Romney 2012?

All Republicans have learned from Bush Senior. Make no promises, because people will then expect you to keep them.

Unfortunately, that's the only lesson they seem to have learned in the last 20 years.

The only question might be is whether those that do not see Romney as their preferred candidate will still vote for him, in context of President Obama's track record during the past four years. That track record includes one's possible hoped for promises, like Guantanamo, and "spreading the wealth around."

Regardless, most people I believe, are concerned with the economy. Not just for them, but for family, friends, etc. And, how long did it take FDR to implement the WPA, during the depession? In my opinion, voters might be thinking that President Obama's "bag of tricks," to fix the unemployment, might be empty. Therefore, a vote for Romney may just be a vote for a hoped for bag of tricks (to fix the unemployment) that has some new, unseen tricks?

A vote for Romney, in many people's minds, could be like when a young person accepts a different "blind date," after the prior blind date was disappointing.

That could be Romneys campaign slogan: You'll Only Have Yourself To Blame, If You Are Disappointed Twice!

Like they expected Obama to keep his?

so what's your pro and con list for Romney?

To be honest, I havent decided to support him or not.
He has some good points, as does Obama.

And he has some bad points, as does Obama.

Without implying any correlation to other behaviors beyond this one... I would't classify his lack of response to this particular issue as spinelessness but rather, political expediency. I don't think Romney gains anything by taking a stance on this yet. He's better off letting the whole thing ride for a while and testing the political winds before making a move.

Remember that for the next few months both candidates are going to be moving pawns and knights very strategically to construct a board which maximizes their probability of success in the end game. Everything we see (or read between the lines) for the next few months has to be seen within the context of the campaign.

I didn't ask if you were supporting Romney.

I asked what you thought his pros and cons are.



(does someone have to know if they're supporting a candidate before they work out the pros and cons?)

The only promise that I'm really upset about him not keeping is the detention facility at Guantanamo.

Since it's not something that I would expect to be rectified by a Republican administration, it doesn't really factor into my choice of who to vote for.

I'd say that the biggest con for Romney is the fact that nobody on his own side is a full-throated voice of support for him. All they ever do is attack Obama.

Cycloptichorn

Perhaps he is waiting to read yours?

I'd be interested in reading any of someone's pro list for Romney.

The guy is the poster child for "the skills required to get the job have nothing to do with performing the job."

He has no moral center at all, from what I can tell. All he cares about is getting 50% +1 votes.

I don't think anyone's interested in my pro/con list for any U.S. candidate.

I could give you pro/con lists for most of our Canadian party leaders (I was going to say all, but I really only know the ones for the parties that are represented in our federal Parliament).

I think it's important to know the strengths and weaknesses of all of the options.



Does anyone have a pro/con list for Mr. Romney? there are whacks of threads going both ways on Mr. Obama - I thought this was a great thread idea.

my pro and con list for any politician

pro
they'll eventually die

con
probably not soon enough

I will follow the topic, but reserve the right to merely read without giving much input.

Foofie has told us his 'pro' for Romney on a number of threads.

Romney is a WASP.

i always think of him more as a WISP, blows around if the wind changes

My own pro/con list for Romney:

Pros:

- Seems to be a basically intelligent person.

- Has held moderate-t0-liberal positions in the past. (Pro-gay marriage, etc.)


Cons:

- Etch-a-sketch. He has proven himself stupendously willing to change his positions.

- Private-sector/ business executive experience doesn't translate well to governing. You need to serve everyone when you govern a nation -- the richest and also the poorest -- while in a business you can (and should) be much more ruthless. (I.e., in a nation, if a child is starving you should do something about it. In a business, if a child is starving that's not your problem, and if the child's father's productivity is declining significantly because he's giving all of the food he can scrounge to his many children, then as a successful steward of your business' bottom line you should fire him.)

- His current, stated positions on just about everything. (Abortion, gay marriage, the environment, foreign policy, taxes, etc., etc.)

- His fealty to the far right, as weighed against his formerly moderate positions. He has to pander to them to get elected, and he would be beholden to them in office. I see no reason that he would revert to being a moderate if he were elected.

- His willingness to tell flat-out whoppers. He's still coasting on a reputation as a basically nice (if boring) guy, but he's been doing some really sleazy stuff on the stump. Not just standard tweaks and evasions but major misrepresentations, and repetitions of lies that have been proven to be lies.

pro: he won't be much different than Obama

con: he won't be much different than Obama