1. First, we can all acknowledge that on most issues Romney sucks. BUT..
2. Unless some miracle happens (and we can reevaluate if said miracle happens), the reality is there are only two people who will be president, Romney or Obama... so we must...
3. Go to the Constitution and look up the job description for President to see who fits that job the best.. We see that the primary role of the President is Commander in Chief of the US Armed Forces. The other duties are to make treaties and appoint judges, etc.
4. Now we look at all the qualms we have with both Candidates. With Obama, it is everything, from domestic to international. With Romney, it is primarily his domestic policies- all of which must require Congress and the Senate victories to have any impact.
5. Which gets us back to 1 critical issue, the role of Commander in Chief of the US Armed Forces. I'm sure you would agree, that out of the primary job role the Constitution gives the president, this is the most immediate and important. The president is the second step on recovery on those issues, but as CIC he is the entire staircase.
6. So, knowing that Commander in Chief of the US Armed Forces is the primary role of the President, who would you rather see our troops have to salute and take orders from on January 22nd and for four years after that?
It is really that simple. If Tom wants to impact the issues he says are most important, he should run for congress where he can actually write bills on those issues- something the President doesn't do.
Now, there's an idea.
If (;-)) Tom loses this election, maybe he should do that, but I won't be able to vote for him because he won't be running in my state or district.
And, I don't want to just ignore or evade the important points you make about the role of Commander in Chief. Believe me, I have thought about that issue because it is important, as in vital, that we have a competent Commander in Chief.
We've had Commanders in Chief who were better than Obama (Reagan) and we've had Commanders in Chief who were worse than Obama (Carter). Obama's nothing to write home about.
I don't know how to score Romney. I like his loyalty to Israel (an important ally), but I almost hear him saying at times that we should defer to Israel's judgement. I don't want to turn over our foreign policy to the Knesset or the Israeli Prime Minister any more than I want to turn over our foreign policy to the United Nations. We should decide what we want to do and I want our president to make that clear at all times.
I really don't know what kind of Commander in Chief Romney would make. Is his current trip about foreign policy or about domestic politics? Did he go to England at the beginning of the Olympics to discuss important issues with British leaders or to remind voters here at home that he once ran the Olympics? Did he go to Israel to to discuss foreign policy or to gain Jewish votes here at home? Is he perhaps in Poland to gain the favor of American Catholic voters? Maybe I'm just too cynical, but Romney has over and over and over again caused me to become cynical about just about every move he makes.
I guess I just never know what to believe about Romney anymore. I'm not sure that he has any fixed philosophy other than a desire to be elected and a willingness to be very liberal and very flexible.
I really just can't trust Romney anymore and I can't tell you that I believe he'd make a competent Commander in Chief.