Posted on 03/18/2012 10:04:32 AM PDT by techno
In all likelihood Mitt Romney will manage to win the necessary 1144 delegates, pre-convention, to win the GOP presidential nomination. So what I am about to write about Rick Santorum has to be seen in this context. In no way shape or form am I hyping Santorum's chances to prevail in the end, but only trying to reflect what is now happening on the ground and how that may impact the lay of the land going forward to put some temporary roadblocks in the path of Romney winning the nomination.
Having said that Rick Santorum's odds of stopping Romney from reaching 1144 and sending the decision to a brokered convention are a little shorter today than they were a week ago.
Here are 10 reasons why I feel Santorum is more viable now and may indeed become more viable over the next two and one-half months:
1)He is NOT making as many damaging UNFORCED ERRORS as he once did. He is doing a better job in interviews on the Sunday news programs and in his campaign speeches.
2)He cannot be pegged as simply a regional candidate. He has now won in the Deep South, the Heartland, the West (Colorado), and competed well in the Rust Belt (Michigan and Ohio) and is now leading in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania in state primary polls. In other words he has broad appeal.
3)Romney being obsessed with delegate math and inevitability lately as opposed to policy and dealing with the issues. His own supporters even have advised him to "get back on message."
4)Santorum has pounded Romney over the head with the issue of Romneycare and Obamacare on a daily basis. I think he is finally beginning to break through with the issue
5)Romney cannot win in the Deep South; that issue will linger and Santorum will be able to capitalize on that issue.
6)Romney has completely abandoned the social conservative playing field to Santorum. Being in Santorum's wheelhouse, I expect him to exploit this abdication on Romney's part fully in future primaries.
7)By virtue of several polls Romney no longer has a monopoly on electability whether it be nationwide, statewide or in swing states.
8)Newt Gingrich's supporters are defecting after his inability to win in either Mississippi or Alabama (loss of 5 points in the Gallup DTP in last 5 days-now down to 12%). Expect Santorum to benefit from this phenomenon as the primary season moves along.
9)Rick Santorum by virtue of (7 and 8) will be able to pile up more money and attract more Super PAC money and become more competitive on the ground against Romney.
10)I contend Romney's newfound conservative support (evangelicals, Tea party supporters, very conservative voters) is "soft" in that they have hopped on his bandwagon since Arizona and Michigan due to the feeling that Romney is more electable against Obama than anyone else.
Once Santorum begins to win or compete well in more contests, and with the clarity of (8)come to realize that Rick is a lot more viable than they first thought he would be and I predict if the polls continue to show Santorum competitive with Obama, a good many of these bandwagon jumpers may have second thoughts and move away from Romney and after realizing Romney does not represent their values as well as Santorum does.
It’s really weird that this election we have two candidates, Romney whose father was born in Mexico, and Santorum whose father was born in Italy, and not much has been made of them proving elegibility.
Maybe we have just conceded that part of our Constitution now that we have an ineligible President already.
Not sure how you think that promotes your position as a Newt supporter.
Santorum's father served in the military in WWII. You really want to make a birther argument there?
There are Mexicans who are not citizens serving in our military now.
And they have a fast-track to citizenship upon completion of service, as did WWII vets. And the larger point is, there is no question of divided loyalty with Aldo Santorum.
That is an acceptable explanation for the same reason that the anti-Perry ads helped Gingrich.
http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/us-citizenship-rights-military-personnel-veterans-46711.html
Immediate Right to Apply for Citizenship for Military Personnel Who Performed Active Duty
You don’t even need a green card (permanent residence) to apply for U.S. citizenship if you served honorably and on active duty with the U.S. Armed Forces during one of the wars or conflicts named below. You can go straight from being an undocumented or illegal immigrant to applying for and receiving U.S. citizenship. Of course, if you already have a green card, you can also use this section to avoid the five-year period that most people must wait before applying for naturalization. (See I.N.A. section 329, 8 U.S.C. section 1440.)
You must, however, have enlisted (signed up) while you were still on U.S. territory. The recognized U.S. territories include the Canal Zone, American Samoa, Swains Island, and a noncommercial U.S. ship.
