he was interviewed on CNN tonight and, in Romney’s defense, he said that other presidents (Reagan, Clinton) have talked tough on China during a campaign only to take a more realistic approach once in office. I think he’s right and that Romney, if elected, would listen to people with more experience in international trade. Romney has no foreign policy or trade credentials and will need to surround himself with people who do.

In fact, Huntsman was interviewed on Bloomberg today and he made the best economic case for Romney that I’ve heard from anyone (including Romney) so far. Huntsman cut right to the chase — that Romney’s business background gives him the ability to send a message to the markets about regulatory and tax reform that will promote confidence and, hence, economic recovery. That’s what Romney should be arguing would be the benefit of his Bain experience in the White House. Instead, Romney’s talking about creating 100K jobs when everyone knows that wealth formation, not job creation, is the goal of private equity. Romney should keep repeating what Huntsman said on Bloomberg TV today about Romney’s business experience.

It won’t happen, but I think a Romney/Huntsman ticket would be one of the strongest tickets possible. The negatives would be that they’re both Mormon and 1 percenters and there are a lot of video clips from the primary in which Huntsman criticized Romney. But I doubt an all-Mormon ticket would be an insurmountable problem given many voters’ angst with Obama. And the Huntsman family’s generosity to charity (esp, the cancer institute they founded and Huntsman’s father giving away his fortune to charity), his adoption of two girls and his sons’ service in the Navy (i.e., how many grandchildren of billionaires serve in uniform?) all help to ameliorate some of the wealth issues. G.H.W. Bush called Reaganomics “voodoo economics” and they had a tough primary battle but ultimately they were able to work together. There’s a history between Romney and Huntsman but perhaps they could put it behind them and work together for the good of the country.

Huntsman appeals to voters with whom Romney needs help — Independents, Latinos and women. And he’s a traditional conservative — a much better one than Romney ever was. Huntsman is one of the most qualified Republicans and certainly meets the readiness test. More than any other potential VP, Huntsman would serve both (1) to double down on Romney’s executive experience argument (without being just a “boring white guy” that the media is talking about — the keyboard playing and motorcycle riding, not to mention his older daughters, make him the opposite of boring) and (2) as a game changer (i.e., no one would see it coming and it would be a statement that Romney is not afraid to choose someone who disagrees with him on some issues). A lot of Independents really like Huntsman. I can’t think of anyone better for Romney to choose, but there’s probably zero chance of it happening. Too bad. Every time I see Huntsman on tv, I am more impressed with him.