I have stated on this board I think a moderate Republican could beat Obama. From what I have been hearing Huntsman could be that guy. In fact, some have speculated from the beginning of Obama's term that he sent Huntsman to China because he saw him as a potential challenge in the forth coming presidential election. So, why won't he get the Republican nomination?
Zzzzzzz. That's why.
Perry will slowly develop a center conversation. Actually, he's starting already.
1) You almost answered the question yourself...he is a Moderate...and that would not allow him to get through the GOP Primary. AND
2) "The Second "M"; he is Mormon; and will therefore never gain the support of the Religious Right.
Chris Christie for President!
too bad he ain't running. Christie 2016 gogogo
My spider sense tells me otherwise.
I think he will jump in at the last minute.
If he does, watch out. He has the balls to really take it to Obama.
Here Is Why Not
He believes in civil unions for homosexuals.
He believes in abortion.
He worked for the Obama Administration.
He has all the personality of an Ambassador, which he was. He is exceptionally boring and smiling is something that he sincerely hates to do.
If a moderate candidate was the answer McCain would have become President.
Because of the above he will NEVER have enough primary support to gain the nomination. Remember they must swing right in the primaries and then back to the center for the general election. He, like Santorum is jockeying for the VP slot. He's already said he'd be happy to run on as VP on a Bachman Ticket (That would be a double error for the GOP). He would be a detriment to any GOP ticket. Hopefully he will be shunned and then tossed aside never to be heard from again.
Does he seriously think that the Bachmann camp would put him on the ticket?
For whatever its worth, he speaks Chinese:
Personally Zeb, however much you may be right about his stance on abortions, gay marriage, and his Mormon faith, I do not feel bored when watching him talk at all. I actually enjoy listening to him. He's well spoken, and seems in foreign policy to be pretty sharp. Also, you know, experienced and all with our biggest rival on the planet.
McCain may have started as a moderate but his switch further right during the campaign lost him votes. Many, and I was one, said they would have voted for McCain 2000 but not McCain 2008. Plus, I think Palin turned many independents off.
Right now, more people identify as Independents than either Democrat or Republican. It is here where the presidency will be won or loss. I would think that someone in the Republican party would realize they have more to gain (vote wise) by nominating a moderate, especially someone who is a fiscal conservative but more center/center left on social issues (since this where the "average" American sits politically), then playing to the far right which does not command enough votes for their choice to win.
This is especially true if they think the far right voter would rather not vote than vote for a more moderate nominee. Because the independent voter will then decide the outcome of the race.
I think the point Zeb had made numerous times is that a person who "sways" too much to the left (for a conservative candidate) and to the right (for a liberal candidate) would never make it through their respective primaries. (Although they may be more popular in the General Election).
I like Huntsman too; but his moderate stands and faith will never get him the GOP nomination.
To your original point, Tex.
The Tea Party Wing of the Republican Party has, and continues to push, the GOP furthur and furthur to the Right.
While the initial focus of the Wing WAS smaller government/fiscal responsibility, etc.; it is now "requiring" that an "acceptable" candidate sign various pledges and promises that cover a number of social/cultural issues.
Party ideologues are just fine with this, in that ideology trumps any other consideration. (As has been stated emphatically by some on this Forum).
No thanks. If I wanted to vote Democrat, I would. If I wanted to vote libertarian, I would. I'm voting conservative. Outside of the GoP if need be.
There you go, Tex!
Creating the perfect ticket is about balance. Obama/Biden is a good example of balance. As was Kennedy/Johnson. I don't there were two Washington politicians who had such disparate personalities and positions. Bush called Reagan's economic views "Voodoo economics" yet he was invited on the ticket.
Should the GOP be unfortunate enough to nominate Bachman and should she be stupid enough to choose Huntsman we will have another 4 years of obama.
Yes, I understand that YOU are not bored, but what does that have to do with the average voter's reaction to him? Don't fall into the John S. trap (I like this person so everyone must). You are here on T Nation along with many of us discussing Presidential politics in August of 2010 15 months before the Presidential election. I know you're aware that the average voter is not even coming close to paying attention yet. You are much sharper and better tuned in to politics. The average voter is nothing like you ---- Not even close!
Mufasa, I appreciate you taking the time to answer my questions so thoughtfully.
I understand the primary/general election process I just think it is a bad policy if a party, but especially the Republicans in this case, wants to win. It's like sleeping with the ugly friend thinking it will endear you to her cute friend. They will alienate those votes they need by securing a few they probably don't.
It would be refreshing (and amusing) if the GOP chairman just came out and said, "you might like Perry/Bachman/Ryan/Romney but Huntsman is the only person who can win in the general election. So if you want Obama out either suck it up and vote Huntsman or live with Obama." I honestly think this would work this time.
You want reasons McCain lost? Really? Okay...
1-He looked like Eisenhower in a time where he needed to look more like George Cloony - The media age is unforgiving.
2-He was up against a tide which badly wanted republicans OUT and democrats in. That's why Obama had both houses of congress democrat.
3-He ran against arguably one of the most charismatic Presidential candidates in modern times.
4-He not only ran against Obama, but the MSLM as well. If you don't think so check out the number of favorable story's for Obama vs McCain. It's incredible! The press came out swinging for Obama in the democratic primaries by bashing Hillary and just kept swinging until he was living in the White House. By the way they'll do the same thing this time.
5-Palin hurt him as you've correctly pointed out. But for many reasons. While Obama actually had less experience than Palin the press dwelled on HER lack of experience. But in all fairness the MSLM threw fast balls at her and she could not hit them. By the way Obama got some nice slow pitches right down the middle from the same people.
And those are the main reasons that McCain lost.
Actually you have it backwards Mufasa. A candidate who sways too much to either political side would have a more difficult time in the general election. But an easier time winning a primary.