Today Governor Jon Huntsman put out the framework of his economic policy. The four main issues that the Governor tackles are: tax reform, regulatory reform, energy independence and trade policy. Read it here (warning it’s a pdf document).
I for one am glad that Huntsman and soon Governor Mitt Romney will be outlining their policy proposals more in-depth. It’s probably naïve, but here’s hoping that some of the race for the Republican nomination centers on ideas and issues instead of name calling and claims of “I’m the best-est conservative ever.”
August 31st, 2011 at 7:08 pm
It’s probably naïve, but here’s hoping that some of the race for the Republican nomination centers on ideas and issues instead of name calling and claims of “I’m the best-est conservative ever.”
A conservative would never say such a thing, and since you said it (while I, on the other hand, did not), I can only surmise that I am more conservative than you are.
RINO.
Good overall plan by Huntsman. It is ambitious, but at least he has a detailed plan out there for people to evaluate. I’m not quite sure how the three-rate tax plan will be able to move through Congress; they have so many cut-outs and carve-outs to favor specific industries/groups/etc that “tinkering around the edges” is the only feasible alternative. I’d like to see a broad-based plan like this become a reality, but I’m too cynical and jaded to believe it will ever happen.
August 31st, 2011 at 7:12 pm
It’s actually a strong, pro-growth, thoughtful plan. The guy’s got serious conservative policy credentials – it’s just a shame he got sucked into the John Weaver Vortex of Destruction. The candidate has been horribly ill-served by his campaign – but, of course, he must take responsibility for that. However, if a great president a great campaign makes, we’d already be carving BHO’s image on Mt. Rushmore.
I’m still holding out hope that Huntsman is a factor in this campaign. He’s got something to offer.
August 31st, 2011 at 7:12 pm
1
It could happen if Huntsman campaigned as president against the opposing members in their home districts the way Reagan did.
August 31st, 2011 at 7:15 pm
#1:
Lol; if I had a nickel every time someone actually meant calling me a RINO, I could balance the budget myself.
As for the tax issue, I think that a GOP Congress and President could pass a major reform. It probably wouldn’t be as ambition as the Governor’s proposal, but I think there is enough political will out there for some type of big tax reform.
August 31st, 2011 at 7:28 pm
It’s hard to guess, off-hand, what the math looks like, but this at LOOKS more reasonable than Pawlenty’s proposed tax reform- closer to revenue neutrality. And I have to say, it takes genuine, as opposed to fake (I’m thinking of Pawlenty here), courage to get rid of popular deductions like the Mortgage Interest Rate Deduction and the Charitable Giving Deduction. If Huntsman mattered, I’d be pretty excited right now.
August 31st, 2011 at 7:28 pm
At first blush, it looks like he’s adopting much of the Simpson-Bowles Commission’s proposals. Good for him. Lower marginal rates, extensive code revision, and higher revenues.
August 31st, 2011 at 7:31 pm
#2 – David,
Good point. I’m not sure why he hooked up with Weaver, especially after mismanaging McCain’s campaign so badly in ’07 that McCain almost had to leave the race.
#3 – MC,
I suppose that is true, too. Has any president done that since Reagan? I don’t remember Bush (either one) or Clinton really doing it that much. Maybe Reagan was just more effective with it.
#4 – Jonathan,
It generally seems like there is a will out there to do a lot of these things, but then very rarely do such changes materialize. I suppose that is a good thing, as I do not think many people (especially conservatives) really like massive institutional changes. You’re probably right that some sort of large tax reform could be implemented, but I’m sure it would be one heck of a fight that would make the Obamacare debate look like tiddlywinks. As I said before, I’m just too jaded and cynical.
August 31st, 2011 at 7:35 pm
Awesome rundown by Huntsman. I can’t imagine any of the Fire Eaters, for all of their faux courage, making detailed proposals like that, that people can take shots at.
Anyone who can read through those proposals and say Huntsman is anything but conservative is off his rocker.
