I know.
Which is why I qualified my original post as follows:
The poll didn't force anybody to make a specific selection. Therefore, it's actually a laundry list of everybody that the respondent would be willing to support.
Those who checked Huntsman were essentially checking "all of the above".
And 29% of the 100% said they could support Huntsman -- which is implausible. And which is why I characterized the number as "static" -- i.e., the "don't know", "no preference", "haven't thought about it" segment of the sample.
If I was voting for 5 candidates, Huntsman could be the 5th choice easily. Huntsman would make a better president than Obama by a factor of 10. But that is not saying much.