Confirmed: A Latino VP would hugely help the GOP’s chances with Latino voters

posted at 1:20 pm on March 6, 2012 by Tina Korbe

If Michael Scherer is right and Latinos will pick the next president, then the eventual GOP nominee — whoever he might be — is in trouble. According to a Fox News Latino poll conducted under the direction of Latin Insights, President Barack Obama beats any of the GOP candidates among Latino voters by a margin of six-to-one:

The national poll of likely Latino voters indicated that 73 percent of them approved of Obama’s performance in office, with over half those questioned looking favorably upon his handling of the healthcare debate and the economy, at 66 percent and 58 percent respectively.

Released on the eve of the Super Tuesday primaries in the race for the GOP nomination, the Fox News Latino poll shows former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney with 35 percent of Latino voter support, to Texas Rep. Ron Paul’s 13 percent, former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich‘s 12 percent, and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum’s 9 percent.

But the poll shows that the overwhelming choice among likely Latino voters is President Obama. In head-to-head match-ups none of the GOP candidates would garner more than 14 percent of the Latino vote come November, the poll said. …

While the poll indicates that four of five Latinos who voted for Obama in 2008 would vote for him later this year, Latinos who voted for Republican Arizona Sen. John McCain four years ago are now divided between voting for Obama and the Republican candidates. Forty percent said that they favored Obama while 38 percent said they would vote for Romney. Obama also leads Santorum 38 percent to 34, and Gingrich 40 percent to 38.

It’s unclear exactly why Latino voters so favor Obama. Like all voters, Latinos cite jobs and the economy as the most important election issue to them — and, on that, Obama has failed Latinos no less than he has failed Americans at large. After the economy, Latinos cite education and health care as their top priorities. Perhaps that’s where Obama has won them over. The GOP candidates oppose the DREAM Act, for example, which has as much to do with education as with immigration. Immigration is the fourth-most important issue to Latino voters, and they’re not pleased with either the GOP candidates’ or Obama’s performance on that issue.

At this point, the GOP candidates can’t do much to tailor their platforms to Latino voters. In this particular cycle, a doctrinaire attitude against illegal immigration became requisite to convince the conservative base that the candidates would, in fact, govern as conservatives — and that meant decrying DREAM, any form of in-state tuition for the children of immigrants who entered the country illegally at all and free emergency room care to undocumented immigrants, among other policies.

The best the GOP nominee can do is hammer home just how disastrous Obama’s policies have been for the economy — and, er, pick a Latino running mate:

One area where Republicans could gain back ground among Latino voters is by the choice of Vice President. Almost one-third of Latino voters say that they would consider voting Republican if there were a Latino on the ticket.  …

Almost one-quarter of Latinos said they would be more willing to vote for a Republican if [Marco] Rubio was on the ticket, with this number rising to almost four-in-ten in Florida, a potential swing state.

About one-fifth of likely Latino voters would be more willing to vote for a Republican if [Susana] Martínez  got the VP nod.

But, then, to judge by the frequency with which Marco Rubio’s name is brought up as a great choice for the vice presidential slot, the GOP probably already knew that.

At this point, though, I’m with George Will: We need to make sure we secure Congress. That means we need Marco Rubio in the Senate and, for that matter, Allen West in the House. Surely we can find a VP candidate from among the ranks of GOP governors.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

On that – why do you think liberals are against any form of voter ID verification?
whatcat on March 6, 2012 at 1:53 PM

To keep election costs down?
NotCoach on March 6, 2012 at 1:54 PM

The one area where they’re for cutting spending.

whatcat on March 6, 2012 at 2:02 PM

That means we need Marco Rubio in the Senate

Why would Rubio have to leave the Senate to run for VP?

strictnein on March 6, 2012 at 2:02 PM

Willard’s father was born in Mexico. Why does Willard need two Latinos on the ticket?

Emperor Norton on March 6, 2012 at 2:02 PM

Texas will be going blue in 10 years.

For every 1 Caucasian born in Texas, 3 Hispanics are born

liberal4life on March 6, 2012 at 1:48 PM

In my experience in Texas, Hispanics with a decent education and good job tend conservative.

So, yeah, if 0 has his way in our society, and they are kept underemployed and ill-educated, you are probably right.

iurockhead on March 6, 2012 at 2:03 PM

Emperor Norton on March 6, 2012 at 1:54 PM

Rubio was born in the United States and automatically naturalized at birth, thus making him a natural born citizen. End of story. This nonsense concerning Obama’s citizenship is now leading to the imbecilic practice of cutting our noses off to spite our face. No legal argument will ever be won declaring Rubio not a natural born citizen.

And how did trying to portray Obama as a Muslim because he spent part of his childhood in Indonesia work out for us? Same crap here regarding Rubio’s childhood affiliation with Mormonism.

NotCoach on March 6, 2012 at 2:05 PM

automatically naturalized at birth

There is no such thing. You’re either a citizen from birth or you’re not. Rubio is a citizen from birth.

thus making him a natural born citizen. End of story.

Wrong. He’s a citizen, and arguable a native-born citizen, but not a natural born citizen, which is different. End of story. Do some homework.

No legal argument will ever be won declaring Rubio not a natural born citizen.

Forever is a long time.

Emperor Norton on March 6, 2012 at 2:06 PM

Oh. My. God. Newt-Biden debate. I think I felt a tingle up my leg. On the other hand, Biden will likely pretend to be sick on the debate day. Here, tingle gone.

Archivarix on March 6, 2012 at 1:55 PM

Ha!

Even a Biden/Jindal debate would be delicious to watch.