August 31st, 2011 at 7:43 pm
#7:
One of the other commentators (I think it’s David but I could be wrong) has mentioned the need for stability at the national level. We’ve had 2, soon to be 3 wave elections in a row. These wild swings back and forth aren’t terribly healthy for democracy. So I agree that massive institutional changes should be approached with caution. Once something that deals with taxes and entitlements passes (like the Ryan Plan or the Huntsman Plan) that puts us on a fiscally sustainable path that should be it. After that, the GOP should try as much as possible to consolidate those changes instead of trying to change everything.
August 31st, 2011 at 7:53 pm
This makes me lose some respect for Huntsman. A “Jobs Plan” should be at least primarily about putting people to work now and I don’t see any proposals that do that. It would take years to even get a third of some of these proposals through congress.
August 31st, 2011 at 7:59 pm
#9:
Very true. I hope that should the GOP ever get something as ambitious as the Ryan plan passed and signed into law that they would spend the next several months walking on eggshells in relation to nearly every other issue.
August 31st, 2011 at 8:02 pm
Huntsman’s biggest problem is that his cultural cues are antithetical to the GOP base. This is just as bad as having Palin/Perry/Bachmann cultural cues that only appeal to the GOP base. Huntsman is a casual member of his religion with an Aristocratic vibe, and his delivery in the midst of confrontational settings, such as at the last debate, tends to give the appearance that the governor is not comfortable with an adversarial proceeding, which feeds the meme that Huntsman is a trust fund kid who can’t get his slacks dirty and who finds raising his voice to be in violation of his sense of propriety. None of these traits match up with today’s Perry-style GOP base voter.
Had Christie opted to run, he would have brought to the table cultural cues that are broadly acceptable both to the GOP base and to swing voters. He’s got the tough schtick down, but in a working-class Yankee sort of way, not in a pistol-waving Southerner manner.
August 31st, 2011 at 8:10 pm
#12 – great point. People (from both sides of the aisle) look at Huntsman’s style and think “liberal/squish.” But his record is anything but.
Sadly, too many in the GOP judge a candidate’s conservative creds by just how loudly and angrily they can denounce Obama. It’s silly, and in the end may be the real influence of Limbaugh and the talk radio/tea party right.
August 31st, 2011 at 8:30 pm
There’s some very good stuff in there, in particular fundamental tax reform and simplification. Many of the bits regarding regulations are very good and could — contra PabloZed — be pushed forward within executive branch agencies by changing policies for energy and financial regulations. Other bits are rather vague and fall short of the requisite boldness to promote growth.
The biggest stumbling block isn’t some caricatured cultural cues. It is the lack of charisma and a more discernible persona that can be conveyed through video and audio media. He isn’t impeded by Romney’s utter lack of charm and otherwise animatronic characteristics. But there is no obvious “animal spirit” that softens opponents and rivals before any negotiating has even begun. Some folks are natural born salesmen on a broad scale and to complete strangers, a la Huckabee or Clinton or Reagan. Huntsman just doesn’t have that discernible but undefinable spark.
August 31st, 2011 at 8:42 pm
This is an excellent plan. And if Huntsman had a regional or an ideological base of any significance I would be impressed by it. As it stands it is a good plan without anyone with the political capital to implement it.
Good ideas are cheap. There is no shortage of good ideas.
August 31st, 2011 at 8:50 pm
Dave G,
For a while I’ve thought of Huntsman as an “NPR Conservative”.
At the moment, I fear that is the extent of his support…..
August 31st, 2011 at 8:53 pm
….and yes, he does have a bit of an aristocratic air to him. It probably has a much to do with natural temperament and years in diplomacy as anything else.
But that doesn’t bother me at all. In fact, I much prefer it to the pistol waving and boot stomping, though I know I’m in a minority in this party.
And YES, I did adamantly support the only candidate to cook squirrel in a popper.
August 31st, 2011 at 9:05 pm
Some points about Huntsman:
- Didn’t really stick out at the Iowa debate. He and Cain received the fewest questions, and Fox geared the debate around Romney (the front runner), T-Paw, and Bachmann. Santorum got press for challenging Paul. Newt got press for criticizing Fox News.
