Huntsman to Declare Candidacy Next Week

Jon Hunstman announced yesterday that within a week, he will formally declare his intention to run for president.

Speaking at an event in New York City to promote Henry Kissinger’s new book, On China, the future presidential candidate had remarkably lucid things to say about China.

He quite rightly remarked that China’s leadership seemed more concerned with preventing domestic unrest than engaging in aggressive behavior abroad. He also pointed to concerns about China turning over roughly 70% of its top 200 leadership positions in the next few years.

Interestingly, Huntsman sees cyber security as an area where China and the United States need to be clear on rules of engagement, much as the Soviet Union and the United States established security protocols regarding the nuclear weapons use during the Cold War.

This perceptive understanding of future international security trends is well beyond that of most other Republican candidates, some of whom continue to yammer about Islamo-fascism.

Huntsman continues to show an intellectualism that has been lacking in Republican circles since Sarah Palin came on the scene in 2008.

He is definitely someone to watch carefully over the next year and a half.

About Sean Patrick Hazlett

Finance executive, engineer, former military officer, and science fiction and horror writer. Editor of the Weird World War III anthology.
This entry was posted in China, Defense, International Security, Media, Nuclear Power, Nuclear proliferation, Policy, Politics, Predictions, Terrorism, War and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Huntsman to Declare Candidacy Next Week

  1. Scott Erb says:

    If it came down to Huntsman vs. Obama I’d be genuinely happy that I would have a choice between two quality candidates, and I am not sure how I would vote. I would love to see a 2012 election where I’d think, “whoever wins, it’s good.”

    • I think I’d vote for anyone who ran against Obama at this point except Bachmann or Palin. In those two cases, I’d just stay home. 😉

      • Scott Erb says:

        I still like Obama. He’s suffering from an economy that’s really outside his control, and so far he’s been pragmatic in his style (which is one reason the left wing of the Democratic party have been some of his most vocal critics). But I’m not overly partisan — I’ll vote for who I think best (which in my state often sees me voting Republican – I like my two GOP Senators). Of the Republican field I find Huntsman, Pawlenty and Romney worth considering (in that order). I’m still most likely to support Obama, but I’ll keep an open mind. I may vote for Nader again!

        • I will give Obama credit for his decision to drop a kill team into Pakistan to take out bin Laden. It was a gutsy move that literally could have started a nuclear war between India and Pakistan.

          That said, he lacked major judgment on his initial policy agenda. For instance, he took on healthcare rather than focusing on the economy. He also got involved in Libya, which still makes absolutely no strategic sense. He also has failed to get the economy moving. I think it is fair for him to blame Bush for the first year, but after 2.5 years, it is time for him to own the problem and stop blaming his predecessor. Lastly, his debt commission had some sensible bipartisan solutions for reining in the deficit — which he subsequently ignored.

          Obviously, I am not a fan. He is 1 for 5 in my book.

  2. Scott Erb says:

    Actually I blame neither Bush nor Obama for the economy, I think we’re seeing a rebalancing of thirty years of growing debt, current account deficits and loss of productive capacity. I think we’d be where we are if McCain had been elected, or if Kerry had won in 2004. Politically the President gets blame or credit for the economy, but I don’t think they can truly accomplish much.

    Obama passed the largest stimulus he could get away with. If he had cut budgets and spending in 2009/10, that would have created more job loss. So while one can criticize the stimulus, I really don’t think there were any options available to Obama (especially ones feasible in Congress) that could have done more for the economy. A bi-partisan “party” of tax cuts and spending increases since 1981 set up this crisis, it’ll take some kind of bipartisan recognition of the problem and compromise to get us back on the right path. I do think Obama needs to start taking debt reduction seriously; I understand the fear of cutting debt when the economy isn’t producing jobs, the impact is the same as a tax increase would be. But given the imbalances, I think its medicine we have to take, even if it dooms his re-election chances.

    • Scott,

      I roughly agree. The economy is dynamic and complex. One individual is rarely responsible for everything.

      Your thesis of bipartisan party tax cuts and spending increases seems to ring true. Now we are suffering through the hangover.

  3. Pingback: Huntsman Announces Candidacy for President | Reflections of a Rational Republican

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.