I can see it now. Uncle Joe will open up with one of his classic lines, sure to get a few laughs from his peeps…

“So Bobby… where’s your dot?”
“Do your parents own a 7-11?”

If Joe Biden were a Republican he’d have been booted out of politics so very, very long ago.

But, he’s a Democrat, and they ignore things like that. They even forgave his backhanded comments on Obama.

But, you’re a Republican or conservative and say such things? Tarred and feathered you’ll be.

Logus on March 6, 2012 at 2:06 PM

Willard’s father was born in Mexico. Why does Willard need two Latinos on the ticket?

Emperor Norton on March 6, 2012 at 2:02 PM

Bill Clinton was the first black President. Mittster could be the first Latino one. :)

Archivarix on March 6, 2012 at 2:07 PM

In my experience in Texas, Hispanics with a decent education and good job tend conservative.

So, yeah, if 0 has his way in our society, and they are kept underemployed and ill-educated, you are probably right.

iurockhead on March 6, 2012 at 2:03 PM

I would add that professional conservative hispanics, at least the few I’ve worked with, have ancestors who have been in Texas for a couple of generations. But the anchor baby population is growing exponentially and they just want to live off the government.

TxAnn56 on March 6, 2012 at 2:07 PM

This nonsense concerning Obama’s citizenship is now leading to the imbecilic practice of cutting our noses off to spite our face.

NotCoach on March 6, 2012 at 2:05 PM

I disagree. We live in an increasingly global society and yet any old candidate with a friendly governor could gin up a “certificate of live birth” that may or may not reflect an individual qualified for the Presidency. We shouldn’t be encouraging witch hunts but I am saying that we probably should be doing more than taking the candidate’s word for their birth status and too many states don’t even vet this stuff before putting candidates on the ballot.

Happy Nomad on March 6, 2012 at 2:10 PM

Here’s a bit of good news. I went in to vote today and the registrar asked to see my ID. I had my government ID hanging on my hip and showed her that – SHE REJECTED IT! Why? Because it didn’t have my home address! It’s a GOVERNMENT ID, but that’s not good enought for her.

So, I showed her my state license. She was happy with it because the addresses matched up, but she warned me it’s due to expire on my birthday this year, which is before the national election – no current ID, no vote!

I LOVE this woman! We need an army of her.

I bet she was a Marine once, or, even better, the mother of a Marine.

She made my day. God Bless her.

Cricket624 on March 6, 2012 at 2:10 PM

Rubio was just elected and would go back to the Senate if a Romney/Rubio ticket loses. If he wins, Rick Scott picks another Republican to fill his seat for the rest of his term. What’s the problem here?

The Count on March 6, 2012 at 2:11 PM

Emperor Norton on March 6, 2012 at 2:06 PM

How exactly can anyone born an American citizen not automatically be considered a natural born citizen? If naturalized at birth, where are they a natural born citizen of if not the United States?

And don’t tell me to do my homework, make your case. You are the one making the claim he is ineligible.

NotCoach on March 6, 2012 at 2:12 PM

Why would Rubio have to leave the Senate to run for VP?

strictnein on March 6, 2012 at 2:02 PM

Neither Biden nor Obama nor McCain nor Kerry did. The only sitting Senator I recall leaving to run for the Presidency was Bob Dole.

Happy Nomad on March 6, 2012 at 2:12 PM

There is only one thing that will change this outcome and that is tone down the rhetoric. The fact of the matter is President Obama should be more loved by the extreme right. He is deporting more illegals than any other President. The Hispanic community is well aware of this, but look at their alternative. Thus far only two candidates have been reasonable and only one is left as an option, Newt Gingrich. You want another four years of President Obama, keep up the negative rhetoric, you want a private citizen Obama, then vote Newt.

DDay on March 6, 2012 at 2:12 PM

So apparently the goal of democrats is to keep blacks and hispanics poor and uneducated so they can keep them dependent on government.

I wonder what hispanics think of that?

darwin on March 6, 2012 at 2:14 PM

Susana Martinez will be a great choice. She is a Governor. She is conservative. She is Hispanic. She provides geographic balance. And she is a woman who will blunt the current GOP is anti- woman meme. Romney’s Lt. Gov in MA was a woman.

galtani on March 6, 2012 at 2:15 PM

Susana Martinez will be a great choice. She is a Governor. She is conservative. She is Hispanic. She provides geographic balance. And she is a woman who will blunt the current GOP is anti- woman meme. Romney’s Lt. Gov in MA was a woman.

galtani on March 6, 2012 at 2:15 PM

Yeah, I like Martinez. Has she endorsed anyone?

darwin on March 6, 2012 at 2:15 PM

It seems that the reasons Latinos cite for liking 0bama (from the post) are:
1. the economy (huh?)
2. education and welfare (free stuff)
3. loose immigration (path to free stuff)

All this pandering is making me angry. How about building a policy platform for Americans (United States version, not hemisphere version)?

I prefer to believe that honest Latinos value the freedoms and opportunities the US offers. Maybe I’m naive or delusional.

freedomfirst on March 6, 2012 at 2:15 PM

I don’t see Senator Rubio sacrificing his nascent career on the pyre of Romney’s doomed effort.

Drew Lowell on March 6, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Susana Martinez will be a great choice. She is a Governor. She is conservative. She is Hispanic. She provides geographic balance. And she is a woman who will blunt the current GOP is anti- woman meme. Romney’s Lt. Gov in MA was a woman.

galtani on March 6, 2012 at 2:15 PM

I’m a little skeptical of any politicians that haven’t spent much time in the dialogue of national politics. Rubio > Martinez

The Count on March 6, 2012 at 2:16 PM

She made my day. God Bless her.

