Mitt Romney...what are his policies?

Smooth.

Sounds like Obama....only to the right, frankly.

Hard to tell right now, because he doesn't like to stick his neck out and tends to play it safe instead of stand up for something (which is one reason why you are seeing the Republicans have a hard time settling on him). He's all about getting elected, mainly. Even more so that most politicians. And this is the primary and he will have to tack to the center in the election so even when he does take a stand it's hard to tell what might just be primary campaigning. For example, he is trying to get conservative bona fides by talking an even more hawkish line of talk than Obama, in order to try to portray Obama as being "soft on Iran" and "not a true friend of Israel" but Obama already tacked that way, giving up on any attempt at Mideast peace this term, and playing a tough balancing act of sabre-rattling and behind-the-scenes attempts at cooling heads on Iran that borders on wholly irresponsible. So I can't realistically see him as bending over backwards any more than Obama has on these issues, going any further would mean a real shooting war and I think he's mainly talk on these issues.

But to answer your question, his policies are likely not too different from Obama on most issues, even though he needs to find greater contrast with Obama than is really there in order to campaign against him, just like Obama did with Bush, promising lofty changes that he subsequently backed down on repeatedly.

Oh dearie, dearie, me.

I don't know about his policies, but he apparently got his strategy from Monty Burns:
http://www.rubinreport.com/post/18461168370/mitt-romney-is-clearly-modeling-his-campaign-after

Baseball 'mitt's' for every one...

Does not matter....he is a shape-shifter, they will change constantly with the wind.

At least that's one thing we can be certain about...

It's kinda terrifying how close the race was in Ohio. Romney barely beat Santorum by 1 percentage point. Ohio has a ton of electoral votes and has been pivotal in the last few elections. I'm a little worried that so many people in a northern industrialized state would vote for a right-wing lunatic like Santorum. When you look at the map, Romney won Cleveland, Columbus, and Cincinnati... the places that matter.

Why thank you! (I'm in Columbus.)

The very good news in Ohio is how low the turnout was. What matters most is not whether Ohio votes for Santorum or Romney but if they vote for Obama or the Republican nominee in November. And the indicators there were good.

A lot of Santorum's votes were from Democrats, too. Does that mean they actually thought he was the better option, or that they preferred that he be the one who runs against Obama because Santorum's easier to beat?

I'm thrilled that Santorum did that well, because it keeps Romney focused on the primary. That means a few things:

1) With Santorum nipping at his heels, Romney has to keep tacking to the right to win the nomination at all, which makes it harder for him to then turn moderate again during the election.

2) Romney has to keep spending money hand over fist -- he's proven that the money advantage is his main advantage. And he is already running into money problems.

3) Romney has to dispatch Santorum/ Gingrich before he can pivot to Obama, so the longer the primary goes on, the shorter the general election campaign is.

4) Related but slightly different, the longer there are viable Republican candidates in the primary field, the longer their attacks on Romney are in the news and being viewed.

I still think Romney is the most likely person to become the nominee, but I'm rooting for Santorum to drag this thing out as long as possible.

Meanwhile, re: Romney's policies, just read this:



http://reason.com/archives/2012/03/07/the-mysterious-mr-romney

(Much more detail in the full article.)

He strikes me as a big business sort of Republican. The kind who is more concerned about the interests of the wealthy than about social conservatism.

On social issues, his views during elections seem to be whatever best panders to the current crop of voters, no matter how extreme or how moderate. When he was governor though, his social policies were more pragmatist than idealist.

Found on facebook

Kids spell 'Romney' wrong in one of the great freudian slips.

Interesting.

Sadly, I think oralloy is right.

That Romney could have a "deeply held conviction" is the basis for a joke.

Mitt's policy right now is to win the GOP nomination, no matter what he has to say to do it.

His whole approach seems extremely calculated and designed to navigate conflicting political waters.

Any maybe that by itself is a good qualifying skill for a president????