-
Tebowing and ‘Polarizing’
June 11, 2013 | 7 comments
-
SEQUESTER: The Horror!
March 1, 2013 | 4 comments
-
SOTU Preview: Human Props, Budget Fights, and Wedge Issues
February 12, 2013 | 0 comments
-
Hello, I Must Be Going
August 14, 2012 | 18 comments
-
Weekend Political Wrap-Up, Paul Ryan Edition
August 12, 2012 | 16 comments
The Spectacle Blog
Daniel Larison doesn’t see much that was nuanced, to use my term, about Jon Huntsman’s critique of Republican foreign policy. But last night’s debate illustrated the room for such a candidate. Most Americans, myself included, want a government that will use a reasonable amount of force to protect the country from terrorism and other threats without resorting to open-ended foreign wars almost as the policy of first resort. On the stage in South Carolina, we had Ron Paul struggling to explain whether he would have killed Osama bin Laden while the other candidates engaged in a contest to see who would do the most bombing.
Let us grant that Paul’s concerns about unauthorized incursions into nuclear-armed Pakistan to take out high-value terrorist targets didn’t seem so self-evidently absurd to many mainstream conservatives when Barack Obama first floated the idea in his campaign over four years ago. But Hunstman did introduce the idea of limits to what military force can achieve, talked about troops returning home so Washington could focus on our “core,” without going as far in the opposite direction as Paul. I agree that Huntsman’s baby steps away from a Bush-McCain-Clinton-Kerry foreign policy wasn’t good enough and that Paul has contributed more to the Republican debate on these issues. But it was enough that supporters of that foreign policy status quo recognized Huntsman as a dissenter.
That brings me to Conor Friedersdorf’s argument that the conservative press is to blame for Huntsman’s failures. Indeed, more attention should have been paid to Huntsman’s pro-life record and his support for the Ryan plan than his tweets or his daughters. But a candidate is ultimately responsible for how he chooses to market himself. There’s a lot of ground between running as John Anderson and Michele Bachmann. Huntsman’s ambassadorship to China simply wasn’t as compelling a personal story as John McCain’s POW status during Vietnam. And Hunstman didn’t have decades as a familiar figure to conservatives (remember that just four years before his “maverick” 2000 campaign where he ran to the left of George W. Bush, McCain endorsed Phil Gramm for president).
If conservatives are skeptical of Mitt Romney, who has done everything humanly possible to market himself as a conservative for the past six years, they are going to be skeptical of someone who — by accident or design — makes an initial impression as something other than a conservative. And if Huntsman concluded he couldn’t win the talk radio primary, it’s hard to blame the conservative press if he then decided to win voters who don’t exist in large enough numbers to secure a Republican nomination. Finally, there was no shortage of conservative love for Tim Pawlenty, yet it wasn’t enough to overcome the defects in his campaign.
UPDATE: Consider this bit from Andrew Sullivan making a point similar to Conor Friedersdorf’s. “What you see in the rejection of Huntsman is the Republican body rejecting a sanity transplant,” Sullivan writes. “Based on unreason and hatred of the other half of America. It’s irrational and degenerate.” Leave aside for a moment the “hatred of the other half of America” that drips from these words. What kind of voter, liberal, conservative or Martian, would not find such condescension off-putting? These are Sullivan’s words rather than Huntsman’s, but people don’t appreciate being told to vote for a candidate as a “sanity injection.”
View all comments (19) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by W. James Antle, III
http://spectator.org/blog/2012/01/17/last-word-on-huntsman
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- The Lehrman Standard
- Yes, It Can!—Maybe
- Gabby Giffords Poisons the Well
The Spectacle Blog
Democrat Dan Maffei Blames Budget Cuts for Girl’s Rape, Mother’s Murder
Robert Stacy McCain | 4:12PM
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
astorian| 1.17.12 @ 4:39PM
There is certainly much for a conservative to admire in John Huntsman's record. And if he'd chosen to RUN on that admirably conservative record, he might have stood a chance of winning.
