Actually there is a huge difference. You can move from a state freely. That's the whole point of our federal system: States can experiment with (even really bad) stuff, and people can vote with their feet. Leaving the US is a whole different thing.
That said, RomneyCare did lay the groundwork for ObamaCare - including mandated abortions - and for that I can't forgive Romney.
Yes, there’s a difference in scope.
So what happens if we take the guy who coerced abortions in the small scope he had, and put him in charge of regulating the entire federal government?
Something that most people don’t realize is that the role of precedents in our judicial system makes us perfectly vulnerable to the Islamists’ methods for taking over a country. You get a precedent set in a local area, and then you use that precedent to push into more and more territory.
Sharia is the goal of Islamists, and it’s where government forces obedience to Muslim dictates and punishes/penalizes non-Muslims. The ideal way for anybody to take over a system is to create a shell/template and then just “tweak” it and eventually give it the real name of what it is. That’s what The New Party (with Obama as a signed member) was supposed to do to the democratic party in Chicago. Use the name and shell of the democratic party but repopulate it with communists. Same thing that Saddam Hussein did with CNN and Soros has done with Fox: use the name and credibility of CNN/Fox but just repopulate it with propaganda pieces. Take over the brand while keeping the brand name.
Well.... by claiming that states don’t have to honor religious liberty, Romney is providing the platform for the Islamists to do their localized precedents. And by getting the government to require Christians (non-Muslims) to violate their own religious beliefs, Romney is also providing the SHELL for the Islamists to take over. Government is already establishing the religion of anti-Christianity; it’s just a small step from there for the government to establish a pro-Muslim religion.
Obamacare goes farther in that direction. It exempts Muslims but not Christians - thus creating a “dhimmi tax” for non-Muslims while giving official government preference to Islam. Exactly what we would expect from a guy who told the Egyptian ambassador that he was and still is a Muslim who supports the Muslim agenda. (The agenda all sects of Islam agree upon is the destruction of the US and Israel and the institution of worldwide sharia).
I don’t believe that Romney is a Muslim, but without even realizing it, he is playing right into the hand of the Islamists. That may be why George Soros has said there’s no difference between Romney and Obama. Either one will further the goals of the communist-Islamist alliance that is headed by George Soros. Romney, like Hillary, supports many of the goals from the communist (”progressive”) side of that alliance, without realizing that in the end it will also serve the Islamist purpose. Both entities want the government to be “god”.