Cricket624 on March 6, 2012 at 2:10 PM

I don’t know where you were voting but I’ve never had issues with the voting process here in Virginia. Funny how having a valid ID or voter registration card with a current address isn’t a problem here but in other states you would think that even daring to ask for identification is akin to a return to poll taxes and Jim Crow laws.

Happy Nomad on March 6, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Happy Nomad on March 6, 2012 at 2:10 PM

That is a legal issue, not an argument against any specific person’s citizenship status. I agree we should keep better track of births. However, there are liberty conflicts as well. A person will have a legitimate beef against a system that requires exacting tracking if their parents failed to comply with such a system. A new born has no control over their parents lack of compliance.

NotCoach on March 6, 2012 at 2:18 PM

How exactly can anyone born an American citizen not automatically be considered a natural born citizen?

As I said, being a natural-born citizen is different. It’s a higher standard. There is only one job that requires this standard–the Presidency. And it doesn’t just mean being born on US soil. This is why the Constitutuion requires Senators and members of the House to be citizens, but only the President must be a natural born citizen. Look it up. Do your homework.

If naturalized at birth, where are they a natural born citizen of if not the United States?

As I said, there is no such thing as “naturalized at birth.” Stop using that silly, makeshift phrase. You can be born a citizen, and you can be born a natural-born citizen, but there ain’t no such thing as “naturalized at birth.”

Emperor Norton on March 6, 2012 at 2:20 PM

I’m a little skeptical of any politicians that haven’t spent much time in the dialogue of national politics. Rubio > Martinez

The Count on March 6, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Martinez runs a state.

Martinez > Rubio

darwin on March 6, 2012 at 2:20 PM

liberal4life on March 6, 2012 at 1:30 PM

Being that your head is so far up Zero’s butt that it’s cutting of your oxygen…

annoyinglittletwerp on March 6, 2012 at 1:35 PM

That’s not the only place he/she/it’s head goes.

docflash on March 6, 2012 at 2:20 PM

Emperor Norton on March 6, 2012 at 2:20 PM

Two words for you: F off.

You don’t want to make your case then you’re nothing but an obnoxious troll not worth my time other then to make fun of.

NotCoach on March 6, 2012 at 2:22 PM

I’m a little skeptical of any politicians that haven’t spent much time in the dialogue of national politics. Rubio > Martinez

The Count on March 6, 2012 at 2:16 PM

That is not necessarily a negative: no paper trail or voting record to go after.

The attack line of the Dems and MSM will be: she has little experience in national issues and foreign policy and she is a heart beat way. But that argument may not sell when you have Barry the Zero.

galtani on March 6, 2012 at 2:23 PM

Just because the Dems managed to get an ineligible person installed in office, does not mean the rules applying to eligibility have changed. Rubio is not a natural born Citizen…his parents were not Citizens at the time of his birth; that make him a Citizen at best, a different category from natural born Citizen.

It is not a hard concept if you take a minute to understand the reasoning behind the natural born Citizen requirement; it is there to insure against outside influence. If just being born in the U.S. is sufficient, why does the rule say natural born Citizen instead of just Citizen? Once you see the reasoning, how can you ignore the requirement for Rubio or Obama?

1andyman on March 6, 2012 at 2:24 PM

Martinez runs a state.

Martinez > Rubio

darwin on March 6, 2012 at 2:20 PM

Rubio has Mormon past, may be ineligible to serve, and is needed in the Senate to eventually replace that snake McConnell.

Martinez >> Rubio

Archivarix on March 6, 2012 at 2:26 PM

You leave my Governor alone, New Mexico needs Susana Martinez, she’s already having a huge impact here and I don’t want her compromised like they did Palin.

Rancher on March 6, 2012 at 2:26 PM

I’m a little skeptical of any politicians that haven’t spent much time in the dialogue of national politics.
The Count on March 6, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Good call, Obama spent two years in the US Senate voting present and otherwise gearing up for a run against Hillary Clinton for the Presidency. If ever there were a cautionary tale of what happens when unfit idiots get elected it is the jug-eared traitor that must be beaten in November.

Happy Nomad on March 6, 2012 at 2:26 PM

Well I can say as an American of Puerto Rican heritage, that having a Latino veep won’t influence my vote (As long as they are conservative). I’m more concerned about who our Presidential candidate is. I can’t speak for other Latinos but the majority of my family will vote conservative/republican, although I know of two that few will vote liberal/democrat. We live in Florida, Missouri, New York, Tennessee and Texas. Most of the Latino’s in my circles, tend to be religious, social conservatives, pro-military, law and order types. Unfortunately it has been my first hand experience that the democrats have made great inroads among the Latino migrant population groups via welfare offerings (as they have among many other low income groups). As a Latino I’ve never been polled on whom I will vote for but I know one thing, it won’t be for President Obama.

RAN58 on March 6, 2012 at 2:28 PM

Dude, I made my case. I told you the section of the Constitution to look for, and quoted the 12th Amendment. You are too intellectually lazy, or impaired, to realise that words mean things, and being born in a country does not necessarily mean you’re a natural born citizen–although you are native born.

There were discussion at the Constitutional Convention on the subject of “natural born citizen.” The only place the phrase appeared contemporaenously was in the book Law of Nations, by Emmerich de Vattel. We know the volume was familiar to the Founders because a few years ago, someone discovered that a copy of this book was over 200 years overdue, checked out of the New-York Historical Society Library. The borrower was George Washington.

I don’t think Obama is Kenyan or Muslim, but he’s still ineligible–even if he’s really Canadian.

Emperor Norton on March 6, 2012 at 2:28 PM

Emperor Norton on March 6, 2012 at 2:06 PM

The definition of natural born citizen (in the US) has always meant someone “born within the United States, its territories or districts, whether the parents are citizens or aliens.”