- Huntsman’s poll numbers are in the 1%-2% range for one simple reason: he worked for Obama. Whenever you work for the enemy, people get suspicious. Things got worse, when Huntsman comes out in support of evolution and man-made global warming, and then implies that Perry and Bachmann are right-wing extremists. If he can convince Republicans that he supports their values, his poll numbers will climb up.
- Huntsman’s goal is pretty simple: Win or place very high in NH, and use that state as a springboard for SC, Florida, and so forth. You see, the National polls are irrelevant. Once you place high in either NH or Iowa, you’re immediately going to place high in the other states.
August 31st, 2011 at 9:06 pm
OT: Not just for the sake of a kumbaya moment where we’re all united here, but I’m wondering if anyone else is as bemusedly annoyed at our current POTUS’s gambit of staging his proposed speech before a — rare — joint session of congress at the very time planned for the next GOP debate.
Anyone gonna do an outraged FPP on that? Can we talk about outrageous? Why, of all possible dates, would Bam decide on short notice to change his original plan to announce his jobs initiative from Sept 6 to Sept 7 right at debate time? Isn’t it obvious?
This POTUS has consistently pulled bizarre stunts and used unconventional venues to play politics leveraging that office and at times — like the million-dollar Canadian-built bus tour through the heartland recently — misappropriated traditions at taxpayer expense without so much as a peep from the media who supposedly comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. Remember how the Bamster used his first Oval Office address? To denounce BP belatedly for the oil spill while blaring out post-modernist, pie-in-the-sky greenie talking points about green jobs and evil carbon dioxide, the planets plant food.
His first official POTUS trip abroad was to promote Chicago for the Olympics, which flopped at some grandiose price to taxpayers and American prestige worldwide. He celebrated and memorialized “Navy corpse-men” under his command. He used TelePrompTers in an elementary school and in televised remarks without a live audience. But these events were more embarrassing than sneakily corrupt.
But using a joint session on such short notice? With such coincidental prime-time overlap?
Any idea as to what the administration hopes to achieve? Will the GOP House or some filibustering Senator stop it? And what would be the political cost of doing so?
This administration constantly does some flying-by-the-seat-of-their-pants stunt and loses. But every now and then they score an improbable win, not least due to the lack of media scrutiny, such as POTUS addressing the GOP retreat on live TV or holding health care reform negotiations before live cameras.
I figure Barry will be reelected thanks to his high office’s natural advantages. But will someone finally call him out for this latest cynical and political game?
August 31st, 2011 at 9:12 pm
Marque,
Yeah, it was more pettiness from Obama, like when he gratuitously told Republicans to get on the back of the bus, because he won.
But apparently, he can’t hold this in the House without the House’s permission, and he doesn’t have that. Boehner already said they can’t do it Wednesday, and helpfully suggested Thursday (the first night of the NFL regular season).
August 31st, 2011 at 9:16 pm
Sorry to threadjack, but this is newsworthy.
Looks like a Pro-Bachmann super pac has taken out an ad in South Carolina hammering Perry for doubling the size of government in Texas and running up the debt.
Soon the mask will start to peel away….
Watch the ad at Politico.
Link: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/62450.html
POLITICO’s Molly Ball reports that the pro-Bachmann super PAC “Keep
Conservatives United” says it’s airing this anti-Rick Perry ad in South
Carolina, a spot that takes aim at the Texas governor’s spending record
and hits him with this: “He’s supposed to be the Tea Party guy?”
August 31st, 2011 at 9:25 pm
POTUS speech moved to Thursday. From the original release:
“Today, the President asked to address the Congress about the need for urgent action on the economic situation facing the American people as soon as Congress returned from recess. Both Houses will be back in session after their August recess on Wednesday, September 7th, so that was the date that was requested. We consulted with the Speaker about that date before the letter was released, but he determined Thursday would work better. The President is focused on the urgent need to create jobs and grow our economy, so he welcomes the opportunity to address a Joint Session of Congress on Thursday, September 8th and challenge our nation’s leaders to start focusing 100% of their attention on doing whatever they can to help the American people.”