But he DIDN'T run on his conservative record. Instead, from Day One, he ran as a liberal. He treid to appeal to the Jon Stewart's, Anderosn Coopers and Stephen Colbert's, while not too subtly sending out hints that "I'm not a stupid yahoo, like all those OTHER conservatives."
I thought EVERYBODY knew that, if you want to become President, the trick is to win over your party's base during primary season and THEN start moving toward the center AFTER you've nailed down the nomination. Remember, Bill Clinton didn't attack Sistah Souljah until long AFTER he'd sewn up the allegiance of the Democratic party's black and McGovernite voters.
By contrast, Jon Huntsman began his "Sistah Souljah" attacks right at the start of his campaign. That was unforgivably STUPID! If Huntsman were well known and well respected as a principled conservative, the Right might have forgiven him his attempts at posing as a moderate- they'd have understood that, "He's really one of us, but he has to be practical and broaden his appeal." . But despite Huntsman's impressive resume, most conservatives just didn't know him very well yet and had no reason to trust him or to give him the benefit of their doubt. When he started acting and talking like a liberal, they had no way of being sure it was an act.
Given a choice between a lifelong liberal who's been trying to SOUND like a conservative (Mitt Romney) and a lifelong conservative who's been trying to SOUND like a liberal, a large plurality of conservatives went with the guy who's campaigning (however implausibly) as a conservative.
Bob K.| 1.17.12 @ 7:29PM
Why waste time on these justifications?
He could not run as a conservative without angering the Chinese and doing damage his family's financial interests and investments in China's Chemical Industries.
Follow the money! Do you think he was appointed Ambassador to China because of his foreign policy expertise? He was appointed because his family bought the position for him.
Kate| 1.17.12 @ 11:51PM
His family did not buy the position for him. Huntsman was uniquely qualified to serve in China. But Obama's motivation in appointing Huntsman was partly to keep him out of the 2012 campaign. As of yesterday, mission accomplished.
Bob K.| 1.18.12 @ 1:50AM
Nonsense! The only way someone gets to be an Ambassador to a country like China is to be a high ranking Foreign Policy diplomat or by making big contributions to the President's campaign.
Huntsman is hardly an Rhodes Scholar. He dropped out of High School and later got his GED. He went to college at Penn. A few years back his father dumped a huge multi million dollar endowment on Penn.
Who was it who said, "Money is the mother's milk of politics?" It was Jesse Unruh of California which is where Huntsman was originally from before it was decided that he be governor of Utah.
Kate| 1.18.12 @ 8:36AM
Your first paragraph is generally true, but not in this case. Huntsman certainly wasn't an Obama donor -- he was McCain's campaign co-chair. This appointment was an unusual one, not awarded for the more typical reasons. Obama was seeking out Republicans to join his administration (Remember Judd Gregg? LaHood and Gates?) but there was an added benefit to Obama in the Huntsman appointment. And, yes, mission accomplished thanks to our own party.
Bob K.| 1.18.12 @ 9:41AM
OK.
Here it is. Huntsman doesn't even try to hide it.
Welcome to Huntsman China.
http://www.huntsman.com/china/.....ageID=6750
Follow the money. Some Republicans don't care if they cut deals with the Obama Adminstration if there is a profit to be made. I think it is called "Crony Capitalism."
And Kate, it looks like you are proud of it!
Kate| 1.17.12 @ 11:18PM
With respect to your last paragraph, we deserve what we get. Romney has no core political or philosophical principles. And he is far less electable than Huntsman would be in a general election because Huntsman appeals to more moderates and independents.
I disagree that Huntsman was trying to sound like a liberal. He is a conservative but he also holds a few moderate views, which appeal to independents. And he has a moderate temperament and a diplomatic style.
Had the conservative media done its due diligence, Huntsman would likely be our nominee. It's sad to think of what might have been vs. what we will probably end up with.
Dai Alanye | 1.17.12 @ 4:54PM
Huntsman chose to portray himself as a clown, and his only reward is to be bought out by the Romney machine. I'd give a lot to know the price paid, considering Huntsman's exceedingly lukewarm endorsement.
