AHC/WI: Obama vs Huntsman

I don't think Huntsman's positions really matter as much because Huntsman:

1. Can win debates 1v1 better than Romney,
2. Won't insult half of the nation by saying they're too poor to vote for him
3. Appeals even more to moderates (giving a shit about economic issues is a wonk things not an every day guy thing. All Huntsman has to do is support civil unions and the DREAM Act and he gets moderate votes).
4. Won't make an inept VP pick, and will probably go with another governor.
5. Had a more emotional core to his campaign like Obama that motivates stupid people.
6. Can get Asian votes as well.

Only AH.com counts a flat tax as a "horrible far right idea", not most Americans.

The problem is his campaign management made Rudy Giuliani's campaign look brilliant.
 
I don't think Huntsman's positions really matter as much because Huntsman:

1. Can win debates 1v1 better than Romney,
2. Won't insult half of the nation by saying they're too poor to vote for him
3. Appeals even more to moderates (giving a shit about economic issues is a wonk things not an every day guy thing. All Huntsman has to do is support civil unions and the DREAM Act and he gets moderate votes).
4. Won't make an inept VP pick, and will probably go with another governor.
5. Had a more emotional core to his campaign like Obama that motivates stupid people.
6. Can get Asian votes as well.

Only AH.com counts a flat tax as a "horrible far right idea", not most Americans.

The problem is his campaign management made Rudy Giuliani's campaign look brilliant.

I don't think any of this points are true, besides #2. That's not a game changer.
 
Have Romeny win the 2008 nomination and get trounced by Obama. He decides not to run agian in 2012. Of all the candiates in the field, I think he's most likely to have endorsed Huntsman, so maybe he becomes the establishment choice early on, considering the lack of other viable options.

Have Santorum win Iowa. Huntsman finishes third or forth, like McCain not contesting the state. Without Romney running, Huntsman has a better chance in New Hampshire at least, though so would Ron Paul. But Paul says something controversial in a debate right before New Hampshire, causing his poll numbers to plummet. Hunstman wins New Hampshire.

The race eventually comes down to Huntsman versus not Huntsman. Since Republicans were not able to rally around a not Romney in time, it stands to reason they'd not be able to stop Huntsman either. He spends his way to victory in the primaries. And probably goes on to lose by the sameish margin as Romney, given conservative distaste and lack of charisma.

No clue who his VP would be. A Jim Demint type?
 
Top