August 31st, 2011 at 9:26 pm
If Huntsman can articulate that the Federal government cannot spend 25% of GDP each year and must be reduced through better management, he can wins 30% of the cote in New Hampshire.
August 31st, 2011 at 9:36 pm
Haha.
Obama just played Khruschev to Boehner’s Kennedy.
August 31st, 2011 at 9:40 pm
#18 – “when Huntsman came out in support of evolution…”
Do you realize how utterly absurd that sounds? Is that really a controversial stand in today’s GOP?
August 31st, 2011 at 9:42 pm
Yes.
http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2011/08/perry-takes-lead-in-iowa.html
August 31st, 2011 at 9:42 pm
Sojo,
I think Obama’s base is cracking. A recent (Gallup?) poll said 1/4 of Democrats would like to see someone else nominated. He’s just gotten his ass kicked on too many things.
I mean really, he’s the Prez, his party controls 60% of both chambers, Republicans are on the ropes, and gives progressives the weak soup of ObamaCare. His base wanted Sweden, or Canada, but instead they got RomneyCare.
In the debt ceiling showdown he is the head of 2/3 of the deciding bodies, and he caves on the stuff he said was non-negotiable. The man is a weakling, and don’t think our enemies haven’t noticed.
August 31st, 2011 at 9:45 pm
27 – I agree with all of that. I still think that he gets the vast vast majority of his liberal base but I’m not at all convinced that he’s ever going to win the center if we nominate someone who draws sharp contrasts.
Gallup has him pegged at 38 percent. Why should the GOP care about electability?
August 31st, 2011 at 9:46 pm
If Barry bombs on the Jobs Thing, he could well cross the point of no return, meaning public sentiment hardens against him enough (as it did against Bush) that he never gets north of 45% approval again.
August 31st, 2011 at 9:51 pm
If Huntsman wants to bloody up Romney in NH, Perry won’t mind..
INTRADE.com big movement today:
August 31st, 2011 at 9:52 pm
Pablo,
“This makes me lose some respect for Huntsman. A “Jobs Plan” should be at least primarily about putting people to work now and I don’t see any proposals that do that.”
I meant to respond to this earlier. Huntsman plan is not bubble-inflating, sugar high stimulus that ends up costing more in the long run. His is meat and potatoes reforms that leads to long term growth. Low and fair taxes, a predictable and sensible regulatory environment, and solid fiscal policy means sustainable growth.
A typical recession can be cured with the “two aspirin” stimulus we’ve already tried. Our problems now are structural and fundamental, and growth will only come through structural reform.
August 31st, 2011 at 9:53 pm
#26-
Good God.
I don’t mind a little bit of grassroots evangelicalism in my GOP, but the day it nominates someone who expresses skepticism about evolution is the day the party leaves me. And I suspect I’m not alone.
August 31st, 2011 at 10:00 pm
I wouldn’t want to be a Bam speechwriter at this point. Because the speech will — if the guy will listen to his experienced chief of staff — have to incorporate parts that the GOP in the house want, massive extensions of unemployment income support, huge “infrastructure” building schemes — while adding tax-hike-on-the-wealthy bits that appeal to a wide audience.
By coming just a day after the GOP debate, Bam will suffocate the GOP presidential headlines with his own plan. The OFA strategy of running against (specifically GOP members of) congress will win for at least a week.
August 31st, 2011 at 10:02 pm
#25. Unfortunately it is. Huntsman said he believes in evolution and believes man-made global warming exists, and all of a sudden, the right-wing blogs got extremely upset. It gets worse though: Bryon York pointed out in the debate that 58% of Iowan Republicans will not vote for a candidate who supports civil unions.
A large portion of the Republican base, not my base, believes in strict creationism, and rejects the notion that things evolve from other things.
