RSS Feed MenuWhile on a promotional tour for his new book, Newsweek columnist Jonathan Alter recently made some interesting comments on the 2012 presidential race. “Whether Obama wants to admit it or not,” Alter claimed, “when he surveyed the Republican party for who had talent…and could potentially pose the most threat for him in 2012, believe me, Obama would prefer to run against Romney or Huckabee or Palin than against Jon Huntsman.”
Who?
Jon Huntsman is the former governor of Utah and current U.S. ambassador to China. In addition to serving both Bush administrations – as ambassador to Singapore for 41 and a deputy U.S. trade representative for 43 – he is a member of what Fortune termed “an iconic family dynasty that’s one part Marriott (another business clan with Utah roots) and one part Kennedy (only Republican).” Early 2009 saw Huntsman clearly preparing for a possible presidential campaign as he developed contacts in early primary states, began the process of establishing a national PAC, and consulted with leading GOP strategists Frank Lutz and John Weaver. U.S. News and World Report noted that Huntsman was the only potential Republican presidential candidate that made Obama’s 2008 campaign manager, David Plouffe, “a wee bit queasy.”
Little more than a week after Plouffe’s pronouncement, however, Obama tapped Huntsman for the ambassadorship to China, thus effectively taking the wind out of the sails of a potential 2012 challenge. This was the move Alter alluded to, and at the time it was hailed as a shrewd political calculation. “Brilliant,” GOP strategist Mark McKinnon remarked on the appointment, “Keep your friends close and your enemies in China.”
Of course, the decision was surely not solely political, as Huntsman is in many ways ideal for the post. He speaks fluent Mandarin Chinese, a byproduct of having served in Taiwan as a Mormon missionary during college. As a trade official, he helped negotiate the opening of markets in Africa and Asia, including China’s. Huntsman is also something of a seasoned diplomat. He was 32 when tapped to be ambassador to Singapore by President H.W. Bush, making him the youngest head of an American diplomatic mission in more than a century. And he has a personal connection to China – one of his seven children was adopted from Yangzhou, Jiangsu province. He has received rave reviews for his work there thus far.
Huntsman’s record as Utah governor is similarly impressive, with the Pew Center rating his state the best governed in the nation in 2008. He left office with an 86 percent approval rating, a fact reflected in a glowing Deseret News editorial commenting on his legacy upon his departure:
When he was elected, nobody knew what to expect. The chattering classes feared he’d be an empty suit — that his privileged upbringing would insulate him from everyday Utahns and his lack of experience would isolate him from power brokers…[But he] has filled his resume with some impressive accomplishments. He has presided over record tax surpluses and record tax cuts. He has been a progressive on climate issues but a conservative in business circles. He has championed education and the four-day work week. But most of all, he has shown an ability to adjust to circumstances. The old saying is old because it’s true: Politics is the art of the possible. And as governor, Huntsman always dwelt in possibilities. The fact he has achieved so much success speaks well of his managerial skills. In short, send that old empty suit to the cleaners. The man headed to China has both looked and acted the part of a leader. What’s more, his future looks tailor-made for national politics.
A presidential run, however, would not be without considerable obstacles. As a Mormon, Huntsman would be competing with Mitt Romney over some of the same supporters and financial backers and have to overcome the same religious prejudices that bedeviled the former governor of Massachusetts in 2008. Huntsman is also not the most popular figure with the GOP establishment – he excoriated the party’s congressional leadership in 2009, making him, dare I say it, a little bit of a maverick.
To be sure, barring a dramatic break with the Obama administration over foreign policy, it is now highly unlikely that Huntsman will take on the president in 2012. But Republicans can still benefit from emulating his intellectual honesty and recognition that good policy requires nuance, as he pointed out to Politico: “We will be irrelevant as a party until we become the party of solutions and until we become the party of preeminence. It’s easy to fall back on gratuitous rhetoric and that’s kind of what this town is all about.” In a party seemingly bereft of good leadership, with the head of the RNC being derided as “gaffe-master GOP honcho” and the House Minority Leader characterized as lazy, it is comforting to know there are still good leaders out there – even if they are currently in China.
