Sure, run for office in 2002 as a pro-choice, anti gun candidate, .....
Then in 2004-5 decide to run for the white house next time around and discover you happen to *now* share the views of the natioanl GOP base not the MA base.. Whats to doubt..
Also, abortion alone doesn't make one a conservative. Condi Rice is pro-choice and most people consider her a conservative too. There are many more like her. And, being pro-life alone doesn't make one a conservative either. Otherwise, you'd have to label Sen. Harry Reid a conservative. Reid is pro-life and he doesn't seem very conservative to me.
Mitt has more of a pro-life platform than does McCain, Obama or Hillary -- and those are your choices.
Mitt is stronger on the 2A than McCain, Obama or Hillary as well. McCain has a C= grade from the NRA, while Mitt has a B. Obama and Hillary both have F's.
In the 1994 Senate race, Mitt Romney held the solid conservative position for 23 of the 24 issues listed; the only exception being the pledge to maintain the status quo in Massachusetts regarding a woman's right to choose. A pro-choice position in Massachusetts in 1994 was a socially moderate stance accommodating the large majority opinion of voters in the state.
However, it's understandable how a first-time candidate in 1994, and former businessman, running a crusade for fiscal conservatism with solid conservative positions on crime, welfare, the economy, foreign policy, school choice, health care, and congressional reform might accept the status quo on a social issue respecting the liberal constituency he would represent.
You'll also notice that even way back then, Mitt Romney favored tougher measures to stop illegal immigration (unlike McCain and the dems). Romney has consistently opposed illegal immigration and demonstrated this by his actions while governor opposing special privileges for illegal aliens and taking steps to enforce federal immigration laws.