The only mention of natural born citizen meaning born in the country to citizens of that country is in a French treatise that was quoted twice in the supreme court, once by a former democratic politician from Illinois, and once by a judge nominated by a democrat (in a dissenting opinion). Both times, it was to deny minorities a clear and unquestionable right, as democrats are wont to do.

Aside from those irregularities, natural born citizen means born in the country regardless of parentage (unless they are diplomats of a foreign country).

Fizzmaister on March 6, 2012 at 2:30 PM

Good call, Obama spent two years in the US Senate voting present and otherwise gearing up for a run against Hillary Clinton for the Presidency. If ever there were a cautionary tale of what happens when unfit idiots get elected it is the jug-eared traitor that must be beaten in November.

Happy Nomad on March 6, 2012 at 2:26 PM

But the VP does not run anything…..
I take it back, SloJoe runs his mouth.

galtani on March 6, 2012 at 2:31 PM

You leave my Governor alone, New Mexico needs Susana Martinez, she’s already having a huge impact here and I don’t want her compromised like they did Palin.

Rancher on March 6, 2012 at 2:26 PM

Don’t be greedy, bro. We in New Jersey will likely be forced to donate Chris Christie as Romney’s AG. Plus, whom do you want controlling the outer fence – Obama and Biden, or Romney and Martinez?

Archivarix on March 6, 2012 at 2:32 PM

The definition of natural born citizen (in the US) has always meant someone “born within the United States, its territories or districts, whether the parents are citizens or aliens.”

You have a vivid imagination. Where did you pull that one out from? Heh. And you put it in quotes, too!

Always meant? Try “never meant.”

Emperor Norton on March 6, 2012 at 2:34 PM

***

You want another four years of President Obama, keep up the negative rhetoric, you want a private citizen Obama, then vote Newt.

DDay on March 6, 2012 at 2:12 PM

People at Hot Air screamed “amnesty shill” when Newt proposed his multi-step plan, which had the promise of legal residency (not citizenship) for longstanding illegals with ties to the community and a sponsor. At the same time, easygoing Mitt was screaming to run ‘em out of the country. I’ve always thought that this was an issue that independents want solved without giving away the store.

Damn I wish Newt hadn’t gone negative in Florida. He should have played a tortoise and hare game with Romney.

BuckeyeSam on March 6, 2012 at 2:35 PM

Dude, I made my case. I told you the section of the Constitution to look for, and quoted the 12th Amendment.

Emperor Norton on March 6, 2012 at 2:28 PM

Absolute and total BS. Please point to the definition of natural born citizen in the above references. That is one of the major issues surrounding this debate: What does natural born citizen mean? Nothing in the Constitution is helpful in defining it for us.

NotCoach on March 6, 2012 at 2:35 PM

Natural born citizen isn’t defined in the Constitution so you have to look at historical opinion. According to the The Congressional Research Service the legal and scholarly opinions historically have held it to mean “one who is entitled under the Constitution or laws of the United States to U.S. citizenship “at birth” or “by birth,” including any child born “in” the United States, even to alien parents (other than to foreign diplomats serving their country), the children of United States citizens born abroad, and those born abroad of one citizen parent who has met U.S. residency requirements.” Good luck libs if you want to go the birther route with Rubio.

Rancher on March 6, 2012 at 2:37 PM

Another suggestion: the governor from Puerto Rico–Fortuno? He seems to be turning it around.

BuckeyeSam on March 6, 2012 at 2:37 PM

…but all her relatives and friends voted for Obama and will likely do so again without having a clue about what he is doing to this country.

SPCOlympics on March 6, 2012 at 1:37 PM

My mother tells me that all her friends who immigrated and ultimately became citizens blindly vote D because they came here for “democracy”. Not sure what they think a “republic” is, but it could be a language thing. BTW, they’re Greek…tells you how much they know.

freedomfirst on March 6, 2012 at 2:38 PM

You guys can’t have Governor Martinez. She is making my home state habitable again. She has done what she said she would do. What a breath of fresh air after Richardson.

conservative_student on March 6, 2012 at 2:39 PM

What does natural born citizen mean?

Now we’re getting somehere. Obviously, it must mean something different than just a plain, old “citizen.” Why does the President need to be one, but Senators and Congressmen don’t? Hmmm? (It has to do with the President being Commander in Chief of the armed forces.)

The definition of natural born citizen (in the US) has always meant someone “born within the United States, its territories or districts, whether the parents are citizens or aliens.”

These are the ideas of one lawyer, John Rawle, writing on the subject in 1829. It’s not the law. I see you copied the passage from Wikipedia. Heh.

Emperor Norton on March 6, 2012 at 2:44 PM

one lawyer, John William Rawle

FIFM.

Emperor Norton on March 6, 2012 at 2:46 PM

Emperor Norton on March 6, 2012 at 2:34 PM

Let’s see, John Bingham, Edward Bates, William Rawle, James Wilson all wrote comments on the clear meaning of “natural born citizen.”

In terms of cases, Lynch v. Clarke, and United States v. Wong Kim Ark (the case where the second of my previously cited democrap judges tried to cite the French treatise).

You asked Not Coach to stop using the made up term, “naturalized at birth.” I’m asking you to stop using the term “native-born citizen.” It doesn’t exist in the constitution. There are only two types of citizens in the United States, Natural Born Citizen and Naturalized Citizen.

Cite European sources all you like, the US isn’t Europe, we do not take into account the citizenship of parents when determining whether children become citizens at birth.

I’d love to continue this debate further (not really), but I must leave now. Make sure you have your helmet on tightly.