Here are the conflicts that qualify you for immediate U.S. citizenship:
World War I (April 6, 1917 to November 11, 1918)
World War II (September 1, 1939 to December 31, 1946)
the Korean hostilities (June 25, 1950 to July 1, 1955)
the Vietnam hostilities (February 28, 1961 to October 15, 1978)
the Persian Gulf War (August 2, 1990 to April 11, 1991) “Operation Enduring Freedom” (also called the “War on Terrorism” or “Iraq Hostilities”, which began September 11, 2001 and will end when the U.S. President issues an order so stating).
If you enlisted during one of the times of war listed above, you will be allowed to apply for naturalization after only one day of military service, and you can apply while you’re overseas (or in the United States).
Most of the usual requirements for naturalization will apply to you. However, unlike ordinary applicants you can be approved without regard to your age or how much time you have recently spent physically present in the United States, and in the state in which your application will be processed.
In addition, you won’t have to pay the usual N-400 application fee. But you will have to file an additional form — USCIS Form N-426, Request for Certification of Military or Naval Service. This form will require input and a signature from a U.S. military official.
For anyone who thinks they’ve spotted a loophole allowing someone to sign up for the U.S. military, serve for only a day or two, and walk away as a U.S. citizen, we’ve got bad news. For one thing, USCIS will wait until the new recruit is done with basic training to complete the citizenship application process. More importantly, you’ll need to honorably complete your term of military service in order to hold onto U.S. citizenship gained in this way. If you don’t, your U.S. citizenship will be taken away.
Even with military service, there is still a naturalization process. If the documentation exists, it should be no problem to produce.
The Supreme Court should have made a definitve ruling on this issue when Obama’s eligibility came into question. The liklihood of anything being done now is slim to none.
The point is, the purpose of the NBC requirement is to prevent divided loyalties. A WW II vet has shown with military service to this country where his loyalties were.
Rick Santorum was not raised in Indonesia. Rick Santorum never bashed America in college. Rick Santorum's history is an open book compared to Obama.
The birthers will be making a serious misstep if they pursue this line of pursuit against a WW II vet. It will be used to paint them as zealots. And I have to say, it will stick for cause.
I agree with the contrast you are making between Santorum, his parentage and Obama’s. I’m saying that the Supreme Court should have given a difinitive ruling on the issue, which they have not had the courage to do, and that such a ruling should followed.
Part of that ruling should be that documentation of eligibility be produced by all candidates for President. That does not seem like too much to ask, since the NBC requirement is in our Constitution.
The law should be followed without exceptions being made as to interpretation of someone’s loyalties.
It really falls to Congress, IMO, to rectify this situation, and given that the Senate is controlled by the Dems, I don't see that happening, and Obama would just veto it anyway. Maybe once the GOP controls the Senate, House and White House again...
I just don't see the point of challenging Aldo Santorum's citizenship, when he performed the military service needed to expedite his citizenship.
It is up to the courts, in this case the Supreme Court to interpret the Constitution . They have failed us miserably.
Congress has failed us by not petitioning the Supreme Court on behalf of the People, since SCOTUS has continued to hide behind the “standing” issue. Very frustrating, but we can see the wisdom of the framers of our Constitution making the NBC requirement, based on the Un American Traitor we have in ofice now, who should have been disqualified from running in the first place.
As I recall, the Constitution leaves it up to Congress to legislate the definition of an NBC. One can take a position that therefore it is up to Congress, not SCOTUS, to deal with this.
I’m not an attorney, but I do know that the Constitution is interpreted by the Supreme Court. I would hope that some of the states that are now passing laws in their legislatures for requiring eligibility documentation, would finally get a hearing and ruling from SCOTUS, if those laws are challenged.
It sure doesn’t look like anything will ever be done at the federal level in Congress, since Nancy Pelosi is the person responsible for certifying Obama’s eligiblity in the first place.
Four years of Obama has been the most destructive of any Presidency in history. Four more years will be fatal.
This is something that will have to be addressed in the future.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.