I'm alright with them though and think McCain and Romney would have made outstanding presidents.

I think the argument that moderate candidates do worse is overblown.

With Dole, McCain and Romney, there's a Catch-22. Republicans tend to nominate moderates in elections that the party is likely to lose. It's been a while since there was a Goldwater style blowout.

Romney did better than many conservatives running in open statewide elections. He won Indiana by ten points, while Mike Pence won by three. And let's not talk of the other statewide candidate in Indiana.

Just because Obama lost Indiana didn't mean he didn't aid statewide candidates. Remember as Obama is from Illinois his GOTV activities for Hoosier Dems that and Murdock's stupid choice of words Don't forget the Dems actually won TWO statewide races. The second one being for our head of public instruction (superintendent of schools) so Obama did have coat tails inspite of defeat in Indiana.

[NHI]

Christie/Huntsman would be perfect, bring some sanity back to the GOP.

[barfbag]

We've had some moderates lately in our party and they've lost. Now it's not only because they're moderates, but part of the margin they've lost by has been because conservatives haven't been motivated to vote for their candidate, only against Obama. History has shown that people can't just not like who they're voting against, even though it works for me. In 2004 the Democrats had a raging hatred for our commander in chief and they were still outnumbered on election day because Kerry didn't get the job done with motivating his base. McCain had a history of being a Democrat half of the time and the Republicans responded in poor numbers for him. Romney did a little better than the previous two mentioned candidates as far as appealing to voters, but his religion wasn't the religion of our party and he was notorious for being a RINO as governor of Massachusetts. Off topic, I think Romney had outstanding politics in Massachusetts and did a fantastic job for having to deal with 85% Democrats in his legislature. Anyways, it takes a conservative Republican to win an election for the GOP. Christie could disguise himself as being more conservative than he's been in the general election, but he'd have to actually change to win the primaries because Republican voters are just too smart and well informed for a camouflaged candidate. Jon Huntsman is too wooden and you can't convince me that his strings aren't being pulled by the Democratic Party. I mean really, when is he ever conservative? He's nothing more than a party spoiler the same as Zell Miller would be if he ran for the Democrats. Why not have Newt Gingrich switch to Democrat just so he could be different kind of Democrat in comparison with Huntsman being a "Republican." What someone calls themselves and what someone is, don't have to always be the same thing. Besides, I don't think Huntsman and Christie even know each other. Having said all this, Jon Huntsman would make a great Secretary of State.

Stances like this that make me want to leave the Republican Party.

It takes people a while to really understand me. Sometimes I'm sarcastic and other times I come off in certain ways to make Democrats get pissy. There's no real religion of our party, but if I come out and say there is, then Democrats get upset. They're easy to fluster and take themselves way too seriously. What do you make of the motivation though? Moderates clearly do poorly in Democratic Primaries and General Elections. I'm alright with them though and think McCain and Romney would have made outstanding presidents.

I think the argument that moderate candidates do worse is overblown.

With Dole, McCain and Romney, there's a Catch-22. Republicans tend to nominate moderates in elections that the party is likely to lose. It's been a while since there was a Goldwater style blowout.

Romney did better than many conservatives running in open statewide elections. He won Indiana by ten points, while Mike Pence won by three. And let's not talk of the other statewide candidate in Indiana.

Just because Obama lost Indiana didn't mean he didn't aid statewide candidates. Remember as Obama is from Illinois his GOTV activities for Hoosier Dems that and Murdock's stupid choice of words Don't forget the Dems actually won TWO statewide races. The second one being for our head of public instruction (superintendent of schools) so Obama did have coat tails inspite of defeat in Indiana.

Coat tails yes, but Indiana isn't going to become much more purple than where it's at now.

[Miles]

Yes; for the Republicans, this would be my favorite ticket.

[barfbag]

Barfbag: "I mean really, when is he ever conservative?"


