I respect your right to see this FUBARed situation in any way you wish, but allow me to just lay out another view.
It's a documented fact that Romney is a liberal with a record that would make any left-winger proud. He's not going to suddenly change his stripes, just because he's now the president. In fact, like most first term presidents, he'll feel omnipotent and freshly confident in his vision for America. This means that he'll be following much the same political path as Obama has, albeit without the racist, Marxist overtones of anti-Americanism.
We're very likely to have a Republican dominated Congress next year. If Romney becomes president, he also becomes the de facto head of their party. Given the reality of the game of politics, they're not likely to oppose his agenda, even if it goes against the grain of everything they personally campaigned for in their own quest for office. They're going to circle the wagons around the 'boss'. Such has it ever been in US politics.
Now, if Obama is re-elected, that same Congress will fight him tooth and nail over his agenda. They'll oppose him for the simple fact that he's on the other side (and perhaps because they really don't support his agenda).
In these two scenarios, at the end of four years, you're going to see a lot more progress of the Socialist agenda with the Republican as president, than you'll see with the Democrat as president.
Art of War 101.
I think it's different this time. The pubbies gave GWB just about everything he wanted, and the independents cleaned their clocks in 2006 and 2008.
Remember when talk about renewing an "assault weapons" ban in 2009. IIRC, Reid and Pelosi said to forget about it, and 64 House rats sent a letter to Holder to the same effect. They campaigned on being pro Second Amendment.
The Tea Party Congress critters campaigned on being fiscally conservative most of all. IMHO, Romney will have to worry most about conservatives opposing him.
Yes, but.
And the "but" is because that's exactly what happened with Bush. Since it happened so recently, it's less likely that it will happen again to the same degree. Representatives may be a little more recalcitrant and not follow the leader so easily, knowing how things turned out last time.
It's kind of a glass half-empty, glass half-full phenomenon. If someone's expecting Republicans to go Tea Party with Romney in the White House, they're going to be disappointed. As you say, that's not the way things happen. But if you compare a Romney presidency to how things were in the Bush years, you may be surprised that Congress does show a bit more backbone this time.
BTW, you are thinking you're making a great argument against Romney. For some people it will work the other way around. That is to say, for a some Republicans the idea that the party will circle the wagons for a Texan or blindly follow an evangelical but won't do the same for someone from the coasts or a Mormon is objectionable. I suspect that's why Ann Coulter and other East Coast conservatives embraced Romney with a closeness that conservatives from other parts of the country may find objectionable.
I agree with you compleatly about Romney, I don’t believe that the liberal Romney appointment to the Supreme Court will vote any different than the marxist that obama will appoint. I hope with a Republican victory that we may have another shot at a real election. I don’t have much hope but I pray a Republican Congress and Senate may exert some sanity into what is happening. Romney getting elected is a disaster, obama getting re-elected is worse. I believe that voting third party or not voting only helps obama. I certainly understand anyone who refuses to vote for Romney.