That's his choice, of course, but it strikes me as a mistake. I'm willing to give every Republican running for the nomination a good, close look (except forNewt Gingrich, who has disqualified himself by displaying either naked political opportunism or yet another indication of his poor judgment).
There are the obvious reasons Huntsman would be well-advised to pledge at least some of his own money -- including the fact that he is not well-known on the Republican side, and some self-funding would help him hold on and possibly attract other donors. But at an even deeper, more visceral level, when truly rich candidates decline to put any of their own fortunes into their quest for political office, I have to ask: If the candidate himself refuses to do it, why should Americans of modest means sacrifice -- or why should prosperous Americans offer up their children's inheritance -- so that someone who's far richer than they can run for office?
I have no problem with Americans of ANY income level seeking office. But someone with Jon Huntsman's resources shouldn't go around asking regular people to do something that he refuses to do himself: Make a financial sacrifice to see Jon Huntsman elected President of the United States.