JeninCT // Jul 8, 2010 at 11:20 pm
Save the GOP from what, exactly?
cz4ever // Jul 8, 2010 at 11:41 pm
I lived in Utah through most of Huntsman’s time as governor, and can attest to the fact that he is a very impressive leader and politician. Like many, I figured he was riding on the coattails of his (immensely wealthy) father’s/family’s name and money, but once in office he surprised me (and most others). In probably the most conservative state in the union, he managed to please both conservative Republicans and (many) progressive Democrats. If I remember correctly, the Democrats did not even bother to run a (serious) candidate against him when he was up for re-election, which is very unusual despite Utah’s conservative streak.
As the author says, Huntsman does not behave like he feels the need to placate people with whose positions he disagrees, even members of the Republican establishment. He is very economically conservative and fairly socially conservative, but he was more than willing and able to squash extremists within his own party… but in ways that did not make them angry. I’m not sure he could win a nomination during the Tea Party era, but by 2016 I expect he’ll be a very formidable candidate. And, although his appointment to the Chinese ambassadorship was likely beneficial to Obama, I suspect it also helped Huntsman by letting him leave the governor’s office before the full brunt of the Great Recession hit Utah, with his sky high approval ratings intact.
msmilack // Jul 9, 2010 at 12:01 am
He is a very impressive guy and he is also very fond of Obama; they have an excellent working relationship of obvious mutual respect, a relationship that has been important in Obama’s dealings with China. I would be shocked if he considered a run in 2012 for that reason. 2016 is more likely but as the author says, he is a good role model for an independent non-partisan thinker from either party.
msmilack // Jul 9, 2010 at 12:04 am
cz4ever
you wrote: “And, although his appointment to the Chinese ambassadorship was likely beneficial to Obama, I suspect it also helped Huntsman by letting him leave the governor’s office before the full brunt of the Great Recession hit Utah, with his sky high approval ratings intact.”
That is an excellent point and very true. It is a mutually beneficial relationship.
Stewardship // Jul 9, 2010 at 8:19 am
I had dinner with Gov. Huntsman during his brief network building tour in 2009. If he announces, I’m signing on to the campaign immediately. Very impressive intellect, common sense, and compassion for average families.
Given the importance of China to our economic well-being (its stake in US treasury bonds), yuan valuation, and trade….Wall Street could get behind Huntsman due to his knowledge and relationship to the Far East.
After 2010, I expect to see a rebound to the middle of the spectrum, for a number of reasons I won’t detail here. In 2012…….Huntsman-Brown? Huntsman–Bono-Mack?
Vagabonda Innamorata // Jul 9, 2010 at 8:43 am
I could probably vote for Huntsman, though I’d have to get more specifics. But he can’t save the GOP unless he can get 59% of the vote. How is he going to accomplish that without the base voters? The “crackpot fringe?”
FrumForum provides some inauspicious clues. The commenters it draws are center left, not center right. I do think America is center right, it goes center left when Pater Familias goes bonkers.
Read the latest Pew poll on the state of the American mind. Should the Feds send more money to the States? No. Should the States reduce services? No. Yet, you get the right person, a real pro America leader, and some of that ambivalence can be moved into energy on behalf of the Country.
Whoever the most promising candidate is that seems capable of defeating President Obama should really consider a “fire-side” chat. Come to the Country in a nice pair of dickies, I mean Khakis, and whatever color shirt best suits his or her palette and begin a frank conversation with “I need your help, my fellow Americans.”
You can dissolve the people known as the base, but you have to be able to replace them with others. And I wouldn’t count on a center-left migration. They’ll congratulate and thank Huntsman for the great seminar duty, but will then beat feet to The One. They’re every bit the True Believers that Palin’s folk are.