Fizzmaister on March 6, 2012 at 2:47 PM

Rancher on March 6, 2012 at 2:37 PM

And our courts will not deviate from such an interpretation. I wonder though if our Founders didn’t intend to leave the final definition of natural born to Congress with the above being the absolute minimum for being considered natural born.

NotCoach on March 6, 2012 at 2:47 PM

Martinez runs a state.

Martinez > Rubio

darwin on March 6, 2012 at 2:20 PM

See Palin-Couric interview, 2008

Rubio > Martinez

BTW, do most people here know anything about Martinez on the issues? I think I heard she was someone who had a gradual drift over from the Democrat Party. In other words, she may be a RINO worthy of the same scorn you guys bestow upon Romney. Better line up the circular firing squad!

The Count on March 6, 2012 at 2:47 PM

lobotomy4life …not to worry!…we will ask Taco Bell to run for VP.

KOOLAID2 on March 6, 2012 at 2:48 PM

Marco Rubio will not help the ticket.

He is a former Mormon.

Asking evangelicals to vote for a a Mormon and a former Mormon is a slap in the face

liberal4life on March 6, 2012 at 1:30 PM

Excuse me, but I fail to understand why a lib like you even comments on this blog.

Who made you an authority on what Evangelicals will and won’t vote for? I’m a Protestant not an Evangelical, but there is not that much difference in what I believe vs my Evangelical friends. I do not personally know anyone who votes for someone based on what religion they are, if that candidate is moral, and qualified for the job.

You and your lib friends aren’t concerned that Obama’s father was Muslim and his mother agnostic, even though he seems to heavily favor the Muslim faith in many of his actions, or that he sat in church and listened to a hate-mongering pastor for 20 years as an adult, so why should you be concerned about what religion Rubio’s family practiced when he was a young child? That said, it’s obvious that it’s you and the liberals in this Country that are against Mormans, not the Evangelical voters.

Your double standard is amazing, but I guess it keeps us from talking about what’s important, like how Obama’s presidency is a total failure.

Susanboo on March 6, 2012 at 2:48 PM

Nice headline.

What the hell, I hope the Republican Party engages in this
Identity politics based on one’s ethnicity full throttle.
Why not impode the party with one big bang?
Nominate a gutless appeaser and throw in a token hispanic
to pander for votes!!

yeah baby! Now that’s the way to show the American people
what this party stands for!!

Just when I think our political climate in this country can’t get
any worse, this Horsh*t is pushed…..have a nice day Republican
Party…been nice knowin ya…..

ToddPA on March 6, 2012 at 2:53 PM

Fizzmaister on March 6, 2012 at 2:47 PM

I incorrectly used the term naturalized citizen. However, even though I don’t think anyone can make a serious argument that Obama or Rubio don’t qualify as natural born under current US law, what do you think of the possibility that our Founders may have intended for Congress to make the final definition of natural born?

NotCoach on March 6, 2012 at 2:54 PM

These are the ideas of one lawyer, John Rawle, writing on the subject in 1829. It’s not the law. I see you copied the passage from Wikipedia. Heh.

And? My point is that there is no settled law. What you have to look at is intent, again from Wiki, which isn’t an automatic disqualifier BTW, I trust Wiki more than I trust you, the intent was to make sure that foreign aristocrats don’t immigrate here and become President. Good luck claiming Rubio is a foreign aristocrat.

Rancher on March 6, 2012 at 2:55 PM

Good call, Obama spent two years in the US Senate voting present and otherwise gearing up for a run against Hillary Clinton for the Presidency. If ever there were a cautionary tale of what happens when unfit idiots get elected it is the jug-eared traitor that must be beaten in November.

Happy Nomad on March 6, 2012 at 2:26 PM

Hard to tell if you were being facetious or not, but it’s worth reminding everyone that a GOP nominee/vp need to be able to battle the media gotcha questions (that their democrat counterparts never get) without looking dumb. Palin wasn’t ready for that. I don’t know about Martinez. But, I’ve seen Rubio handle those situations aplomb.

The Count on March 6, 2012 at 2:56 PM

Evangelicals will vote for a Black Theology disciple over a Mormon? They will vote for someone trampling on religious freedom over a Mormon? They will vote for someone who advocated infanticide over a Mormon?

Rancher on March 6, 2012 at 3:01 PM

Is Luis Fortuno of Puerto Rico eligible?

http://reason.com/blog/2011/12/07/wall-street-journal-luis-fortuo-for-vp

Vanilla Salt on March 6, 2012 at 3:04 PM

If we are going to pick a hispanicgovernor go with Fortuno

cpaulus on March 6, 2012 at 3:06 PM

I’ve voted Republican since Reagan. I’ll vote for a non-Latino White guy if I feel he’d represent my point of view. I dont care what the guy’s race or background is.

It seems to me that Chicanos are the most adamant about amnesty. Others, not so much.

Shambhala on March 6, 2012 at 3:06 PM

I’m sick of this type of blackmail. Screw ‘em.

Blake on March 6, 2012 at 3:10 PM

The national poll of likely Latino voters indicated that 73 percent of them approved of Obama’s performance in office…

But how many of them are illegal aliens that should not be voting?

slickwillie2001 on March 6, 2012 at 3:10 PM

How about Sandoval from NV?

vegconservative on March 6, 2012 at 3:21 PM

“it’s unclear why Latino voters so favor Obama.”

Tina can’t be this dumb, right? Latinos overwhelmingly favor Obama because Repblicans are largely incapable of talking about immigration without sounding like virulent rackets (“Hispanics ate lazy welfare bums who commit crime, refuse to assimilate and want to give the Southwest back to Mexico”). And when a Republican deviates from the party line, like Perry or Newt, they get savaged by gangs of right wing hysterics.

