As conservative commentators have given Jon Huntsman's candidate a second look, they see someone who cut taxes aggressively, is the only candidate to support the Ryan plan for reform of government spending, passed lots of pro-life legislation in Utah, and lowered taxes there.

So they ask themselves: Why hasn't this guy been at the top of the polls? And they quickly settle on the explanation that it is his campaign's fault, and usually they point the finger to his campaign manager, John Weaver - who ran John McCain's campaign and has been known to criticize the party's base of voters.

James Poulos announced this line of thinking at the Daily Caller. Ross Douthat repeated a version of the same idea at the New York Times. So did W. James Antle III at the American Spectator. And Erick Erickson believes the same too.

As evidence for their theory they blame the fact that Jon Huntsman was featured in several positive magazine profiles in the mainstream media. One in Vogue, one in Esquire, and another in The New York Times Magazine.

And now it is said that Huntsman was "courting" the MSM, instead of conservatives. Further it is taken as evidence that Huntsman doesn't "like" conservatives. They cite his quote to ABC, "We've got people on the Republican side who are too far to the right." Or his tweet in which he said "To be clear. I believe in evolution and trust scientists on global warming. Call me crazy." He was "baiting" the base, they say.

Isn't this a foolish strategy when Republican voters are looking for someone who is more credibly conservative than Mitt Romney? Why hide the fact that Huntsman's governor in Utah and his campaign promises are far more conservative than Romney even claims to be?

Well, the race in the summer was not that simple. Typically the more "establishment" candidate always beats the insurgent conservative challengers in the GOP nomination. John McCain beat Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee. George W. Bush soundly beat Alan Keyes. Bob Dole and George H.W. Bush beat Pat Buchanan.

The Huntsman campaign decided early to concede Iowa, believing with good reason at the time that someone like Michelle Bachman or Rick Santorum would win that state. (Bachmann did with the Iowa straw poll.) Romney had done the same thing. Huntsman was trying to force himself into a battle for Mitt Romney's supporters. But Romney has held steady until recently.

This was a plausible strategy. Huntsman could not "out-conservative" Michelle Bachmann or Rick Santorum who have an almost tribal identification with the party's base. But now Huntsman can "out-conservative" Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich - both of whom are technocrats at heart who have been on both sides of most important issues.

And it simply isn't true that the Huntsman campaign spurned the conservative media. His campaign spokesman Tim Miller pointed out to the Daily Caller today that their first interviews were with George Will, National Review's Ramesh Ponnuru, and Sean Hannity. Hannity got the exclusive the moment that Huntsman announced.

Huntsman also did several sessions with conservative magazines. He held a bloggers' briefing at his Washington D.C. home with journalists from The American Spectator and National Review. He sat for a profile written by yours truly for The American Conservative.

He has certainly been much more available to the conservative media than Mitt Romney.

But, yes, Huntsman got more attention for the issues on which he made distinctions between himself and other conservatives because the media likes to emphasize contrast and conflict. It was also apparent that the media liked the idea of Jon Huntsman as a reasonable man who is martyred by his party that has gone insane.

And if the weakness of Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney lead to a reconsideration of Huntsman, the same mainstream media outlets that adored him this summer will write about how he "sold his soul" to the Tea Party. And how his tax-plan is "radically right-wing," and how he has pushed an "extreme anti-choice" agenda.

Suddenly he'll look very conservative.