Heinlein helped write some of Reagan’s speeches. I wonder if he helped with this one? Maybe Niall Ferguson could help the Republican nominee. Is he a hedge-fund guy? Because that could be a problem. But he wowed Brolin and Babs, so who knows?
Vagabonda Innamorata // Jul 9, 2010 at 8:47 am
As McDaniels said, you can’t turn the Country around with 50.5% of the vote. I’d add you can’t do it with 52% either. One other thing is for sure: No more a-American nitwittery. Here’s Hayek (substitute American for British) because we are the last and best hope:
Nowhere is the loss of the belief in the specific values of British civilization more manifest, and nowhere has it had a more paralyzing effect on the pursuit of our immediate great purpose, than in the fatuous ineffectiveness of most British propaganda. The first prerequisite for success in propaganda directed to other people is the proud acknowledgement of the characteristic values and distinguishing traits for which the country attempting it is known to the other peoples. The main cause of the ineffectiveness of American propaganda is those directing it seem to have lost their own belief in the peculiar values of English civilization or to be completely ignorant of the main points on which it differs from that of other people.. The Left intelligentsia, indeed, have so long worshipped foreign gods that they seem to be incapable of seeing any good in the characteristic English institutions and traditions. That the moral values on which most of them pride themselves are largely the product of the institutions they are out to destroy, these socialists cannot, of course, admit. -[The Road To Serfdom, The Definitive Edition, pg. 220]
Stewardship // Jul 9, 2010 at 8:50 am
Another advantage for Huntsman is that his father and Glen Beck are friends…Beck did an entire show with and about the elder Huntsman….he idolizes him. If Beck gave Gov. Huntsman his stamp of approval, that would be accretive in primaries where Huntsman should already hold appeal for independents and moderates.
balconesfault // Jul 9, 2010 at 8:56 am
Vagabonda: But he can’t save the GOP unless he can get 59% of the vote. How is he going to accomplish that without the base voters? The “crackpot fringe?”
In fact, there was considerable speculation that when Obama offered the China post to Huntsman … what he was doing was giving Huntsman a way to avoid the craziness that the Republican Party is devolving into. Kind of like saving seed when pestilence strikes, so you have something to replant after the plague passes.
Think of it this way … 2012 is out of the question for Huntsman, I think. He won’t really have a place in the Republican Party until the Tea Party has completely played itself out. And no matter what happens in the 2010 midterms, the Tea Partiers are going to have a huge role in choosing the 2012 nominee. Huntsman’s long term political future will be much enhanced by never having to pander to them, or by never being steamrolled by one of their candidates.
Vagabonda: As McDaniels said, you can’t turn the Country around with 50.5% of the vote.
Heh. Bush turned around the prosperity of the 90’s with less than that.
sinz54 // Jul 9, 2010 at 9:08 am
balconesfault: 2012 is out of the question for Huntsman, I think
That all depends on how well Obama is perceived as doing in 2011.
If Obama is perceived as doing well, then the GOP can only offer a sacrificial lamb against him (like Bob Dole in 1996).
If Obama is perceived as doing poorly, then all kinds of Republicans will consider a run against him, even Huntsman. Because that might be a quicker way to power.
Any savvy politician is like a shark when it comes to smelling blood in the water. Why should Huntsman be any different. He took the China job at a time when Obama was still quite popular with the public (and with the key Independent bloc of voters). I’m sure Huntsman is aware that this has now changed.
Perhaps Huntsman will resign his post in early 2011 “to spend more time with his family”?
balconesfault // Jul 9, 2010 at 9:12 am
Hayek The main cause of the ineffectiveness of American propaganda is those directing it seem to have lost their own belief in the peculiar values of English civilization or to be completely ignorant of the main points on which it differs from that of other people.. The Left intelligentsia, indeed, have so long worshipped foreign gods that they seem to be incapable of seeing any good in the characteristic English institutions and traditions
Well, besides the characterization of liberals being a complete strawman (is the argument that in championing human rights liberals are turning their backs on characteristic English traditions? That’s just pig-head stupid) … it is the conservatives, by and large, who generally direct American propoganda abroad. So why blame their failure on the liberals?
