[Eugene]

[quote=briansd1]
Not only did Huntsman work for Obama, he was the US Ambassador to China, not just a State Department official, but the personal representative of the President in China.

I can’t see Republican primary voters warming up to that.

Both Mitt Romney and Tim Pawlenty are too boring in style for Republicans, IMHO. Republicans want candidates that let it rip. That’s why they liked the Donald and Palin.[/quote]

There are Republicans and there are Republicans.

Romney is mostly disliked by evangelicals and by the Tea Party. (He’s pro-gay, pro-choice, and he created Romneycare – three red flags. And he’s a Mormon.) The establishment dislikes him too, but stops short of direct bashing, recognizing that he’s much more likely to beat Obama than Pawlenty or, say, Bachmann. He leads the polls in more liberal states. On the other hand, he will have a hard time winning SC unless Bachmann or someone else splits the conservative vote. In SC, evangelicals are 60% of the primary voters, and, in 2008, he got only 11% of their vote – and that was before Romneycare was seen as a liability (although with an evangelical pastor, Huckabee, in the running).

In the end this looks like it should be a close fight between a centrist candidate who captures the North (Romney or, less likely, Giuliani) and a wingnut candidate who captures the South (Intrade expects Pawlenty, but, personally, I’d put money on Santorum, or even Palin, or maybe even Ron Paul).

[Eugene]

[quote=briansd1]
Not only did Huntsman work for Obama, he was the US Ambassador to China, not just a State Department official, but the personal representative of the President in China.

I can’t see Republican primary voters warming up to that.

Both Mitt Romney and Tim Pawlenty are too boring in style for Republicans, IMHO. Republicans want candidates that let it rip. That’s why they liked the Donald and Palin.[/quote]

There are Republicans and there are Republicans.

Romney is mostly disliked by evangelicals and by the Tea Party. (He’s pro-gay, pro-choice, and he created Romneycare – three red flags. And he’s a Mormon.) The establishment dislikes him too, but stops short of direct bashing, recognizing that he’s much more likely to beat Obama than Pawlenty or, say, Bachmann. He leads the polls in more liberal states. On the other hand, he will have a hard time winning SC unless Bachmann or someone else splits the conservative vote. In SC, evangelicals are 60% of the primary voters, and, in 2008, he got only 11% of their vote – and that was before Romneycare was seen as a liability (although with an evangelical pastor, Huckabee, in the running).

In the end this looks like it should be a close fight between a centrist candidate who captures the North (Romney or, less likely, Giuliani) and a wingnut candidate who captures the South (Intrade expects Pawlenty, but, personally, I’d put money on Santorum, or even Palin, or maybe even Ron Paul).

[Eugene]

[quote=briansd1]
Not only did Huntsman work for Obama, he was the US Ambassador to China, not just a State Department official, but the personal representative of the President in China.

I can’t see Republican primary voters warming up to that.

Both Mitt Romney and Tim Pawlenty are too boring in style for Republicans, IMHO. Republicans want candidates that let it rip. That’s why they liked the Donald and Palin.[/quote]

There are Republicans and there are Republicans.

Romney is mostly disliked by evangelicals and by the Tea Party. (He’s pro-gay, pro-choice, and he created Romneycare – three red flags. And he’s a Mormon.) The establishment dislikes him too, but stops short of direct bashing, recognizing that he’s much more likely to beat Obama than Pawlenty or, say, Bachmann. He leads the polls in more liberal states. On the other hand, he will have a hard time winning SC unless Bachmann or someone else splits the conservative vote. In SC, evangelicals are 60% of the primary voters, and, in 2008, he got only 11% of their vote – and that was before Romneycare was seen as a liability (although with an evangelical pastor, Huckabee, in the running).

In the end this looks like it should be a close fight between a centrist candidate who captures the North (Romney or, less likely, Giuliani) and a wingnut candidate who captures the South (Intrade expects Pawlenty, but, personally, I’d put money on Santorum, or even Palin, or maybe even Ron Paul).

[Eugene]

[quote=briansd1]
Not only did Huntsman work for Obama, he was the US Ambassador to China, not just a State Department official, but the personal representative of the President in China.

I can’t see Republican primary voters warming up to that.

Both Mitt Romney and Tim Pawlenty are too boring in style for Republicans, IMHO. Republicans want candidates that let it rip. That’s why they liked the Donald and Palin.[/quote]

There are Republicans and there are Republicans.

Romney is mostly disliked by evangelicals and by the Tea Party. (He’s pro-gay, pro-choice, and he created Romneycare – three red flags. And he’s a Mormon.) The establishment dislikes him too, but stops short of direct bashing, recognizing that he’s much more likely to beat Obama than Pawlenty or, say, Bachmann. He leads the polls in more liberal states. On the other hand, he will have a hard time winning SC unless Bachmann or someone else splits the conservative vote. In SC, evangelicals are 60% of the primary voters, and, in 2008, he got only 11% of their vote – and that was before Romneycare was seen as a liability (although with an evangelical pastor, Huckabee, in the running).

In the end this looks like it should be a close fight between a centrist candidate who captures the North (Romney or, less likely, Giuliani) and a wingnut candidate who captures the South (Intrade expects Pawlenty, but, personally, I’d put money on Santorum, or even Palin, or maybe even Ron Paul).