Kate| 1.17.12 @ 11:27PM
A clown? Really? Huntsman was the best-qualified and most experienced candidate in the race.
"Bought out by the Romney machine"? Where does this stuff come from? Read the news reports. Romney neither asked Huntsman for his endorsement or offered him anything for it. And there was no payment! It has been obvious that the two men do not much like each other. Huntsman made the right decision in leaving the race and endorsing Romney. In light of some conservatives perceiving him as being out of touch with the GOP as this article suggestes, Huntsman needs to build bridges within his own party. Suporting the frontrunner and likely nominee will help him do that. Plus, despite their significant policy differences on some key issues, many of Huntsman's views are probably closer to Romney's than to any other candidate's views.
PattyMor| 1.17.12 @ 5:06PM
I dunno Jon Huntsman comes off as swarmy. I know its probably unfair, but I just can't stand to watch the guy.
Reid Smith| 1.17.12 @ 5:51PM
Bravo, Jim.
PCP Smoker| 1.17.12 @ 9:43PM
"That brings me to Conor Friedersdorf's argument that the conservative press is to blame for Huntsman's failures. "
At this point I stopped reading. Why mention that fisking, tea-bagging fag on this forum? Is he not getting enough mention at NRO or from his boyfriend David Frump? One the other hand, I'm glad you mentioned him, it gives me an excuse to stop reading your stuff.
Cfountain72 | 1.17.12 @ 10:06PM
Hmm... "profane, bigoted, or grossly impolite."
Jim, looks like we have a winner!
PCP Smoker| 1.18.12 @ 6:48AM
you sound like Connor Frieddork. Faggety, pro liberal, all while pretending to be a conservative. I think your mother needs servicing. Please, now.
Cfountain72 | 1.17.12 @ 9:59PM
Just more proof that you can be pro-choice, pro-gov't run healthcare, pro-higher taxes (see Romney, Guiliani, Lieberman, etc.) and still be respected by a majority of Republicans. The ONLY apostasy they won't accept is any movement towards a less interventionist foreign policy.
Peace be with you.
Kate| 1.17.12 @ 11:46PM
While there is no question that the Huntsman campaign made some strategic mistakes (what campaign doesn't make a lot of mistakes?), I think there is merit in Conor Friedersdorf's article.
Last summer and fall, it was impossible to watch the evening shows on Fox (esp. Hannity and O'Reilly) without seeing wall to wall coverage of Romney, Perry, Bachmann and Cain. Huntsman, the most qualified guy in the race, got no coverage while Cain, the biggest joke in the race, dominated much of the Fox coverage.
The sad truth is that many conservative bloggers and commentators dismissed Huntsman as a "liberal" or "Obama-lite" or, worse, a "traitor" at the start of the campaign without doing any due diligence on his record in Utah. Even Huntsman's substantive policy proposals were met with little interest from Fox and the conservative media. It's no wonder Huntsman made himself available to CNN and Vogue magazine for interviews. When you're a relative unknown, you take all the free media attention you can get.
Huntsman was a faithful conservative and I attribute the stylistic criticisms of him to his years in the diplomat corps and his moderate temperament, not any disdain for conservatives.
What a shame. We had an opportunity to elect a conservative Republican who appeals to independent voters and Democrats disillusioned with Obama. But we rejected him and now he has left the 2012 race. Instead we will wind up with Mitt Romney, a man who will say and do anything to win an election and who created the predecessor to Obamacare. As if Democrats didn't already have enough of a case to make against Romney (flip flops, Bain, etc.), today's news about Romney's taxes just gave them plenty more.
Hopefully Huntsman will run again in 2016 (assuming Obama will be reelected). He will have plenty of time to lay the groundwork and strengthen his ties to conservatives in the meantime.
PCP Smoker| 1.18.12 @ 6:48AM
D-U-M-B Bitch.
Kate| 1.18.12 @ 8:33AM
Try to stay classy. Better to refute an argument than to name call.
PCP Smoker| 1.20.12 @ 12:35PM
There is no argument there. There is simply, you, a dumb bitch.