Funny, almost every single right to life organization seems to disagree with you, both on Thommpson and Romney.
Here is why. From their press release. Since announcing his candidacy in September, Fred Thompson has run second only to pro-abortion candidate Rudy Giuliani for the Republican nomination in the overwhelming majority of national polls. As pro-lifers throughout the nation begin to unite behind his candidacy, he will be well positioned to win the nomination and the presidency.
The answer is because they picked wrong, like most people on FR, and didn't recognize that 1% Fred doesn't take them as seriously as he takes them. Who, oh, who, will they be supporting after next Tuesday when he comes in fourth - or fifth - in SC and gets out of the race.
And when he does and NRLC gets behind Romney, what are you going to do then? Where is your God now?
We'll see what happens in SC. He will likely do much better than you think he will. If he doesn't, the NRLC might endorse Romney, but only because Rudy is obviously pro-choice, and Huck and Queeg are complete lunatics. They will be holding their nose as they make the endorsment just as many will hold their nose to vote for Romney in the general.
Oh, and just for fun, lets review Mitt’s record:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_w9pquznG4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Elx3UWmyAY4
Your candidate has some positives. Consider discarding the nastiness and learning from him.
What a bizarre statement. I’m not sure you if you understand this, but most of us do not see our candidates as “Gods”, or even future Gods...Your statement suggest that you believe Romney is your God. You need some help.
Oh, and as for your argument about Right to Life Groups simply picking too early, more come out for Thompson every day.
If a man like Romney, who so passionately defended Roe v. Wade, attended NARL fund raisers and pledged to uphold the status Quo when it comes to abortion can in fact convince any right to life groups to endorse him, then you may be right about him being a God, since nothing else could explaining any pro-life conservative voting for man with such a reprehensible past on this issue.
Yeah, they also got him wrong by giving him a 100% rating for his service in the Senate over two terms. BTW, while Fred has gotten a 100% rating, Mitt has, in his own words, "strongly supported a woman's right to choose".
If you insist on being a single-issue voter, you should at least educate yourself a bit. Mitt has changed his pro-life/pro-choice 'principles' several times.