Jon Huntsman has a new web video going after Ron Paul's newsletters. Aimed at New Hampshire voters, a state where Huntsman has largely focused his campaign efforts, the clip highlights Paul's racist and homophobic messages from the 1990s and paints him as "unelectable" with the general electorate.
"I'm just making a case for electability," Huntsman told NBC News. "You know at the end of the day we've just got to win back some people who actually voted for Barack Obama, just to make the math work. So who at the end of the day is the most electable? I believe I'm the most electable candidate in the race right now."
A late-bloomer to the fickle Republican surges we've come to know this election cycle, it's now becoming a make or break situation for the former Utah governor.
Paul has proven to be the buzziest candidate of late by topping some polls in Iowa, followed by a last-minute surge for über conservative Rick Santorum.
No word on whether Huntsman would support Paul if he were to become the GOP nominee. Fellow candidate Newt Gingrich said he wouldn't vote for Paul, citing differences on foreign and domestic policies. Frontrunner Willard M. Romney said he would throw his support behind Paul if he gets picked as the party's top choice.
Leave a Comment:
That is a shameful personal attack against a man who only attacks policy records, himself. And it implies Ron Paul, who merely failed in oversight of a newsletter 22 years ago while practicing medicine, is a bigot. Not only does his 35 years in the public eye refute that, he never was such. This, from the 1970s, before he ever intended to go into office:
Chris, you've been indoctrinated by Fox and/or AM Hatriot radio. How do I know? You use the logic that he was too busy practicing medicine to read a few articles that were published under his name in his own newsletters when he was between government gigs. Sorry, that's absurd to excuse him with "I was too busy to read the articles." Whatever happened to personal responsibility by the personal responsibility party? Perhaps you could explain his opposition to the Civil Rights Acts because they force business owners to serve people of all races. He actually believes the rights of a business trumps the rights of the individual in our country to be discriminated against based on race.