iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Huntsman Daughters

GET UPDATES FROM Huntsman Daughters
 

First in the Nation, #FITN

Posted: 10/18/11 04:04 PM ET

The American people deserve a New Hampshire primary, not ratings-influenced media coverage.

Tonight, 4+ million people will tune in to watch the Republican presidential debate in Nevada. In all likelihood, it will probably be more frivolous discussion focused on the latest book, merits of a vaccine, or a candidate's potential to be submissive to their spouse as president. It will be a conversation focused on the 10-second sound bite or jab, and not the substantive dialogue our country so desperately needs. Surely, it will fill SNL's coffers with abundant material (which are hilarious, by the way) -- but, in choosing the leader of the free world let's have a real debate.

When we reflect on our experience in New Hampshire over the last few months, we couldn't think of a more distinct contrast to the debates thus far. While many people might conjure up visions of the beautiful changing leaves in the fall, a perfectly prepared lobster roll, or a stroll through historic Portsmouth, presidential candidates know it for a different reason. Granite Staters are a famously discerning people with an outsized influence in presidential politics. Every four years, candidates canvas the state looking for votes. Not through media, but by traditional retail politics -- meeting folks one-by-one in townhalls, house parties, and coffee shops. (Riding a Harley down Elm St. in Manchester now and again doesn't hurt your chances either.) The outcome of elections in New Hampshire aren't decided by who's up in the latest national poll or who's been running for president the longest, but rather on a candidate's ability to offer a credible vision for our country based on ideas and real solutions. (Maybe a reason "Hope" and "Change" weren't enough to win there in 2008?)

In an unsettling time of economic turmoil, a government paralyzed by partisanship, and two wars abroad, we couldn't think of a more important time to have a serious national conversation about our country's future. We won't solve America's ability to be competitive in the 21st century through a hand-raise at a debate, or petty personal attacks. Americans deserve a conversation like the one that is going on in New Hampshire, based on substance and authenticity. (Our dad's Time to Compete is pretty darn good!) The stakes are too high to make an uninformed decision, again.

So, as we watch tonight's debate, trying to parse through an expansive field of candidates fighting for tomorrow's headlines, we're sure our minds will wander to New Hampshire. A place where substance is king (or queen), the state motto is "Live Free or Die", and most importantly where candidates are truly tested -- if only the national conversation followed New Hampshire's lead.

To keep up-to-date on the conversation in New Hampshire, follow our dad's campaign here.

 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 24
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
08:18 AM on 10/21/2011
Let me start off that I am from NH, And IMHO NH is a republican leaning state. But the difference between NH, and the other early primary states like Iowa,also a repub leaning state, are we are not in the bible belt. We are not looking for a religious dogma in a Presidential candidate. Only 2 viable ( R ) candidates possess this, Paul and Huntsman. Even though Romney has a palatial estate on Lake Winnipausakee, he garners as much enthusiasm as a cold bowl of oatmeal on a cold January morning. As a Democrat, the only republican candidates that sound sane are Huntsman and Roemer, both long shots. Judging from the political climate this year, I'd say Paul and Romney have the best chance of winning in NH, but they will only win with a 30 something % of the vote. Bachman, Gingrich, and Santourum are just sideshow clowns with political views that give every republican a bad name.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
donnyraindog
Grass shack nailed to a pinewood floor
11:00 AM on 10/19/2011
The girls seem like their dad to be earnest,educated and open minded.They obviously have no business being in national politics!
photo
Liberals Are Intolerant
fiscal conservative, social libertarian
09:42 AM on 10/19/2011
Huntsman's decision to boycott Nevada was foolish. My state votes last and I'm tired of having no say in the primary. He badly needed exposure and the NV debate (close to his own state) would have given him that.
01:17 AM on 10/19/2011
you "dad" didn't do much to keep all the chinese made products off of american store shelfs during his watch.

huntsman?

please.
photo
Liberals Are Intolerant
fiscal conservative, social libertarian
09:44 AM on 10/19/2011
Yeah because the ambassador really controls import levels and tariffs. Plus it was under Obama.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
garcohsf
11:39 PM on 10/18/2011
Become Democrats. There is no place for your father in today's Republican Party. It is unfortunate, but true. The nation is in peril. Become Democrats, defeat the people who dominate the Republican party now, and then try to rebuild the Republican Party if you want to. Please
10:47 AM on 10/19/2011
Why in god's name would Huntsman want to become a Democrat? Why would he want to align himself with a bunch of pansies?