August 31st, 2011 at 10:07 pm
Marque,
Obama is going up against opening night for the NFL which will probably outdraw his speech.
And there’s no stomach for more debt. If he wants to spend more on unemployment insurance and shoring up union pension funds, he’s going to have to offset it with cuts elsewhere. I’m sure he’ll have some tax cut for the “middle class”, thus further shrinking our tax base, and making it more unstable.
August 31st, 2011 at 10:10 pm
Calvin,
“Bryon York pointed out in the debate that 58% of Iowan Republicans will not vote for a candidate who supports civil unions.”
Then I suppose skipping Iowa shows a prudent allocation of resources.
August 31st, 2011 at 10:12 pm
AND in Iowa and South Carolina, Perry is pounding the second place Bachmann in each state by 32 and 53 points today over at Intrade.
Romney’s waaaaay out of the picture in both states.
Hey, it’s looking more and more like Perry can pull off the golden triple win parlay – IA to NH to SC — just need to tag-team Romney in NH with Perry/Huntsman by hitting Mitt hard from the left and from the right.
Has the early triple ever been done?
August 31st, 2011 at 10:14 pm
A large portion of the Republican base, not my base, believes in strict creationism, and rejects the notion that things evolve from other things.
A piss poor scientific education in most schools is one of the reasons for this. I also believe that there are sociological factors at work. I remember reading somewhere that fealty to traditional Hindu creation stories have been on the rise in India and similar countries. And while most of us grew up during the age of Ayatollahs ruling the Middle East, I remember talking to an older fellow on a plane ride once who told me that during his youth, going to a place like Iran was like going to France. In other words, the return to “fundamentalism” in religion has a lot to do with this, and that’s happening everywhere, in response to a dynamic, changing culture that a) makes certain types of traditionalists uncomfortable and b) allows people to ONLY associate with others who think exactly like themselves. The dream world of the Thomas Friedman set, where a high-information, interconnected world leads to world peace and pluralism galore, just isn’t borne out by the facts. People are wired to act as tribal animals and pluralism isn’t “natural” to humans. It can be learned, but groupthink is much more natural.
But that’s all irrelevant to the job of the president. I’d prefer a president who understands basic biology, all things being equal, but all things are never equal, and unless banning Biology 101 textbooks from homes, libraries, and schools everywhere somehow ends up on the presidential candidate’s ten point plan to make America awesome again, I fail to see how this is relevant. I prefer Chris Christie’s answer when he was asked about the subject: None of your business.
August 31st, 2011 at 10:15 pm
Craig,
You constantly cite Intrade as if it has some predictive power. Did you know Intrade had Michele losing Ames just hours before she won it?
August 31st, 2011 at 10:17 pm
Go Huntsman Go!
August 31st, 2011 at 10:18 pm
#38 – That’s a smart, thoughtful answer, and I generally agree.
As to your final point – that a candidate’s personal view of evolution isn’t really relevant to their qualifications for office – well, I’ll have to think about that for a bit. I get what you’re driving at, but at first blush can’t really agree.
August 31st, 2011 at 10:19 pm
Matt,
Ron Paul’s bots through their money at InTrade that last day for some crazy reason.
August 31st, 2011 at 10:19 pm
*threw
August 31st, 2011 at 10:23 pm
I’m pretty agnostic when it comes to evolution. I don’t pretend to be an expert when it comes to biology, but I know there are things that evolution explains very well, and I know there are at least a few things evolution chokes on. Science is always evolving.
That said, I know that God created the Universe, and the Earth, intentionally and deliberately, and whatever method He chose, is how we got here. I don’t lose any sleep over evolution one way or the other. It’s about the Cross, not whether the Earth was literally created in 7 days.
August 31st, 2011 at 10:30 pm
The only predictive power I know of is common sense and trends, Matt.
I keep it pretty simple.
But I cleaned up at Ames on Intrade with Bachmann and am currently doing the same with Perry. AND may throw money on Huntsman after I see him in one more debate. But only if he goes hard and effective on Romney regarding jobs and Romneycare.
