Dont vote for John Huntsman, GOP primary 2012

As my opponent has stated Romney is the only member of the GOP who can stand up to Jon Huntsman in terms of experience. We'll start with character issues. My opponent is obviously confused by how Romney made his way in the business world. He was a private equity fund manager. For the sake of clarification let me explain what this means. The super rich go to private equity firms and invest large amounts of money. The equity managers take this money and combines it with 5 or 6 other rich people's monies. Using this they then go and buy a business for let's say 400 million dollars. The equity firms makes sure the business does really well then 3-4 years later, after the monies made a profit, the equity manager either sells the company, takes the money and gives it back to the investors (firing all the employees in the process). Or they fire all the employees, chop the business up into economical "chunks", and sell it at a bigger profit. Is this somebody who we really think has great character? Somebody who will destroy an entire company, fire all the employees and screw up those lives for the sake of money? He may be successful but, his success is unethical. Fine, Huntsman may he gotten a job from his father, but, that does not mean he did not do his job and do it well. Therefore, we must assume, until proven otherwise that Huntsman was the one doing his own job not his father. And doing a more ethical job. My opponent seems to think that bluntly stating that people are stupid is a bad thing. But, he has provided no reason why it is a bad thing. We need somebody as our leader who will bluntly state what people need to hear but, do not want to hear. The United States education system is figuratively "going down the toilet". The United States once had one of the best public education systems in the world. Now, as of 2009-2010, the United States is ranked 30th, just above Mexico. As a nation, people are not learning as well, because they are not learning as well, they are not learning as much. Because they are not learning as much people, through generations, are getting dumber. I applaud Huntsman for saying what nobody else has the gall to say. Bluntness is not a bad quality. Defense of my points: 1) Fine so they both have executive experience. Even if the state is more or less populated it is still equally as difficult to manage the states budget. 2) I'll concede this point. 3) The Senate Armed Services Committee only is empowered with the legislative of the United States military. This is not as relevant to foreign affairs as say being an ambassador to a country. A more relevant committee dealing with foreign affairs would be the United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations. Seeing as no candidate sits on this committee, an ambassador position is much more relevant, and hands-on, in the world of foreign affairs than sitting on a committee dealing with solely the military. Even so, our relationship with China is much more important than our non-relationship with Iran. China is a military and economic superpower in the world. Iran most assuredly is not. Should the United States not worry about something which is present instead of something which may become present in the future? The United States has a bigger economic stake with China than Iran. Iran's only real threat to the United States are the nuclear weapons they do not posses currently and the Strait of Hormuz which they cannot completely close under international law. 5) I never said it was a poll. 6) Ok and your point is? His father may have given him the job. But, you cannot prove that his father did his job for him. So we must believe that since it was Huntsman Jr.'s job he did it himself. Furthermore, you completely ignored the other qualifications I stated. So you must agree with me on this point. Experience is the most important thing the leader should have. 7) Not at. Trump began for personal gain, more people know his name. Furthermore, you do not have to be dedicated to a country, to be a leader of a country. 8) Actually you gave one reason but, that's besides the point. My opponent is making a mockery of my argument. My argument is that in China instead of riding in a secluded high-up motorcade. Huntsman choose to ride a bicycle and interact with the Chinese people, finding out their personal views on certain topics. This shows a willingness to interact with the regular person. Which is not being aristocratic in any stretch of the imagination. 9) Ok? Once again your point is? It still is a state and he obviously performed well as governor there. The most important attributes for a leader of the country is experience. Huntsman has the most executive experience of all the GOP candidates as he was both governor, Trade Ambassador, and Ambassador to China, no other candidate has this experience. My opponent in fact, agrees with me in this regard. Should the presidential candidate not be the one with the most experience? I say yes. My opponent obviously not.