[Eugene]

[quote=briansd1]
Not only did Huntsman work for Obama, he was the US Ambassador to China, not just a State Department official, but the personal representative of the President in China.

I can’t see Republican primary voters warming up to that.

Both Mitt Romney and Tim Pawlenty are too boring in style for Republicans, IMHO. Republicans want candidates that let it rip. That’s why they liked the Donald and Palin.[/quote]

There are Republicans and there are Republicans.

Romney is mostly disliked by evangelicals and by the Tea Party. (He’s pro-gay, pro-choice, and he created Romneycare – three red flags. And he’s a Mormon.) The establishment dislikes him too, but stops short of direct bashing, recognizing that he’s much more likely to beat Obama than Pawlenty or, say, Bachmann. He leads the polls in more liberal states. On the other hand, he will have a hard time winning SC unless Bachmann or someone else splits the conservative vote. In SC, evangelicals are 60% of the primary voters, and, in 2008, he got only 11% of their vote – and that was before Romneycare was seen as a liability (although with an evangelical pastor, Huckabee, in the running).

In the end this looks like it should be a close fight between a centrist candidate who captures the North (Romney or, less likely, Giuliani) and a wingnut candidate who captures the South (Intrade expects Pawlenty, but, personally, I’d put money on Santorum, or even Palin, or maybe even Ron Paul).

[Eugene]

Huntsman is too centrist. As far as I know, he is to the left of Romney. In fact, he worked for Obama up until a few weeks ago. That itself should make him anathema in Republican primaries. But he might end up sabotaging Romney’s campaign by drawing moderates away from him. (Not that there are many of those in the Republican Party, especially in the South.)

It still remains to be seen how things play out on the right. Pawlenty seems to be in a good position to grab the Tea Party vote.

[Eugene]

Huntsman is too centrist. As far as I know, he is to the left of Romney. In fact, he worked for Obama up until a few weeks ago. That itself should make him anathema in Republican primaries. But he might end up sabotaging Romney’s campaign by drawing moderates away from him. (Not that there are many of those in the Republican Party, especially in the South.)

It still remains to be seen how things play out on the right. Pawlenty seems to be in a good position to grab the Tea Party vote.

[Eugene]

Huntsman is too centrist. As far as I know, he is to the left of Romney. In fact, he worked for Obama up until a few weeks ago. That itself should make him anathema in Republican primaries. But he might end up sabotaging Romney’s campaign by drawing moderates away from him. (Not that there are many of those in the Republican Party, especially in the South.)

It still remains to be seen how things play out on the right. Pawlenty seems to be in a good position to grab the Tea Party vote.

[Eugene]

Huntsman is too centrist. As far as I know, he is to the left of Romney. In fact, he worked for Obama up until a few weeks ago. That itself should make him anathema in Republican primaries. But he might end up sabotaging Romney’s campaign by drawing moderates away from him. (Not that there are many of those in the Republican Party, especially in the South.)

It still remains to be seen how things play out on the right. Pawlenty seems to be in a good position to grab the Tea Party vote.

[Eugene]

Huntsman is too centrist. As far as I know, he is to the left of Romney. In fact, he worked for Obama up until a few weeks ago. That itself should make him anathema in Republican primaries. But he might end up sabotaging Romney’s campaign by drawing moderates away from him. (Not that there are many of those in the Republican Party, especially in the South.)

It still remains to be seen how things play out on the right. Pawlenty seems to be in a good position to grab the Tea Party vote.

[Eugene]

I’m skeptical about solar water heaters. It’s still something like $5K not including labor, and it only reduces the part of the bill that is spent to heat water (in my house that’s 10% to 20% of total bill, depending on the season, I think.) On the other hand, solar panels offset lighting, computer, TV, and, most important of all, air conditioning.

Solar water heaters make most sense for people with heated pools.

[Eugene]

I’m skeptical about solar water heaters. It’s still something like $5K not including labor, and it only reduces the part of the bill that is spent to heat water (in my house that’s 10% to 20% of total bill, depending on the season, I think.) On the other hand, solar panels offset lighting, computer, TV, and, most important of all, air conditioning.

Solar water heaters make most sense for people with heated pools.

[Eugene]

I’m skeptical about solar water heaters. It’s still something like $5K not including labor, and it only reduces the part of the bill that is spent to heat water (in my house that’s 10% to 20% of total bill, depending on the season, I think.) On the other hand, solar panels offset lighting, computer, TV, and, most important of all, air conditioning.

Solar water heaters make most sense for people with heated pools.

[Eugene]

I’m skeptical about solar water heaters. It’s still something like $5K not including labor, and it only reduces the part of the bill that is spent to heat water (in my house that’s 10% to 20% of total bill, depending on the season, I think.) On the other hand, solar panels offset lighting, computer, TV, and, most important of all, air conditioning.

Solar water heaters make most sense for people with heated pools.

[Eugene]

I’m skeptical about solar water heaters. It’s still something like $5K not including labor, and it only reduces the part of the bill that is spent to heat water (in my house that’s 10% to 20% of total bill, depending on the season, I think.) On the other hand, solar panels offset lighting, computer, TV, and, most important of all, air conditioning.

Solar water heaters make most sense for people with heated pools.

[Author]

Posts