Well gosh, I mean, he was elected, then re-elected, Governor of Utah, the most socially conservative state in the Union, despite being iffy on abortion and isn't a gay-hating asshole like Santorum or Bachmann.
He cut taxes by $407 million and balanced the budget, Utah was 4th in job creation during his tenure and a top 3 state to do business in.
     - Despite the increase in spending from $16.7 billion to $22.8 billion, it fell as a % of GDP from 20.22% in 2004 to 19.76% in 2008(but it did increase in 2009 due to the recession).
In 2001, he launched trade negotiations in Doha(Free trade is a Republican thing, no?).
He supports Cap & Trade, which was devised under Reagan and GHWB signed into law.

2 of his sons are serving in Afghanistan, which is more than most Republican chickenhawks who would love to see thousands more of our people die in endless wars so military contractors can continue to rake in billions of dollars can say(Cheney, Bush, Romney, etc).


Simply because he doesn’t hate gays, embraces science, and doesn’t violently hate Obama doesn’t mean he’s a RINO. In fact he comes off as the very essence of a 21st-Century Republican who could deal serious damage to the Democrats in 2016 by competing with minorities and the youth vote. A pro-business, socially moderate, fiscal conservative who is qualified to deal with China (which is already viewed our main competitor) in an increasingly multi-polar world. I trust him very much, and will be happy to vote for him in 2016.


But hey whatever, just keep nominating psycho conservatives and keep losing, eventually a Dem President will mess up or the economy will crash, but I wouldn’t bet my cards on that happening for a long time.

Yes he was governor of Utah and watching the 2012 primaries made his politics in Utah look completely fake. Please explain to me in depth detail how being against gay marriage makes someone a hating asshole. If someone doesn't agree with you, they're an asshole? You said that conservatives nominees are psycho? The healthcare bill that passed when Romney was governor makes him a psycho conservative? Your response sounds like hate speech. I said a lot more than what you've quoted. I think Huntsman could do a good job on foreign policy and would be a great secretary of state, but he seems too wooden and sour to fit the presidency. I will fully support him if he were to ever represent the GOP in the presidential election, but I just don't know about him sometimes. Please don't take things out of context. I don't know what being an asshole or hating gays has to do with this topic of conversation.

[Supersonic]

It's good in the sense that I love it.

Though it's bad for social conservatives.

I would prefer Clinton/Rice, that would be the dream.

[Link]

Oh this hits the nail on the head. You're very correct. I've said all along moderate Republicans are very underrated.

How would you know what a moderate Republican is?  Have you read some of the stuff you've posted?

In 1996 and 2008 we weren't going to win because of the nature of the times. 2012 we had no business losing after the Fort Hood Massacre where Obama refused to use the word "terrorist," Obamacare, the BP oil spill made Obama look like a total mad man wanting to know "whose ass to kick," the finding of Bin Laden just happened to be on the 8 year anniversary of Bush landing on the aircraft carrier and on Holocaust Remembrance Day, he told people who employ others they "didn't build that bridge" to throw a bone to his unemployed base, and worst of all he let people die in Ben-Ghazi so he wouldn't have to deal with criticism from an international crisis while running for re-election. Did I mention the unemployment rate was worse than in 2004 when Bush was re-elected?

You have a very strange and right wing way of looking at the world.  At election time most of that stuff either wasn't being discussed by people I know or was being discussed in very different terms.  If you think the average American was going into the voting booth in 2012 upset because the President was displeased with BP's reckless behavior then we know you are firmly part of the far right.  The far right told us dril!  Drill!  Drill! Right?  So what did Obama do?  After he won his first term he started to piss off his environmentalist base and consider opening up more off shore drilling.  How did big Oil and the Republican party thank him?  And you think people think he is crazy for being pissed off?

One good thing is that idiotic drilling nonsense has died down.  I'm sure you were right their screaming drill, drill, drill.  You guys demand this reckless policy and then you blame Obama when one of your oil cronies blows the whole thing up.

[TarHeelDem]

Yes, I'm a hardcore liberal and I can at least respect both of them. However, I'm not sure they have the dynamic quality needed to win a presidential election. A calculated campaign based on moderation and common sense leadership could go a long way though.