His personal life appeals directly to the hearts of Middle America. He has seven children, of whom two are adopted and another two are in the US Naval Academy.
He is a fan of alternative rock, and played an impromptu version of Johnny B. Goode while appearing on the Late Show with David Letterman.
His style of choice is cowboy boots, denim jeans and a flak jacket embroidered with the Star Spangled Banner.
And yet Jon Huntsman struggles along towards the bottom of the race to be the Republican presidential nominee, with even the best national polls putting him at just four per cent.
For observers outside of the Republican Party, this comes across as something of a mystery, especially when considering the merits – or otherwise – of his opponents. Huntsman would appear to be vastly more presidential than Newt Gingrich, the philandering former Speaker of the House of Representatives.
He surely overshadows Ron Paul, the libertarian who has huge support from the online generation but who has failed to explain how racist and homophobic newsletters came to be printed in his name.
And that is before we even consider the remainder of the field: religious hardliner Rick Santorum, who is now polling second nationally; Rick Perry, who failed to remember during a televised debate which government departments he had vowed to cut (the Department of Energy, Rick. Come on, there were only three!); and Michele Bachmann, who told supporters God was going to bring her victory in Iowa – and who, after finishing sixth, has now pulled out of the race.
Alongside Huntsman, only Mitt Romney, the clear frontrunner in the Republican race but also, arguably, the least inspiring of all candidates, looks even vaguely statesmanlike. So why has Huntsman been unable to exploit a shambolic GOP field to take the fight to an embattled President Obama?
Perhaps an unfortunate paradox of the 11 month-long candidate selection process is the more level-headed candidates gain less attention. The media would much rather follow a sharp-tongued Gingrich, a gaffe-prone Perry or an ultraconservative Santorum than a sensible bloke.
So Huntsman has been ignored by the nation’s media. This denial of the oxygen of publicity and what would be the resulting name recognition has in turn given the media an excuse not to focus on the rank outsider.
Huntsman did not even campaign in Iowa, which held its non-binding caucus last Tuesday, focusing instead almost exclusively on the small New England state of New Hampshire, which traditionally holds the ‘first in the nation’ primary vote.
New England is not fertile Republican territory. On just one occasion since 1988 has one of its six states voted for a GOP candidate for president, when New Hampshire chose George W. Bush in 2000.
Registered independent voters are permitted to vote in the Republican Party’s New Hampshire primary, meaning the winner of the contest tends to represent the moderate wing of the party. John McCain, whose politics are hardly revered on the right wing of the GOP, secured a win in the last two New Hampshire primaries.
This time, the Granite State looks almost certain to opt for Mitt Romney. The frontrunner has a number of advantages. He was formerly Governor of neighbouring Massachusetts, which he governed relatively liberally. He has also secured the endorsement of McCain.
Crucially, Romney also has momentum after winning on unnatural territory (like Huntsman, Romney is a Mormon) in the evangelical heartland of Iowa last week, albeit by the slimmest of margins.
Huntsman must hope for a strong second-place finish in New Hampshire if his grassroots campaign is not to be trampled by the establishment power and Wall Street backing Romney boasts. Huntsman has made over 150 public appearances in New Hampshire, but with the exception of former Pennsylvania Governor and Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge, he has not received any high-profile endorsements from another political figure.
Huntsman did receive a boost last night (Thursday) when he received the backing of New England’s biggest newspaper, the Boston Globe, ahead of local boy Romney. That endorsement, as well as a pair of televised debates this weekend, and a media now focused on New Hampshire rather than Iowa, should help to nudge his numbers upwards.
The problem for the Utahan is he needs more than just a nudge. The Real Clear Politics poll average sees him sitting in fourth position in New Hampshire, albeit within the margin of error of both Newt Gingrich below him, and Rick Santorum, who has surged since his Iowa near-win, in third. Ron Paul is polling around one vote in five, with Romney well clear on 40 per cent.
Those numbers must be disheartening for Huntsman as he continues with his ‘handshake-by-handshake’ quest for attention. Before the campaign he would hardly have been familiar with such numbers. He was first elected Governor of Utah in 2004, and proved so popular that, four years later, when Republicans candidates struggled nationwide at the end of the Bush presidency, Huntsman romped to re-election by securing 78 per cent of the votes.
His record in Utah’s Governor’s Mansion is highly regarded, and he continues to boast his state headed the nation in job creation during his tenure while emphasising the marked contrast with Romney, whose Massachusetts ranked 47th. In the words of the Boston Globe:
With a strong record as governor of Utah and US ambassador to China, arguably the most important overseas diplomatic post, Huntsman’s credentials match those of anyone in the field. He would be the best candidate to seize this moment in GOP history, and the best-prepared to be president.
But Huntsman’s appeal to Democrats and independents is also what many in the Grand Old Party might take issue with. He accepts the concept of global warming, favours civil unions (though not same-sex marriage) and rejects creationism.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, he has downplayed that during recent weeks as he seeks to appeal to the conservative base. In the current economic climate, his proven record of fiscal conservatism, however, should be enough to appease the more pragmatic members of the right wing.
He has felt the need to take to promoting himself as the “consistent conservative” of the race, pointing to his tax-cutting, job-creating, growth-promoting record in Utah. With Romney and Paul battling out for much of the independent voting bloc, Huntsman has attempted to change tack – understandable, but surely too little, too late.
In a general election, it is not difficult to envisage him winning Rockefeller-esque support, as he did in Utah, from those who might be dubbed “Huntsman Democrats” by political scientists – but without GOP support, he will never be in a position to achieve that on a national level.
He has shown he is willing to be bipartisan, by accepting President Obama’s offer of the post of ambassador to China (Huntsman speaks fluent Mandarin). That appointment also clearly indicates the President respects his potential rival’s abilities as a diplomat. Meanwhile, Huntsman’s record at the helm in Utah has demonstrated he isn’t bad at the politics lark, either.
It is madness the most electable of all Republicans has been, by and large, ignored by the media, the public and his own party.
But if he falls short in New Hampshire and pulls out of the contest, America would be wise to start preparing for Huntsman 2016.