Stop talking about Latinos like they’re scum, and you might get a few votes.

urban elitist on March 6, 2012 at 3:23 PM

If Michael Scherer is right and Latinos will pick the next president, then the eventual GOP nominee — whoever he might be — is in trouble.

So the open borders thing worked like a charm for the left….

V7_Sport on March 6, 2012 at 3:26 PM

Damn I wish Newt hadn’t gone negative in Florida. He should have played a tortoise and hare game with Romney.

BuckeyeSam on March 6, 2012 at 2:35 PM

I couldn’t agree more. I guess be damn with logic is the best thought on immigration, its better to throw red meat and end up in the losers corner with your dignity and four more years of President Obama.

DDay on March 6, 2012 at 3:31 PM

More government give away’s, that’s the solution and it won’t matter who the “giver” is. This is simple, you’ve go to buy them with taxpayer’s money. Isn’t it a great country?

rplat on March 6, 2012 at 3:45 PM

Stop talking about Latinos like they’re scum, and you might get a few votes.

urban elitist on March 6, 2012 at 3:23 PM

Care to link to examples of that kind of stereotyping? I haven’t seen it and as a Hispanic I would think I would have noticed. Many of the Hispanics in New Mexico support the closing of our borders and are against illegal immigration. Susana got elected on the platform of getting rid of driver’s licenses for illegals and more border enforcement and you don’t get elected here without a large majority of the Hispanic vote. As a border state we suffer more than most from open borders and the flood of illegals straining our public services. The difference between us and Californians is that we have been here for generations and aren’t still trying to get the rest of our families over here.

Rancher on March 6, 2012 at 3:47 PM

Stop talking about Latinos like they’re scum, and you might get a few votes.

urban elitist on March 6, 2012 at 3:23 PM

I reserve such insults for vapid posters who are incapable of making solid arguments and must instead resort to racialist and PC nonsense.

NotCoach on March 6, 2012 at 3:51 PM

that worked so well when they tried to get the Hilary Clinton voters by making Sarah VP nominee. Looking back, that was dumb, and that was the worst thing that ever happened to Sarah Palin.

Imagine if she never got introduced that way, but instead a la Cain, or Perry. On her own terms, own campaign. Ha. #shouldawouldacoulda

Can.I.be.in.the.middle on March 6, 2012 at 3:57 PM

Susana Martinez will be a great choice. She is a Governor. She is conservative. She is Hispanic. She provides geographic balance. And she is a woman who will blunt the current GOP is anti- woman meme. Romney’s Lt. Gov in MA was a woman.

galtani on March 6, 2012 at 2:15 PM

Yes! She’s my first choice as well. Much stronger than Rubio, imho.

Just Sayin on March 6, 2012 at 3:59 PM

In 2008 I voted for Sarah Palin in spite of John McCain.

The same scenario is happening this year, I’ll probably vote for Marco Rubio in spite of Romney, but if it’s Romney and another liberal moderate I’ll be voting again for Sarah Palin.

RJL on March 6, 2012 at 4:04 PM

Luis Fortuño for VP, governor of Puerto Rico.

islandman78 on March 6, 2012 at 1:21 PM

NO!

ProudPalinFan on March 6, 2012 at 4:08 PM

When will Republicans realize that they will never out-pander Democrats when pimping for ‘Latinos’? This parroted talking point that ‘Latinos will choose the next president’ is such nonsense that it makes me sick. Why are we required to pander to particular ethnic groups? Does it make sense to alienate large portions of the electorate when ‘Latinos’ only consist of 7% of the electorate? How did all that pandering work out for John McCain?

Stop drinking the racial divisive kool-aid and simply campaign to get AMERICANS to vote for you. The racial bean counting just gives control of the narrative to the left. The GOPs greed that led them to ignore illegal immigration for the exploitation of cheap labor will be the death of the party. Look to California for what the future has to offer if we continue to give out amnesties or look the other way because we don’t want to ‘offend’ the ‘Latino’ community.

Jerry Bear on March 6, 2012 at 4:08 PM

That trend crosses racial and ethnic “boundaries”. There are a lot of people who vote while ignorant.

The candidate looks nice? Vote for them.
The candidate looks like me? Vote for them.
The candidate says the other candidate is bad? Vote for them.
The candidate says they’ll give me lots of stuff? Vote for them.
The media/Hollywood says the other candidate is bad? Vote accordingly.
My parents voted for party x, so I vote for party x too.

I seem to recall Bill Clinton getting a lot of women voting for him because they thought he was so handsome.

There was a lot more than Bush and Republican hate going on as to why Obama won.

Logus on March 6, 2012 at 1:47 PM

Unfortunately that’s the truth and I snapped out of that one and I feel sorry for those I speak to that speak like this.

ProudPalinFan on March 6, 2012 at 4:12 PM

When has Michael Scherer ever given the GOP good advice in the past?

Just wondering . . . is there some reason this leftist is being helpful now?

Adjoran on March 6, 2012 at 4:18 PM

Stop talking about Latinos like they’re scum, and you might get a few votes.

urban elitist on March 6, 2012 at 3:23 PM

Take it from the village idiot, all Latinos are amnesty begging coyotes, single issue voters and appreciative of Obama’s empty promises and one-word fake Hispanic accent pandering (Lahtinossss).

The Count on March 6, 2012 at 4:22 PM

Is Luis Fortuno of Puerto Rico eligible?

http://reason.com/blog/2011/12/07/wall-street-journal-luis-fortuo-for-vp

Vanilla Salt on March 6, 2012 at 3:04 PM

Heh I am from PR and I don’t even know! PR is a US Commonwealth and we can vote for the POTUS primaries but NOT for the general election because we’re not a state (let’s not go there).

