I will do it if Huntsman wins. I really don't like him.

 

also, after Newt gets his campaign in high gear, i think you will decide to vote him. you will forget all about voting for Obama.

 

you've got a pretty serious hatred for Huntsman. He run over your dog or something?

Jon Huntsman 2012: Charity Efforts May Be Liability In GOP Presidential Race

Jon Huntsman 2012: Charity Efforts May Be Liability In GOP Presidential Race

 

What a bizarrely titled article. There is one line at the very end that talks about meeting someone through charity who changed his civil unions ideas, and that apparently makes them a liability? Not one person or organization said anything to his charitable giving being a negative thing, or viewed as a negative, but somehow they are a liability? I should know better than to read HuffPo.

What a bizarrely titled article. There is one line at the very end that talks about meeting someone through charity who changed his civil unions ideas, and that apparently makes them a liability? Not one person or organization said anything to his charitable giving being a negative thing, or viewed as a negative, but somehow they are a liability? I should know better than to read HuffPo.

I agree. If you actually read the article, first of all, it makes me like him as a candidate that much more. But second, it really us amusing how HuffPo wants to take a small piece of his life and make it into a wedge issue between him and other parts of the GOP. As he said himself, plenty of Republicans are OK with civil unions anyway. Some aren't. This only adds to the picture that Huntsman is a moderate Republican, but the article really should have been something accurate, which is to say, a study of the candidate's charitable efforts (which are pretty impressive).

 

agreed with both posts. The story in the article is that it hasn't been helpful, not that it's been harmful.

agreed with both posts. The story in the article is that it hasn't been helpful, not that it's been harmful.

 

Which is bizarre on two counts. First I don't think 99% of people know about it, and second, it helps the people he is giving to, which is what really matters.

Which is bizarre on two counts. First I don't think 99% of people know about it, and second, it helps the people he is giving to, which is what really matters.

 

The context is clearly in terms of his campaign.

The context is clearly in terms of his campaign.

 

I understand that. But how is it supposed to help his campaign if most people don't even know about it? Heck most people don't know about him, let alone what he does in his free time.

I understand that. But how is it supposed to help his campaign if most people don't even know about it? Heck most people don't know about him, let alone what he does in his free time.

 

Two ways to look at that, I think:

 

1) News stories aren't written about Huntsman's charitable givings because he's a marginal candidate, why waste space/airtime?

 

or

 

2) HuffPo's implication that this doesn't help, at best, is why those stories aren't pushed by the Huntsman campaign, because GOP primary voters don't value that sort of thing.

 

I'm inclined to think its just a throw-away article, tbh.

Two ways to look at that, I think:

 

1) News stories aren't written about Huntsman's charitable givings because he's a marginal candidate, why waste space/airtime?

 

or

 

2) HuffPo's implication that this doesn't help, at best, is why those stories aren't pushed by the Huntsman campaign, because GOP primary voters don't value that sort of thing.

 

I'm inclined to think its just a throw-away article, tbh.

 

I'd agree with the third for sure. I also don't think any candidate looks good by bragging about how much charitable giving they do. It looks pretentious and egotistical.

I found it interesting that he has access to a ton of money from his personal wealth but he hasn't cut back on charitable giving to support his campaign instead.

I found it interesting that he has access to a ton of money from his personal wealth but he hasn't cut back on charitable giving to support his campaign instead.

I know we're all jaded about politicians, mostly with good reason, but they aren't all the utter scumbags we sometimes assume. Maybe he's got some principles.

 

I know we're all jaded about politicians, mostly with good reason, but they aren't all the utter scumbags we sometimes assume. Maybe he's got some principles.

I'm not disagreeing. Just seems like that's a weakness in terms of running his campaign if he has a large pool of personal financial resources that he's unwilling to tap into (Romney, of course, is quite wealthy and has dumped considerable amounts of that money into his campaigns).

Well I have to assume he's not an idiot and knows he really doesn't stand a chance at the nomination.

Well I have to assume he's not an idiot and knows he really doesn't stand a chance at the nomination.

That doesn't stop some people.

I'd agree with the third for sure. I also don't think any candidate looks good by bragging about how much charitable giving they do. It looks pretentious and egotistical.

Yet, to me, their history of giving is something I would consider. Volunteering as well.

I know we're all jaded about politicians, mostly with good reason, but they aren't all the utter scumbags we sometimes assume. Maybe he's got some principles.

 

I believe the majority, well over 95%, go in as good, honest, decent, people hoping to make a change. The bigger the stage, the more the system causes them to make compromises to stay in the game.

Yet, to me, their history of giving is something I would consider. Volunteering as well.

 

It would me too. But like I said the vast majority of people wouldn't care enough for it make a difference.

Donald Trump met with him over a meal and now believes that Jim Perry is a great candidate.

 

I hope knowing this has somehow brightened your day. (apparently it actually is James Rick Perry).

Apparently Rick Perry got his claws on the guy who was doing ads for the Pawlenty campaign.

 

Actually surprising results from the latest poll in NH. Romney's lead is huge, and Perry all the way down to 4th. Huntsman with a sudden surge as well...

 

Romney: 41%

Paul: 14%

Huntsman: 10%

Perry: 8%

Palin: 6%

Bachmann: 5%

Gingrich: 4%

 

Interesting.

 

In New Hampshire that isn't a surprise at all. It is next door for Mitt, and a state with a big libertarian streak. The right wing of the party isn't going to do well there.

In New Hampshire that isn't a surprise at all. It is next door for Mitt, and a state with a big libertarian streak. The right wing of the party isn't going to do well there.

No surprise he is winning, but I'd say it is a surprise he is winning by 27 points over anyone else, and 30+ points over anyone who might beat him to the nomination. Thats a huge lead considering he trails in national polls. Bachmann isn't going to win Iowa by that much if she wins at all.

 

No surprise he is winning, but I'd say it is a surprise he is winning by 27 points over anyone else, and 30+ points over anyone who might beat him to the nomination. Thats a huge lead considering he trails in national polls. Bachmann isn't going to win Iowa by that much if she wins at all.

 

Bachmann is done. Perry hit his peak as well, it looks like. I think its really Mittens' nomination to lose.

Bachmann is done. Perry hit his peak as well, it looks like. I think its really Mittens' nomination to lose.

 

As much as the left wanted it, Bachman never was a factor.