No, Huntsman should be spending this time building his creds with an eye on 2016 as an independent.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cb55
11:20 PM on 10/18/2011
Good for you, directing your attention to your Dad. I really thought his campaign would take off. Too bad "moderate" Republicans get a bad name in politics today.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
motoGpifupleez
watching with amusement
10:13 PM on 10/18/2011
If a first primary is going to have "make or break" status, then let it be in a state with a far larger population and diversity.

California or New York would be a much better starting point.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Robert Breedlove
Curmudgeon of Lucidity
07:53 PM on 10/18/2011
Unfortunately for your father(and fortunately for Obama)the Tepublicans aren't interested in ANY conversation about fixing the damage they have done to the American people, they cannot even admit it was totally their policies that caused the problem. The real discussion about real progress is in the Occupy movement, not in the Republican(or admittedly, large parts of the Democratic)party. At least Obama got out in front of that wave, somewhat, with his jobs plan, though it is a timid and weak attempt not nearly of the scale needed.
06:27 PM on 10/18/2011
Retail politics, and long answer politics is nice, and I'll even say Huntsman is the sanest sounding of the Republicans in the primary.

However, giving any special claim to New Hampshire over any other state for having unique or special insight, or somehow deserving their ongoing 'first in the nation' primary status is pure pandering.

I grew up one state away in MA, and the NH folk did not have any special folksy wisdom to share.

Randomize the primaries, or have a rotating system to move them around, and if you do vote R, by all that is sane, vote for someone who accepts that evolution is the actual guiding theory that underlies all of modern biology.
06:19 PM on 10/18/2011
Did they have to pay for this lame advertisement?
Mysteryprincess
Liberal Libertarian
05:42 PM on 10/18/2011
Where does the "submissive to your spouse as president" quip come from? What's the context?
Mysteryprincess
Liberal Libertarian
02:03 PM on 10/20/2011
Hahaha thanks! I figured maybe something like that happened. I don't watch debates.
06:45 PM on 10/18/2011
From the Bible, Colossians 3:18, directed at Michele Bachmann, by some evangelical who takes that seriously. How would a female evangelical executive in chief be submissive to the first dude (her husband). It's crazy. Particularly if Bachmann herself actually follows it.
ThinkCreeps
Seriously, it's time.
05:41 PM on 10/18/2011
If the three of you think that vaccine denial is peripheral, pay attention to the 0.3-1% chance that one of you will die from cervical cancer that the vaccine could prevent. Pass that on to Michele if you cross paths.
02:45 AM on 10/19/2011
That is simply not true...death from cervical cancer is less than 4 in 100,000, that is .004%. Not to mention we don't know it yet how the vaccine works on the long run and if there are any long term side effects. Plus the PAP test is very effective.
http://shfonew.kff.org/comparemaptable.jsp?ind=475&cat=10
ThinkCreeps
Seriously, it's time.
03:58 AM on 10/19/2011
That's an annual rate. The three huntsman girls will be living for longer than one year (unless Michele has anything to do with it). Their lifetime risk of death from a strain of cervical cancer that can be prevented by the vaccine is something like 0.16%. (2 million girls grow up each year, 3000 women die from preventable HPV-caused cancers).

Numeracy. The practical alternative to nonsense.
ThinkCreeps
Seriously, it's time.
05:40 PM on 10/18/2011
That's boosted the profile of the other (possibly) sane candidate.