This is the reason why we don’t know: The Supreme Court Justices (here: Clarence Thomas) is even avoiding the issue.

So, my daughter can run for office, my husband can, but my firstborn and I we’re kinda hanging on the balance.

ProudPalinFan on March 6, 2012 at 4:38 PM

I don’t think picking a Hispanic like Susana or Rubio amounts to a policy of “give out amnesties or look the other way”. Pandering to a demographic with your VP pick is a time honored tactic. The only other reason for picking someone is to tie up the nomination by picking your opposition. That could happen here and that would really suck.

Rancher on March 6, 2012 at 4:47 PM

If you are a Caucasian, you are a racists if you vote for someone because of their race. If you are not a Caucasian, it seems to be the primary reason to cast a vote. I am really tired of M&M politics where we pick someone for their sex or ethnicity. It is fundamentally wrong no matter who does it.

aniptofar on March 6, 2012 at 4:59 PM

CONFIRMED : Anyone but Romney will be good choice.

Fuquay Steve on March 6, 2012 at 5:19 PM

aniptofar on March 6, 2012 at 4:59 PM

Great point. We have a lunatic doctrine of racial taboos designed by the left that many conservatives fall for because they are so terrified of being called ‘racist’.

Jerry Bear on March 6, 2012 at 5:27 PM

This speculation about whether a minority candidate will be palatable is just mind-boggling. A woman on the ticket will not blunt Democrats’ “war on women” rhetoric; she will be the gender equivalent of an Uncle Tom and savaged extra-hard by the left for her trouble. That’s all. Same thing for a Latino.

WE SHOULD KNOW THIS. We’ve seen it happen over and over. So why are we talking about Martinez being a Latina like it matters? If you like her for VP, talk about what she’s done that qualifies her, not what she is.

TouchingTophet on March 6, 2012 at 5:46 PM

If you like her for VP, talk about what she’s done that qualifies her, not what she is.

TouchingTophet on March 6, 2012 at 5:46 PM

That’s why we need to give her eight years as Governor. She’s already got our fiscal house in order after Richardson wrecked it.

Rancher on March 6, 2012 at 5:58 PM

People at Hot Air screamed “amnesty shill” when Newt proposed his multi-step plan, which had the promise of legal residency (not citizenship) for longstanding illegals with ties to the community and a sponsor. At the same time, easygoing Mitt was screaming to run ‘em out of the country. I’ve always thought that this was an issue that independents want solved without giving away the store.

Damn I wish Newt hadn’t gone negative in Florida. He should have played a tortoise and hare game with Romney.

BuckeyeSam on March 6, 2012 at 2:35 PM

Just the state of CA brings in more illegals every year than anyone in DC can ever hope to ship out. Add in a few more pro-illegals states and the picture changes, dramatically. Newt’s plan was based on that fact, too bad Rubio and Co. are stupid enough to both understand this and admit this. Not that there is a chance Romney will win in a general, provided he is GOP’s selection, but if he does make it to the general I will take any and all bets from all of these “immigration experts in their minds” that Romney, as POTUS, won’t do much about illegals save for saber rattling, same as he does on all other issues. His RomneyCare was designed to take care of illegals, have no idea how anyone sane is listening to all the BS from his camp and Romney himself when it comes to illegals. And any other issues. And Rubio can go to hell along with his puppet master Romney after his actions led to Romney win in FL.

So, anyone wants to bet? You seem to be convinced illegals will be eradicated by Romney. Put your money where your mouth is. Or shut up once and for all.

riddick on March 6, 2012 at 6:22 PM

“..Mi nombre es Marco Rubio.!”

MaiDee on March 6, 2012 at 6:26 PM

yes. let’s have a Latino VP. Sounds awesome to me. They need encouragement to move in the direction of their conservative instincts, and they deserve to get it.

cheetah2 on March 6, 2012 at 7:04 PM

yes. let’s have a Latino VP. Sounds awesome to me. They need encouragement to move in the direction of their conservative instincts, and they deserve to get it.

I say this only if we have good Latino candidates to go with, which I think we do, and so why not? We need any advantage we can get. It would be better if ethnicity were not a factor for voters, but it is so lets deal with reality no matter how dislikable it is.

cheetah2 on March 6, 2012 at 7:09 PM

Latinos are overwhelming Catholic, pro life, pro family, and pro jobs.

What part of this helps Obama again?

Roy Rogers on March 6, 2012 at 7:59 PM

Texas will be going blue in 10 years.

For every 1 Caucasian born in Texas, 3 Hispanics are born

liberal4life on March 6, 2012 at 1:48 PM

…(Taco Bell will be the VP candidate…tell your friends).

KOOLAID2 on March 6, 2012 at 8:04 PM

libtard4life believes Hispanics are the next slave class??? Really???

Hispanics HATE lazy, atheist, homo loving, white punk liberals.

NOTHING goes against everything they believe in more than libtards.

Roy Rogers on March 6, 2012 at 8:33 PM

How about the Republicans look for a handicapped, black, Hispanic, transvestite just to cover as many bases as possible.

Nomas on March 6, 2012 at 8:43 PM

Roy Rogers on March 6, 2012 at 7:59 PM

We hear this time and time again that ‘Latinos’ are naturally ‘conservative’ but evidence suggests the exact opposite. They throw their social values out the window when it comes elections because they consistently vote for Democrats who offer them free stuff. Stop chasing a pipe dream created by the pro-amnesty pro-cheap labor neocons.

