[kabar]

Romney ran a state and left it with a surplus. Romney is a successful capitalist who has made lots of money in the private sector running businesses. He understands what it means to be an executive and meet a payroll. It is one thing to be a fiscal conservative with the taxpayers money and another to be one with your own.

Thompson was one of 100 senators. His executive experience is limited compared to Romney.

[Reagan Man]

Romney was a liberal Governor of a very liberal state. Massachusetts has elected two of the biggest liberals in America to the US Senate for decades --- Ted Kennedy and John Kerry.

Romney's recent conversions on several key issues isn’t convincing. More political expediency than political epiphany. His 35 years of support for Roe v Wade and a woman's right to have an abortion is enough right there to disqualify him. His support for gay rights, gun control and his call for nationalized health care based on his own plan called RomneyCare, marks him as a big government, liberal Republican.

Willard didn’t support Reagan`s conservative agenda of the 1980`s and even opposed the Contract With America. He even shifted from being an open borders/amnesty backer to a Tancredo clone.

Thats just off the top of my head. Romney’s got a horrible track record on most issues. Mitt’s has never been a conservative.

Look, I was an independent during the time of Reagan-Bush.
I'm not trying to return to Reagan-Bush.

~ Mitt Romney LINK

[Politicalmom]

Romney has NO foreign policy experience, FRed has extensive foreign policy experience.