Former GOP presidential candidate Hun...

Former GOP presidential candidate Huntsman backs gay marriage

There are 21 comments on the WTAX-AM Springfield story from Feb 21, 2013, titled Former GOP presidential candidate Huntsman backs gay marriage. In it, WTAX-AM Springfield reports that:

Former Republican presidential candidate Jon Huntsman voiced support for gay marriage on Thursday, reversing his position and urging the Republican Party to be more supportive of gays and lesbians who want to marry.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at WTAX-AM Springfield.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#1 Feb 21, 2013
He's a little late to voice his support......

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#2 Feb 21, 2013
He represents the future of the GOP; assuming they have one......

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#3 Feb 21, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
He represents the future of the GOP; assuming they have one......
Well seeing how the Republicans hold a MAJORITY in the House Of Representatives, a MAJORITY of the governorships, and and a MAJORITY of the statehouse seats, it's certainly not like they're on te ebrink of extinction. It's the DEMOCRATS who are the minority party.

“Take Topix Back From Trolls”

Since: Dec 08

El Paso, TX

#4 Feb 21, 2013
However, these elections were nothing beyond the hazards of gerrymandering. As the states start to wake up the Dems will be in control of the states by 2020 and Katy Bar the door. The Republicans have no idea what's going to hit them. The Dems may own this country till 2050 or longer.

.
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
Well seeing how the Republicans hold a MAJORITY in the House Of Representatives, a MAJORITY of the governorships, and and a MAJORITY of the statehouse seats, it's certainly not like they're on te ebrink of extinction. It's the DEMOCRATS who are the minority party.

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#5 Feb 21, 2013
TomInElPaso wrote:
However, these elections were nothing beyond the hazards of gerrymandering. As the states start to wake up the Dems will be in control of the states by 2020 and Katy Bar the door. The Republicans have no idea what's going to hit them. The Dems may own this country till 2050 or longer.
.<quoted text>
I see. And when teh Democrats contoled teh House Of Represntatives for 40 solid years, that was solely the will of the citizenry and had NOTHING TO DO WHATSOVER with gerrymandering. And btw, gubernatorial races obviously cannot be decided by gerrymandering, nor can congressional races in states with only a single representative.

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#6 Feb 22, 2013
Fa-Foxy wrote:
He's a little late to voice his support......
Yes, it is.

But, truly, it's better late than never.

He was one of the more sane candidates last run.

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#7 Feb 22, 2013
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
I see. And when teh Democrats contoled teh House Of Represntatives for 40 solid years, that was solely the will of the citizenry and had NOTHING TO DO WHATSOVER with gerrymandering.......
Whoever has the most power at the time does the mot gerrymandering. It's a bipartisan game that hurts all of us.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#8 Feb 22, 2013
So he finally decided to let Snow White live, eh?

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#9 Feb 22, 2013
snyper wrote:
So he finally decided to let Snow White live, eh?
Snort ..

“Married 6/17/08”

Since: Feb 07

Porterville, CA

#10 Feb 22, 2013
TomInElPaso wrote:
However, these elections were nothing beyond the hazards of gerrymandering. As the states start to wake up the Dems will be in control of the states by 2020 and Katy Bar the door. The Republicans have no idea what's going to hit them. The Dems may own this country till 2050 or longer.
.<quoted text>
In CA the Republican Party has no power in Sacramento and even in conservative areas like Fresno County their percentage of registered voters is going down.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#11 Feb 22, 2013
Quest wrote:
<quoted text>
Snort ..
http://free.bridal-shower-themes.com/img/a/r/...

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#12 Feb 22, 2013
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
Well seeing how the Republicans hold a MAJORITY in the House Of Representatives, a MAJORITY of the governorships, and and a MAJORITY of the statehouse seats, it's certainly not like they're on te ebrink of extinction. It's the DEMOCRATS who are the minority party.
I was referring mostly to the White House, where the GOPasaurs are unlikely to be for the next 50 years except on the visitors tour......

“Take Topix Back From Trolls”

Since: Dec 08

El Paso, TX

#13 Feb 22, 2013
Yeah some states are so stupid and there's so many idiot " conservatives" and foolish "libertarians" they elect people like Brewer and Perry.

And I never inferred that the Dems success wasn't due to gerrymandering now did I?
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
I see. And when teh Democrats contoled teh House Of Represntatives for 40 solid years, that was solely the will of the citizenry and had NOTHING TO DO WHATSOVER with gerrymandering. And btw, gubernatorial races obviously cannot be decided by gerrymandering, nor can congressional races in states with only a single representative.

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#14 Feb 22, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
I was referring mostly to the White House, where the GOPasaurs are unlikely to be for the next 50 years except on the visitors tour......
That's silly. The major party's fortunes are constantly changing as far as POTUS elections go. It's impossible to predict now which party will win teh next POTUS election.

I remember in late 91 after the success of The Persian Gulf War against the evil Saddam, when noby belived that Bush could lose. He did. I remember when Democrats were euphoric in 76 when Carter won, Four years later, the voters decided he was an utter failure and threw him out of office in one of the largest landslides in history. I remember when Dukakis (WHO ?!) was the Democrats' "knight-in-shining-armor ". POTUS elections are simply not predictable this early in the game.