Nonsensical passage, unless one is just out to demonize liberals.
The more cogent reason for why American propoganda fails is that the people we’re propogandizing have lived with despots who have propogandized them all their lives, and they have very strong bullshit detectors.
Our best “propoganda” is living up to our own ideals … you know, like banning torture, instead of having our ex-President and ex-VP running around in public championing it.
balconesfault // Jul 9, 2010 at 9:13 am
Perhaps Huntsman will resign his post in early 2011 “to spend more time with his family”?
You may fantasize about this. As I said, I don’t think he’s stupid enough to subject himself to the bare knuckle free-for-all that the 2012 Republican Primary will be.
Carney // Jul 9, 2010 at 9:52 am
This puff piece conspicuously fails to mention that Huntsman is weak on “gay marriage”, having voiced support for “civil unions”, which every serious activist on both sides of the debate well understands is a stopgap stepping stone that makes “gay marriage” much more difficult to stop.
JohnnyA // Jul 9, 2010 at 10:13 am
“Our best “propoganda” is living up to our own ideals … you know, like banning torture, instead of having our ex-President and ex-VP running around in public championing it.” -balconesfault
Well said. I would extend that to the rest of our American values.
msmilack // Jul 9, 2010 at 10:44 am
Vagabonda Innamorata
In answer to your question, Huntsman is not a hedge fund guy; the money he has is inherited. His father is a billionaire.
msmilack // Jul 9, 2010 at 10:49 am
Stewardship // Jul 9, 2010 at 8:50 am
You wrote: “Another advantage for Huntsman is that his father and Glen Beck are friends…Beck did an entire show with and about the elder Huntsman….he idolizes him. If Beck gave Gov. Huntsman his stamp of approval, that would be accretive in primaries where Huntsman should already hold appeal for independents and moderates.”
Just my opinion, but if Beck endorses Huntsman, I think it would be the kiss of death for his candidacy for the simple reason that the majority of reasonable people who like Huntsman would become suspicious if Beck liked him too. I would expect in that circumstance that Huntsman might do a Scott Brown and find a way to avoid the endorsement of Beck without fully rejecting him personally as Brown has done with Palin. I’m sorry to hear Beck likes him so much to be honest.
Clifton Yin // Jul 9, 2010 at 10:51 am
re. Carney
Thanks for reading. Neglecting to mention Ambassador Huntsman’s stance on civil unions was certainly a mistake, but not an intentional one!
Add his position to the list of obstacles he would have to overcome in a Republican presidential primary. That being said, I think he deserves credit for having the courage to support civil unions “in a state where, according to recent polls, 70 percent of people oppose civil unions,” as stated by the New Republic. Perhaps even more tellingly, according to the same article: “But defying all expectations, his popularity barely took a hit, sinking only from 90 to 84 percent.”
msmilack // Jul 9, 2010 at 10:53 am
balconesfault // Jul 9, 2010 at 8:56 am
You wrote: “In fact, there was considerable speculation that when Obama offered the China post to Huntsman … what he was doing was giving Huntsman a way to avoid the craziness that the Republican Party is devolving into. Kind of like saving seed when pestilence strikes, so you have something to replant after the plague passes.”
I think that’s a really good point; it has saved him from having to confront them at all right now which keeps him pure. I wonder if Romney has dropped out of sight hoping the tea party movement can die out without involving him further; Romney is no Huntsman, by the way. Huntsman seems consistent in his views and from what I have seen doesn’t pander.
medinnus // Jul 9, 2010 at 10:58 am
I think Palin will BE the “sacrificial lamb” of the GOP in 2012; even with bad numbers, its very difficult to unseat in incumbent President, and Palin (now) has the deep pockets necessary to fund a “true believer!” oval office run. Hopefully, she’d get her grizzly ass deservedly kicked all over the country, and finally point out to the current GOP asylum that they need to change, and be a party that can fit moderates and conservatives who aren’t Far Right or stuck in a delusional 1950’s America.