Jerry Bear on March 6, 2012 at 9:09 PM

Jerry Bear on March 6, 2012 at 9:09 PM

That’s BS

The Hispanic and Latino vote led to historic losses by liberals across America in 2010.

Can’t wait to see what damage your War on Religion will do to your failed social animal farm.

Roy Rogers on March 6, 2012 at 10:52 PM

No way.

Rubio is only 40 and does not have the life experience to be president.

He went to college on a football scholarship, got his law degree and went straight into governing the people. Then he jumped straight from the Florida State Senate in 2006 to the U.S> Senate in 2009. He has never held any private sector job of note, although it’s possible he flipped burgers while on his football scholarship. This guy basically has 0bama’s job arc.

Conservative or not, he needs to get older and pay his dues.

The vice-president is supposed to be someone capable of being president should the president not finish his term.

He’s not supposed to be a race puppet dangled up there for a few racist votes.

We need a highly qualified Pres & VP, and Rubio fails.

cane_loader on March 6, 2012 at 11:37 PM

The presidency would be a stone cold lock. And it would be a watershed for attracting your average hard-working, abortion-opposing, jumping-through-legal-immigration-hoops, family-raising Hispanics who’d see that the Left — which takes their support for granted — is not where liberty and prosperity is found. This is the time. Will the GOP get smart? Not holding breath.

curved space on March 7, 2012 at 8:48 AM

automatically naturalized at birth
There is no such thing. You’re either a citizen from birth or you’re not. Rubio is a citizen from birth.

thus making him a natural born citizen. End of story.
Wrong. He’s a citizen, and arguable a native-born citizen, but not a natural born citizen, which is different. End of story. Do some homework.

No legal argument will ever be won declaring Rubio not a natural born citizen.
Forever is a long time.

Emperor Norton on March 6, 2012 at 2:06 PM

There was a flap in the Lame-Stream Media a few months ago where someone pointed out to Marco Rubio that his parents had left Cuba BEFORE Castro came to power, and had not fled Castro directly. His mother had visited Cuba for less than a month in 1962, after which both of his parents lived in the United States ever since.

Since Marco Rubio was born in 1971, he can be forgiven for not knowing everything about his family history from before he was born–he can only repeat what older family members have told him. But the point is, both of Rubio’s parents had lived permanently in the United States since 1958, and had become US citizens long before Marco Rubio’s birth in the United States.

We already have a President who was born (so he says) in a state that had only joined the Union two years earlier, whose father was NOT an American citizen at the time of his birth, and never became one, and left our country to foment revolution in Kenya two years after his son (our President) was born.

Marco Rubio was born in Florida to both parents who were citizens at the time of his birth, and who had lived in the US constantly for at least 9 years prior to his birth, and have always been law-abiding citizens. What would be the problem of his eligibility to become President?

Steve Z on March 7, 2012 at 10:26 AM

Hard to tell if you were being facetious or not, but it’s worth reminding everyone that a GOP nominee/vp need to be able to battle the media gotcha questions (that their democrat counterparts never get) without looking dumb. Palin wasn’t ready for that. I don’t know about Martinez. But, I’ve seen Rubio handle those situations aplomb.

The Count on March 6, 2012 at 2:56 PM

Sarah Palin, after being Governor of a sparsely-populated state with relatively Republican-friendly media, was totally unprepared for the vicious attacks of the left-wing media of the Lower 48.

But Rubio won his Senate election by over a million votes in the fourth largest state in the Union, which has its share of liberal media who cater to the “sunbirds” (retired New Englanders) seeking sun and fun along the Gold Coast (Miami/Fort Lauderdale/Palm Beach–the Gore recount counties!). Rubio is an excellent, smooth, and articulate speaker, who comes across as genuinely “likeable” even to those who may disagree with some of his positions, which can be extremely important in wooing all “independent” voters, not only Latinos.

It remains to be seen whether Rubio, at age 41, would have the experience and “gravitas” to be Vice President, but he would not be the youngest Vice President in history if elected. That distinction belongs to Richard Nixon, who was 39 when he was elected Vice President in 1952, who committed his worst errors in 1972-73, when he was in his late 50′s and supposedly more experienced.

Steve Z on March 7, 2012 at 10:46 AM

STOP with the identity political pandering please. Find someone with character who’s qualified and will -for the first time in decades run on the truth -it will be the only thing to turn the nation around.

To Hades with this leftist party and their “us-too” GOP clones who are unprincipled liars who tell us what they think we want to hear, only to change it tommorrow. Why elect another RINO, who’s at best, questionable on the abortion scourge and loves the big government Oromneycare he created and embraces?

The GOP would put up, and protect Satan, if he’s promised to leave the status quo alone.

Don L on March 7, 2012 at 11:57 AM

Since Marco Rubio was born in 1971, he can be forgiven for not knowing everything about his family history from before he was born–he can only repeat what older family members have told him. But the point is, both of Rubio’s parents had lived permanently in the United States since 1958, and had become US citizens long before Marco Rubio’s birth in the United States.

Steve Z on March 7, 2012 at 10:26 AM

I do not know ANYONE who doesn’t know his/her family history, recent history at that. I can rattle off names and ages of family members going back at least 100 years, cities they were born in and lived, ages, etc. Rubio, just like his puppet master Romney, is very good at telling tall tales, but that is not a qualification a VP should run on. His parents left Cuba in mid ’50s, they did not flee Castro regime, meme that gave a lot of play to Rubio’s election to US Senate. Don’t care what Rubio has to say, I do side with LSM on this one. “I did not know” is not a defensible position unless you’re 5 years old and still learning not to draw on walls, and certainly for someone running for US Senate. He’s a fraud, like Romney.

riddick on March 7, 2012 at 12:20 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3