Estimated read time: 3-4 minutes
This archived news story is available only for your personal, non-commercial use. Information in the story may be outdated or superseded by additional information. Reading or replaying the story in its archived form does not constitute a republication of the story.
You've heard that Jon Huntsman Jr. is considering a run for the U.S. presidency, but you're not sure how serious the talk is, or whether or not he would be considered a legitimate candidate.
Based on a steadily growing stream of news reports, blogs, analysis and speculation among political insiders, it's time to start believing. When the media gives as much attention as a Huntsman candidacy is suddenly getting, a lot of people will start looking at it -- and him -- as the real deal.
The former governor will leave his post as Ambassador to China at the end of April. His brother, Peter, told reporters this week he fully expects Huntsman to run for the presidency; it's just a matter of whether it's in 2012 or 2016.
But the political tea leaves are pointing to 2012. A secretive Political Action Committee, called Horizon PAC, was outed just this week as a funding front for Huntsman, and by all reports, it's doing quite well.
The man in charge of the campaign-in-waiting is John Weaver, a well-known and respected political operative who was the chief strategist during the early stages of John McCain's candidacy in 2008.
And speaking of McCain, he this week delivered to Huntsman what sounded a lot like an early endorsement.
And, if you need more, Huntsman's operatives have just recently deployed an advance team to New Hampshire, a state that would be strategically crucial to Huntsman in 2012. More on that below.
The naysayers who scoff at Huntsman's chances tend to point to three principal objections: He lacks a bona fide conservative pedigree Republican delegates will insist on, his Mormon background is a liability, and he is an unknown commodity from an obscure state.
Let's take them in reverse order.
In the age of instant messaging, "unknown" becomes "known" real fast. How, where and when he makes his debut is certainly critical, first impressions being as important as they are in modern politics. Bill Clinton was just as unknown in the same nascent stage of his 1992 campaign. And, frankly, Arkansas may not be any less obscure than Utah.
The religion question is interesting, especially since it's the same question Mitt Romney has had to grapple with. But just how big a deal it might be on a national stage is really a matter of speculation. No question, among conservative "Bible Belt" Republicans, it's an issue. That's why the early signs of Huntsman's campaign strategy show him avoiding Iowa and its socially conservative electorate, and banking on New Hampshire, where social issues are less likely to be decisive.
As for the argument that Huntsman is too moderate to pass the Tea Party litmus test, it may not be an argument at all. Huntsman's backers may very well be pursuing a strategy of no argument -- that it is better for the GOP to run away from the Tea Party, than to run with it.
Mr. Weaver himself is on the record that Republicans can't win if they hand over the race to the party's extreme right.
In addition, the Horizon PAC's website contains a manifesto of sorts, in the form of a pleading that clearly condemns the current establishment. "What happened to decency?" it asks. "To reason? What happened to common goals? To calm? To respect? What happened to actual, lasting solutions to problems?"
It ends in a prayer for new blood in the party. "Maybe someday we'll find a new generation of conservative leaders. Well-grounded leaders of vision. Who will bring back America. Maybe someday."
Maybe someday -- soon -- the Horizon people will attach a real name to such a leader, and maybe -- more than maybe -- it will be a name quite familiar in these parts.
Email: cpsarras@ksl.com
