You are absolutely correct. Romney is only saying he can run the welfare state better than Obama. He's got to tell the voters why Obama is a failure. He has to utter the forbidden (to elite, snobby Republicans) words "leftist" and "socialist." But he won't do it. One consolation: if Romney loses despite running against the worst president in history, we'll never have to tolerate another moderate Pubbie again. If there's a country left after another four years of Obama.
Then he isn't doing it right. If that is your strategy then do it this way (although he should have highlighted this at the RNC):
Monetize welfare. No more phones, no more food stamps, no more section 8, WIC etc (did you know there are something like 75 federal assistance programs??) instead we would simply give them their benefits in CASH. There would be ONE program instead of dozens and dozens. We could lay off 80% of the welfare bureaucracy (probably 70% of welfare budget goes to administrative costs).
Just make them all show up in person with their whole family in tow once a month to show us they are still who they say they are. (that is how ration cards were distributed in the Great Depression/WW2)
We could actually increase the benefit and still save mega billions that could go to reduce the deficit, that is how inefficient the system is.
States could bump the benefit up if they want but the federal program should give the same amount nationally, which is doesn't today. Today a rent voucher in NYC is a lot more than a rent voucher in rural Mississippi - treating people unequal.
The recipients would love the idea of getting it all in cash and not having to file forms for a dozen different programs. We could also merge the unemployment benefit into this and other things too.
The savings from bureaucracy alone would be astronomical even if the total benefit was raised 10%.