Moderate Republican and previously probable candidate in the GOP Presidential primaries for 2012 Jon Huntsman is given the nod for ambassador to China.
So, is he being chosen for all those attributes, or is instead a political slam dunk calculated for domestic political gain - and they don’t mean “reaching across the aisle”.
Can’t it be both?
It’s definitely shrewd on Obama’s part. But Huntsman is genuinely qualified, so much so that it would take a pretty exceptional candidate to better him. Political considerations clearly took a part: Obama might favorably dispose himself to Western Mormons in the swing states of AZ, CO, and NV; he takes out a potential rival in 2012 at the ambiguous cost of positioning a strong moderate candidate as a major force in 2016; and he appears moderate and reaching across the aisle while making non-Huntsman Republicans look increasingly loony.
One issue that’s not covered much is how interesting Huntsman is symbolically. He was a Christian missionary in Taiwan. East Asia, and China in particular, have a dark history with Christian missionaries. Huntsman is also a member of a marginalized religious sect, which adds a bit more punch to the symbolism.
Is this a sign that Obama might make serious moves on human rights in China? Probably not, but an interesting lens to look through at any rate.
Its an interesting angle to consider but I think the greater symbolism is sending someone who is fluent in the language and the culture instead of expecting them to speak in English or via a translator. It is showing respect.
It seems to me that China might be a bit miffed at Huntsman’s relationship with Taiwan. But then, I know little about diplomacy and international relations, so I could easily be wrong.
I agree! Leave them spids alone!
I don’t see how. Perhaps he can’t run in the primaries as a sitting ambassador, but he can always resign if his prospects look good; meanwhile, he’ll be in China building up his resume.
From This 'Pubbie site
I think it is a brilliant move for a number of reasons:
It nuetralizes a possible strong moderate Republican. Sure he could run anyway, but he would either have to resign early and come home or be subject to major criticism for not attending to duties across the ocean. Also, Huntsman’s major strength - foreign trade, particularly in the Far East - wouldn’t be a strength anymore. After all, it is difficult to credibly criticize a policy you were a part of creating.
It shows some non-partisanship - Huntsman was a major McCain spokesman. There will be no criticism from either side during confirmation.
It probably makes Tiawan happy, as Huntsman has some love for the island.
It signals to China that we are simulaneously serious about trade and Tiawan (and maybe religious freedom).
It might (just might) create some cracks in the Rocky Mountain Mormon Republican monolith - many Mormons are unhappy about the way the Republican Party, particularly in the South, reacted to Romney’s candidacy. Any chance to further weaken that bond is a good thing.
And most importantly: 6) He is a good choice - smart, knowledgable, fluent in Mandarin, knows trade and China. There might have been a better choice somewhere, but I can’t think of who.
The only downside I can see is that a Huntsman/Romney primary contest might have been a bloodbath in the west, which might have helped the Democrats. OIn the other hand, maybe Obama waould like Romney as an opponent. Huntsman, because he is much more moderate, would have been harder to beat.
This appointment also hurts Huntsman’s chances in 2012 because it ties him directly to the Obama Admin. This is something that will be exploited by both parties during the primaries to set off the Rush/Newt/Hannity “we aren’t being whackjob conservative enough” crowd who will destroy him better than the DNC ever could.
George H W Bush was also an envoy to China too. The thing is if you work with someone you’re less likely to oppose them. A Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, is less dangerous to Obama than one that actively opposes him.
But the thing is really ridiculous because it’s way too early. We’ve seen time and again how people can peak too early so it is a non-issue. Why should the Republicans care. Obama only got interested in being President once Oprah backed him. Without her it’d be President Hillary Clinton.
You can never tell and any Republican trying to establish a name will have 3 years for his opponents both Democratic and Republicans to find reasons to take him down.
Curious how good his Mandarin really is? I haven’t heard him speak. He would have spent 2 years in Taiwan in the late 1970’s, which was before China cracked open the door to foreign students. I think the time in Taiwan will be a non-issue.
According to The GOP Jihad in Rolling Stone, the hard-right group trying to run all the moderates out of the party had Huntsman in their cross-hairs. I see it as a favor to moderate Republicans. Obama had hoped to appoint some Republicans, and the hard core guys are just too dangerous.
Er, what?
I’ve heard he’s fluent, but I’m not sure who originally made that judgement.
Huntsman never had a chance to win the GOP nomination in 2012. Neither does Romney. Let’s be realistic: Republicans outside of the West aren’t going to vote for a Mormon.
Supposedly this was also Huntsman’s “dream job”, for whatever that’s worth.
Well, the cynics would not only agree but claim that Obama’s reaching out to them with this appointment is calculated to illustrate to Mormons that while their faith will forever exclude them from acceptance as fully equal within the GOP, it does no such thing inside the Democratic tent. From the second link in the op:
Me? I still think that Huntsman is just amazingly well qualified for the job and that someone that qualified should get the job whatever party or faith they identify with.