Not to mention those that were “too principled” to vote against him..........
Same old sad song. Romney is/was the SAME animal politically, just less of a hater of the country. BUT, his goals were the same - national health care, gay rights, expannd the welfare state, ad nauseum. BOTH liberals/socialists.
BUT, you would somehow FEEL better if that socialism came in under those with an R by their name.
The lesser of two evils is STILL evil. Give me a candidate WORTH voting for, and I will.
Perhaps you were running on emotions from the fact that RomneyCare was a basis for ObamaCare and that he opined that he thought that homosexuals should be allowed in the Boy Scouts and missed his qualifiers.
He stated that, while RomneyCare was legal for a State, ObamaCare was unconstitutional as a national/federal program. He also clearly stated, that despite his opinions, the Boy Scouts should be the ones to make the decision, not the government.
Opinons that suck, when tempered by an intent to follow the Constitution, mean we have a disagreement - not a Constitutional crisis.
Then there's the hundreds of other things that Obama has not just wanted, but was willing to go extra-Constitutional with to force them down our collective throats, and the commies he surrounded himself with. I can't imagine Romney deserting Israel or bollixing Iran and the rest anywhere near what Obama did and continues to do.
I was no big Romney fan, but at least I had the brains to be able to make the distinctions about some very concrete differences. if you want to tell yourself that Romney's faults justified a second term for Obama, go ahead and keep up the delusions. Romney had plenty of faults, but he was not hell-bent on "fundamentally changing America" and destroying our status around the world.
If one is not intelligent enough to vote against the pure evil of an Obama, they have no standing to carp about those who actually voted for him (the original target of my comment).