“Equality First”

Since: Jan 09

Location hidden

#15 Feb 22, 2013
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
That's silly. The major party's fortunes are constantly changing as far as POTUS elections go. It's impossible to predict now which party will win teh next POTUS election.
I remember in late 91 after the success of The Persian Gulf War against the evil Saddam, when noby belived that Bush could lose. He did. I remember when Democrats were euphoric in 76 when Carter won, Four years later, the voters decided he was an utter failure and threw him out of office in one of the largest landslides in history. I remember when Dukakis (WHO ?!) was the Democrats' "knight-in-shining-armor ". POTUS elections are simply not predictable this early in the game.
I don't know about '16,but have you read this posted by David Mixner?

http://www.davidmixner.com/2013/02/nate-silve...

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#16 Feb 22, 2013
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
That's silly. The major party's fortunes are constantly changing as far as POTUS elections go. It's impossible to predict now which party will win teh next POTUS election.
I remember in late 91 after the success of The Persian Gulf War against the evil Saddam, when noby belived that Bush could lose. He did. I remember when Democrats were euphoric in 76 when Carter won, Four years later, the voters decided he was an utter failure and threw him out of office in one of the largest landslides in history. I remember when Dukakis (WHO ?!) was the Democrats' "knight-in-shining-armor ". POTUS elections are simply not predictable this early in the game.
And yet in 2004 I correctly predicted the Dems would win in '08.
And yet in 2008 I correctly predicted the Dems would win in '12.

And in 2012 I predicted the Dems will win in 2016; I stick by that prediction.

Obviously YOU can't predict who will win. Even a week before the election most GOPasaurs like you still actually said Romney was going to win, when it was clear to just about everyone else Obama would easily win reelection.

Maybe one day you'll learn to listen to me.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#17 Feb 22, 2013
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
That's silly. The major party's fortunes are constantly changing as far as POTUS elections go. It's impossible to predict now which party will win teh next POTUS election.
I remember in late 91 after the success of The Persian Gulf War against the evil Saddam, when noby belived that Bush could lose. He did. I remember when Democrats were euphoric in 76 when Carter won, Four years later, the voters decided he was an utter failure and threw him out of office in one of the largest landslides in history. I remember when Dukakis (WHO ?!) was the Democrats' "knight-in-shining-armor ". POTUS elections are simply not predictable this early in the game.
Oh, and I also knew Bush was going to lose to Clinton mostly because I was in the Gulf War and EVERYBODY I new was going to vote against Bush's relection.

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#18 Feb 22, 2013
RalphB wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't know about '16,but have you read this posted by David Mixner?
http://www.davidmixner.com/2013/02/nate-silve...
No. But I did now.

But a week in political terms is a lifetime. And there have often been results that weren't predicted such as Reagan's overwhelming landslide,(I remember when the Democrats were slivating at the thought of Reagan being nominated as he was their "Republican DREAM candidate" because he was "too old", "too far right" and "too Hollywood"), the accompanying Republican takeover of teh Senate, and teh "Republican Revolution" of 1994.

Anyonw who thinks they can predict these things with any consistent accuracy, should be rich beyond te dreams of avarice by placing financial bets on teh outcomes.

Things simply change too quickly and unpredictably in politics.

("We can't LOSE this election !" Susan Estrich gleefully exclaimed after Dukakis (Who ??!!) was nominated.)

“Equality First”

Since: Jan 09

Location hidden

#19 Feb 22, 2013
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
No. But I did now.
But a week in political terms is a lifetime. And there have often been results that weren't predicted such as Reagan's overwhelming landslide,(I remember when the Democrats were slivating at the thought of Reagan being nominated as he was their "Republican DREAM candidate" because he was "too old", "too far right" and "too Hollywood"), the accompanying Republican takeover of teh Senate, and teh "Republican Revolution" of 1994.
Anyonw who thinks they can predict these things with any consistent accuracy, should be rich beyond te dreams of avarice by placing financial bets on teh outcomes.
Things simply change too quickly and unpredictably in politics.
("We can't LOSE this election !" Susan Estrich gleefully exclaimed after Dukakis (Who ??!!) was nominated.)
It is true that we can't predict these things with any accuracy, but Nate Silver is a man to heed. He may change his mind between now and then, but I will keep an eye and ear to everything he says.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#20 Feb 22, 2013
“The positive role of limited government has always been the defense of these fundamental principles. The conservative movement is founded on the simple tenet that people have the right to live life as they please, as long as they don't hurt anyone else in the process."

"Religious factions will go on imposing their will on others unless the decent people connected to them recognize that religion has no place in public policy. They must learn to make their views known without trying to make their views the only alternatives."

“There has always been homosexuality, ever since man and woman were invented. I guess there were gay apes. So that's not an issue. The Republican Party should stand for freedom and only freedom. Don't raise hell about the gays, the Blacks and the Mexicans. Free people have a right to do as they damn well please."

"The big thing is to make this country, along with every other country in the world with a few exceptions, quit discriminating against people just because they're gay. You don't have to agree with it, but they have a constitutional right to be gay."

Conservative Icon, WW2 Hero, US Senator, Republican Presidential Candidate, Barry Goldwater

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 3 min River Tam 46,261
News 'Free Kim Davis': This is just what gay rights ... (Sep '15) 15 min carter county res... 25,228
Gay Porn 56 min drod113 23
News Doritos makes rainbow chips in support of gay r... (Sep '15) 1 hr guest 1,318
News Anxiety in America up since Donald Trump became... 1 hr Ryan is cryin 25
News First openly gay Texas A&M student president ho... 2 hr I DONT LIKE YOU 10
News Perry blasts election of 1st gay Texas A&M stud... 2 hr Ted Haggard s Gos... 2
News 'Reading a book can't turn you gay,' say author... 2 hr Normal Decent Hetero 15
News Man Beat 2 Transgender Women Who Tried to Enter... 2 hr Truth 36
More from around the web