Massachusetts hadn't elected a Republican senator since 1962. Things change, and PA may be in play, for the simple reason that Obama has so thoroughly screwed up the country in his first term that many Democrats aren't going to pull the lever for him. If it came down to a few votes, wouldn't you want yours to be one of them?
Originally Posted by marinejcksn
Originally Posted by marinejcksn
There is a lot to recommend Romney. First, he was extremely effective at Bain Capital and running the Salt Lake City Olympics, which means that he has a proven record of taking failed or failing enterprises and turning them around without increasing costs. Given the massive failures that we are seeing in DC, that's not a bad resume, especially in view of his record as governor, where he started with a $3 billion deficit and left office with a $721 million surplus. As governor of Massachusetts, we're told that he governed as a liberal, but he actually vetoed over 800 bills or line items in the budget. Most of these were overturned, but let's face it, he was governor of the most liberal state in the country, and he managed to bring the budget back into line with revenues despite the Democrats.
His Wikipedia entry details his actions as governor. It's not as bad as Mike128 makes it out to be. For example, although he claimed to be pro-choice, Romney vetoed a number of pro-abortion bills. He started out being in favor of embryonic stem cell research, but changed his mind afer talking to a stem cell researcher:
Romney says that his views on abortion were drastically altered on November 9, 2004, after discussing stem cell research with Douglas Melton, a stem cell researcher at Harvard University
. The Harvard Stem Cell Institute was planning research that would have involved therapeutic cloning.
The Governor says that Melton declared that the research "is not a moral issue because we kill the embryos at 14 days." "I looked over at Beth Myers, my chief of staff, and we both had exactly the same reaction, which is it just hit us hard," recalled Romney. "And as they walked out, I said, 'Beth, we have cheapened the sanctity of life by virtue of the Roe v. Wade
mentality.' And from that point forward, I said to the people of Massachusetts, 'I will continue to honor what I pledged to you, but I prefer to call myself pro-life.'"
Melton disputes Romney's account of the meeting, declaring "Governor Romney has mischaracterized my position; we didn't discuss killing or anything related to it ... I explained my work to him, told him about my deeply held respect for life, and explained that my work focuses on improving the lives of those suffering from debilitating diseases."
If Romney is telling the truth, then this means that he is open to changing his mind when he is presented with new evidence. This means, to me, anyway, that his other more liberal positions may change as he works with more conservatives and gets an earful on things like Global Warming, gun control and the like.
On foreign policy, he favors a strong defense, and as governor, he was extremely pro-military. He also understands the we are facing an existential threat from the global jihad.
He's also honest, in the sense that he doesn't use the political process to enrich himself or his cronies. His policy positions have changed over the years, but so have a lot of people's (Reagan started out as an FDR Democrat). He's done missionary work, and takes his faith seriously.
He's a good, decent man who holds some opinions that I'd prefer that he didn't, but he's not a totalitarian monster who will sell the country out to its enemies.