Smart money has Huntsman (who I’d vote for) in 2016. As for him being “weak” on Gay Marriage, Immigration, etc – he’s only “weal” if you compare him to the far Right and the TheoCon religious nutz. Being “weak” will help him in a general election against whoever follows Obama as the standard bearer. He can point to his work for Bush and Obama administrations as a defense against being a partisan hack (like Romney).
easton // Jul 9, 2010 at 6:46 pm
yeah, I agree 2016 is far more auspicious. He can’t possibly go up against Romney and split the Mormon vote, and 2012 is Romney’s last chance no matter what. People won’t back a 2 time loser.
That said, what has Huntsman himself ever said? It is entirely possible he simply lacks the fire in the belly for a Presidential run.
gmckee1985 // Jul 9, 2010 at 8:23 pm
“Save the GOP”? Huh?
Vagabonda Innamorata // Jul 9, 2010 at 9:19 pm
My marinara is on the stove, my fish is ready for poaching and I’m sitting here with a nice measure of Nàdurra and a bit of ice. Took me a while to acquire a taste, but what a great buzz!
So, to your health, and sincerely, Balcone! To the health of my Irishman and my family and his family, and yours.
In fact, there was considerable speculation that when Obama offered the China post to Huntsman … what he was doing was giving Huntsman a way to avoid the craziness that the Republican Party is devolving into.
Well, then, so long as it’s only speculation.
I agree that the Tea Party needs to peter-out before Huntsman can advance.
You’re right about President Bush and competence. But, you know what? That bear hug that President Bush gave President Obama on Inauguration Day was sincere and beautiful. He’s a good man, notwithstanding the hate and vitriol that the Left -Liberal for you, I guess . Better keep that under wraps though if you’re going to peddle that two-is-one to the Country- directed at him.
Methinks the strawman accusation against Hayek needs more work. Prima cosa, the term straw man, if I understand it correctly, connotes volition. Then you’ll have to separate your understanding of the word Liberal from Hayek’s. He was a Burkean Liberal, a de Tocqueville Liberal.
I understand strawman to be like a head-fake. Now I could search Obama’s speeches and “calibration” of words and probably find your type of straw man, but I’d have to know his will to head-fake and since I can’t know that, I’ll have to ascribe what I think is error to misapprehension.
Much of the critique against conservatives problems with “irreversible facts” (Orwell) is accurate. And much of the critique against liberals problems with irreversible principles is accurate too. See Orwell’s Essays for all the info you need on each.
All of that living, much of it in the physical realm. Acquiring all that knowledge, through the physical and the intellectual and the intuitive; full-on synthesis resulting in clarity and precision. Orwell’s intelligence is hard to measure. It’s like a piece of the eternal or something.
I’ve been thinking of Hitch, hoping he’ll get better
Yes, let’s ban torture. Let’s do it honestly though. Let’s say ad alta voce, no matter what happens, we can rebuild. Let’s not take the Manzi route. Save a City, then persecute the rough and ready.
Gotta run, your responses are usually pretty good, but this one was lacking substance and good style.
Couldn’t It Wait Until December? | Article VI Blog | John Schroeder // Jul 12, 2010 at 8:45 am
[...] course, that in and of itself is hardly news. He starts by putting forth Jon Huntsman as “the Mormon.“ – Old, tired, not buying it. Huntsman took himself out of the hunt (pun intended) [...]
Jon Huntsman could be the GOP surprise nominee - Page 3 - US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum // May 23, 2011 at 12:07 pm
[...] [...]