Huntsman doesn’t rule out presidential run

[scottie]

It's Viking who's been saying all along that Huntsman could very well be the GOP candidate in 2012 right? I've always liked Huntsman, Jr.

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/home/50...rrent.html.csp

[frank ryan]

It's Viking who's been saying all along that Huntsman could very well be the GOP candidate in 2012 right? I've always liked Huntsman, Jr.

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/home/50...rrent.html.csp

I've voted for him before. I like him so much more than Mitt.

[Maximus]

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/...12-dept/68737/

[ERCougar]

I've voted for him before. I like him so much more than Mitt.

I liked Mitt much better too before he ran.

[Levin]

This Huntsman Jr. interview with Charlie Rose (from just a few weeks ago) is one of the best, most substantive interviews I've ever seen a politician give. Put this type of thinking and ability to explain complex international relations up against Palin, and she shrivels like the witch in the Wizard of Oz.

He's a remarkable communicator. I hope he doesn't run in 2012, because I think his chances in 2016 are very good. I think his big consideration is this: will or could Obama lose in 2012? If yes, then he runs. If no, then he doesn't. He wouldn't run against an incumbent Republican in 2016.

My two cents -- Obama wins in 2012 (easily) on a surging economy. Don't run, JHjr -- wait until 2016.

http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/11357

[scottie]

This Huntsman Jr. interview with Charlie Rose (from just a few weeks ago) is one of the best, most substantive interviews I've ever seen a politician give. Put this type of thinking and ability to explain complex international relations up against Palin, and she shrivels like the witch in the Wizard of Oz.

He's a remarkable communicator. I hope he doesn't run in 2012, because I think his chances in 2016 are very good. I think his big consideration is this: will or could Obama lose in 2012? If yes, then he runs. If no, then he doesn't. He wouldn't run against an incumbent Republican in 2016.

My two cents -- Obama wins in 2012 (easily) on a surging economy. Don't run, JHjr -- wait until 2016.

http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/11357

A candidate's communication skills are more noticeable after GWB's two terms, aren't they?

[Levin]

A candidate's communication skills are more noticeable after GWB's two terms, aren't they?

Bush may not have been good off the cuff, but he had a certain emotional intelligence that permitted him to communicate wonderfully at times -- think the aftermath of 9/11. Truly some remarkable moments that welded a large portion of America to him in a very emotional way. Think of him grabbing the bullhorn at ground zero. His pitch perfect speech at the National Cathedral, and his state of the union address just a few months later.

Bush gets knocked because he wasn't good off the cuff. But if being a good communicator means transfering to an audience a message that connects the audience with the speaker in a deeper way, Bush was very effective in many respects.

[Levin]

And as a further thought, I actually think Romney is a worse communicator, according to my definition above, than Bush was. Romney comes off as plastic, opportunistic, and pandering. Romney may not say strategery (neither did Bush), but no thanks.

Huntsman has the unique combination of sincerity, being articulate, and making the emotional connection. Almost the non-cheesy Bill Clinton. (But I love Clinton as a communicator. I'd much rather listen to him than any other living politician today.)

[Commando]

And as a further thought, I actually think Romney is a worse communicator, according to my definition above, than Bush was. Romney comes off as plastic, opportunistic, and pandering. Romney may not say strategery (neither did Bush), but no thanks.

Huntsman has the unique combination of sincerity, being articulate, and making the emotional connection. Almost the non-cheesy Bill Clinton. (But I love Clinton as a communicator. I'd much rather listen to him than any other living politician today.)

Hmm I don't know. Huntsman seems like a kid in a big-boy suit.

[Levin]

Hmm I don't know. Huntsman seems like a kid in a big-boy suit.

Watch the Charlie Rose interview. I agree he at one time came off as such, but in that interview, you can see the maturing of a pretty remarkable political talent.

[Babs]

Bush may not have been good off the cuff, but he had a certain emotional intelligence that permitted him to communicate wonderfully at times -- think the aftermath of 9/11. Truly some remarkable moments that welded a large portion of America to him in a very emotional way. Think of him grabbing the bullhorn at ground zero. His pitch perfect speech at the National Cathedral, and his state of the union address just a few months later.

Bush gets knocked because he wasn't good off the cuff. But if being a good communicator means transfering to an audience a message that connects the audience with the speaker in a deeper way, Bush was very effective in many respects.

And as a further thought, I actually think Romney is a worse communicator, according to my definition above, than Bush was. Romney comes off as plastic, opportunistic, and pandering. Romney may not say strategery (neither did Bush), but no thanks.

Huntsman has the unique combination of sincerity, being articulate, and making the emotional connection. Almost the non-cheesy Bill Clinton. (But I love Clinton as a communicator. I'd much rather listen to him than any other living politician today.)

The difference between a bumbling Bush and a more eloquent Obama or Clinton or Romney is that once you can make sense of it, you actually believe what Bush is saying. Or you at least believe that Bush believes what Bush is saying. The more politically polished speakers come across as artificial and at times even disingenuous.

[Levin]

The difference between a bumbling Bush and a more eloquent Obama or Clinton or Romney is that once you can make sense of it, you actually believe what Bush is saying. Or you at least believe that Bush believes what Bush is saying. The more politically polished speakers come across as artificial and at times even disingenuous.

Bingo. And Huntsman has that added Bush characteristic of sincerity. I hope a national election, with its bifurcated nature of pandering primaries and generalist national, doesn't make Huntsman make the typical political mistakes.

And I agree the US needs Huntsman's Chinese experience -- but in 2016 more than in 2012.

[pellegrino]

Huntsman v. Bloomberg v. Obama

Amazing race that would be!

This country needs Huntsman due to his Chinese experience. Period.

that could be a compelling reason to vote for him. It depends on what happens in the coming years between the two nations.

[il Padrino Ute]

If Huntsman can beat Obama in 2012, then he should be the GOP candidate. It's really that simple.

Of course, he'll have the Mormon thing going against him, so he won't win the GOP nomination.

[wuapinmon]

Huntsman doesn't worry me the way other GOP "candidates" do. I might consider his platform.