August 31st, 2011 at 10:35 pm
I like his tax plan, though I’m not sure it is realistic. Eliminating capital gains and dividend tax is a non-starter, and I’m not sure it shouldn’t be. That would be a lot of revenue gone (probably cut revenue in half). Capital gains and dividends are just as much income as anything else. I think the rate needs to be lowered significantly, but not eliminated.
If you are going to make such drastic changes in so many areas though, why not scrap the whole code and start from scratch. The current code is a mess.
August 31st, 2011 at 10:37 pm
Huck had the answer for the ages on evolution when the libs tried to pin him down.
“Of course, I believe every word in the Bible. And since I don’t see the word evolution and know for sure, I’ll just say I just don’t know. But I’ll be sure to ask God when I see Him just how long w each of those 7 days were — and if He set the process of evolution in place as well
.”
August 31st, 2011 at 10:39 pm
Yeah
I am a poor fit with those who deny the last 50 years of science. Spent a lot of money and invested a lot of time…….to learn. I got a 3.7 GPA and am hardly ready to dump it all and go chasing unicorns with a science drying GOP
Evolution, Global Warming, Pollution Controls, Carbon Sequestration, ………sign me up. That’s what I learned and Im not ready to put it in the dumpster and follow some west Texas Rufus playing his fife like a pied piper of the 1890s
CraigS
August 31st, 2011 at 10:40 pm
Whoops, Correction, meant Denying, not drying
CraigS
August 31st, 2011 at 10:46 pm
I really like this plan. He clearly knows what is going on, and what it will take to create new jobs here. The key factors are taxes and regulation. Stimulus works, in theory, but not nearly as well as letting private industry do its own thing. Romney has been stressing these things too. I’m sure his plan will be quite similar to Huntsman’s (and I wouldn’t be surprised if Huntsman claimed he stole it, which will be nonsense … of course).
I also am happy to see that he recognizes the terrible Patent system that we have. It is in need of a big overhaul, and I am impressed that he was able to pick up on that. There are other candidates that I am not sure would understand that.
August 31st, 2011 at 10:46 pm
Good luck hitting Willard from the left.
August 31st, 2011 at 10:47 pm
Evolution, like all scientific theories, is not a perfect explanation for the way the natural world works. I happen to think there is enough evidence to support the idea that it comes pretty close though.
August 31st, 2011 at 10:51 pm
What is the correct functional level of description? Group selection? Individual selection? Gene selection? Various combinations of all three?
August 31st, 2011 at 10:52 pm
Jax,
“If you are going to make such drastic changes in so many areas though, why not scrap the whole code and start from scratch.”
That’s what he’s proposing. Scrap the code, eliminate all the deductions, carveouts, and sweet heart deals, and lower the rate to an honest rate that people can and will pay.
August 31st, 2011 at 10:53 pm
Obama’s strategy will be to propose a bunch of stimulus and left wing job programs that the Republicans will fight him on, and then try to blame Republicans for the jobs mess. It won’t work, but I think it is the only move he can make. He can’t get the jobs situation fixed without completely turning off his base.
August 31st, 2011 at 10:57 pm
Did you know that there exist well educated people who assert that government spending creates wealth?—it’s a species of vulgar-Keynesianism akin to witchcraft, yet nobel prize laureate economists urge this position in the NYT. This scares me. Creationists, on the other hand, are harmless.
August 31st, 2011 at 11:02 pm
54 – I mean the whole code, not just the ordinary income tax part. It doesn’t sound like that is what he is suggesting. It sounds like he is just suggesting the elimination of credits and deductions.
Regardless, it is a good plan. He certainly knows how to present something that is smart and attractive to conservatives.
August 31st, 2011 at 11:12 pm
Matt/MWS- you were once a big Huck guy. Much more tolerable than Craig for Huck but a big Huck fan no less. Now your a big Huntsman guy. How does that work. WIth Huck’s evangelism, strong social conservatism, etc… Huntsman doesnt seem to be much like Huck at all. I was just curious.
Craig for losers- when do you ever sleep or use the bathroom? You literally type on this site all things non Romney day and night, over and over and over and over. You have anti Romney diarrhea of the brain. You really ought to give it a break, put away the champaign, wait for the debates, and search fervently for the next loser candidate you will hitch your wagon too. It will happen.
August 31st, 2011 at 11:15 pm
I think the important thing for him is that he didn’t suggest any new spending plans. I actually think some investment in infrastructure might be a good idea, but beyond that spending our way out of unemployment is the Obama and Perry way of doing things. It does not last, and leads to greater problems in the future.
August 31st, 2011 at 11:17 pm
58 – He is an anti-Romney guy first and foremost. That should clarify things a little.
August 31st, 2011 at 11:25 pm
Im telling you… Craig has anti Romney diarrhea of the mouth (via his computer). He just cant help himself. I remember the Huckabee garbage I read for months and months, and I couldnt stop smiling and laughing when Huck said “no thanks”. I saw humor in Huck stringing along sheep like Craig. Palin is doing the same thing to Tele, Franklin, Tex, and a few dozen others. I hope they dont jump off a bridge when they find out they’ve been played.
Back to Craig though, he trolls everything from the web to the bathroom wall trying to find trash on Romney. And when something as insignificant as Mrs. Millers 4th grade class in San Antonio picks Perry over Romney, he wets himself in excitement ready to anoint Perry the winner.
September 1st, 2011 at 7:03 am
[...] « Governor Jon Hunstman Unveils His Jobs Plan [...]
September 1st, 2011 at 8:21 am
husky,
“Matt/MWS- you were once a big Huck guy…. Now your a big Huntsman guy. How does that work?”
Good question. Both are accomplished governors. Both have impeccable records on the right to life. Both are trying to bring civility to the public debate (this is not an invitation to open old Romney/Huck scars, btw). Neither are dogmatic when it comes to economic policy or foreign policy, but the most pragmatic in their respective fields.
Yes, I disagree with Huntsman on civil unions. Neither man shares my faith, but the personal theology of candidates doesn’t keep me up at night, unless there is some direct link to policy and governing.
In this campaign, Huntsman is the only candidate with executive experience in government who I trust on life. I think he also has the character, competence, and temperament to get this deficit under control. Making Utah the best governed state (according to Pew) and one of the most business friendly (according to Forbes) is icing.
September 1st, 2011 at 8:24 am
jax,
“I think the important thing for him is that he didn’t suggest any new spending plans.”
Excellent point. I hadn’t even noticed that, I’ve become so entrenched in austere thinking.
Prior to this cycle, candidates of BOTH parties would create a huge ol’ Christmas wish list of what they were going to “invest” in. I fully expect Obama to do that again (last campaign he promised at least a billion dollars for everything he could think of). It will be interesting if any Republicans come up with new spending plans, whether as part of stimulus or not.
September 1st, 2011 at 8:54 am
I’m familiar enough with Huntsman’s tenure in Utah, and his statements since, that this is almost exactly the plan I thought he would unveil…..and it would put America on the right track again and get the economy growing.
Pablo’s not seeing immediate jobs growth here is a failure to understand the problem. Deregulation combined with renewed faith in the currency and the prospect of greater retained earning power will generate job creation in the near-term, and on a larger scale than most imagine.
Jon’s my number 2. His skill-set and vision are almost as inspiring as Mitt’s.
September 1st, 2011 at 9:00 am
BTW,
Huntsman’s belief that evolution was God’s plan has ample precedent in Mormonism, which has always been a pro-science religion. Brigham Young, when asked his views about Darwin’s Origin of Species, replied that if that was the way God did it, it was fine with him. There are a lot of Mormon scientists who take the same view as Huntsman.
Personally, I disagree. There isn’t a single transitional fossil in the entire fossil record. The icons of evolution are all fraudulent, and some were deliberate hoaxes. Micro-evolution is established science. Macro- not so much.