Obama seems to fail to see the freight train coming the other way. How close to the edge, to financial calamity is the American public willing to go? Only Romney is the one equipped to turn this country around financially, for the good of all of us. This is so blaringly apparent that I hope we will all see it!
Confront and handle financial matters without massive debts
Not delude the voters to think that taxes on the rich will provid near enough (see below)
Stop the rampant spending that is continued in Obama's budget and projections
Assure solvency of Social Security and Medicare, without reducing safety part of it
More effectivly assure adequate funds to meet imperatives.
Better run safety nets for those unable to care for themselves and those who need to build skills
He ain't no fool and he'll do what works for all the people
PRODUCE ENOUGH FOR ALL OF OUR CAUSES
Democrats should definitely vote for Romney. Sure, some Democrat causes may not be forwarded as much, but many will be forwarded even more. That seems paradoxical, so let's look at why and how.
Right now we do not have enough money to fund all the causes that we might like to. And if we continue to have too small a pie to split, we'll end up not being able to afford them.
Romney will enable better growth in the size of the pie, which will benefit all of us. With Romney we'll benefit from the principle that "all boats rise in a rising tide." [Nobody in our past ever advocated "trickle down economics", as the term was invented by Will Rogers. The actual concept is not that the rich will get richer, but that all people benefit from a prospering economy.
Obama will increase national debt so that we are at a higher level of debt than Greece. This is shown in his own projections and is not something someone made up. We will be worse off if we continue down this path. Putting off dealing with it was what happened with Greece, particulary with its unfunded pension liabilities. Our unfunded liabilities are in excess of $35 trillion dollars for social security and Medicare, though we focus on the $16 trillion national debt owed to "others".
If we don't address the biggest issue of all, having fiscal integrity so that social security and medicare are protected, we will be crushed by a giant snowball, that we could easily see was coming, if only we looked. There is no free lunch or some miracle cure that will pop up in the future, magically. Someone will have to pay - and it looks like that will happen by increasing taxes substantially for future generrations.
Obama is trying to convince the voters that all this will be handled by taxing the rich. But there is not enough wealth among the rich to handle the situation. (Taxing the 1% would produce $37 billion a year; taxing those above $250,000 by eliminating the Bush tax cut for them would produce about $70 billion a year; compare that to a $1.3 trillion a year deficit and to our total debt of $16 trillion owed to "others" and the $35 trillion currently owed to ourselves via Social Security and Medicare. $70 billion a year is 0.014% of $50 trillion; $50 trillion is 50,000 billion, so even $500 billion dollars would only be 1%.)
Are you willing to be "kidded" (fooled?) about all of this, thinking we can just continue to give out candy and never face fiscal solutions?
If you aren't willing to fall for this, it would seem to make sense to vote for someone who has proven to be able to deal with this.
MORE COST EFFECTIVE PROGRAMS
Romney, as he has always done with turnarounds, whether companies or Massachusetts, will take programs and get effective managers to make them more effective, as opposed to bureaucrats or politicians. He has proven himself to have not play favorites to his supporters - no cronyism.
One huge advantage to this is that he will be able to have systems and operations be able to better support the critical few - those who are unable to care for themselves - and to create effective job building skills for those who need it. He will fix whatever is needed so that it meets rigorous, clear standards.
WORKS WITH OTHERS EFFECTIVELY
Although of course there are conflicts between parties and although he did 800 vetoes while governor, he was able to work with an 85% Democratic legislature to do magnificent things. He, and they, overcame the huge deficits and the dangerous financial position of the state to create surpluses and a large "rainy day" fund.
And they created together, with the Democrats modifying it somewhat, landmark health care insurance coverage reform that adjusted for the Federal requirements, preserved sources of funds, and implemented several conservative principles: "free riders" had to pay for the state covering them for free, free markets and portable insurance, and other very workable "innovations".
NOT CUT OFF OUR NOSES TO SPITE OUR FACES
As I look at the political environment, I see members of both parties losing their perspectives and geting stuck in "being right" rather than getting more of the results they want. As Democrats (and even some of us independents), you do not wish to see the social issue matters be harmed.
Will abortion rights be cancelled? As I see it, it just ain't possible. There may be a few hindrances (like having to be "informed" so one makes a "better choice"), but the rights will be preserved.
Will same-sex marriages happen? Of course, gradually as states add their votes over time. There "ain't no way" anybody could garner a 2/3 majority to create an amendment to the constitution, or the equivalent. It just ain't gonna happen. So ignore the rhetoric from the right. (And the right should give up the fruitless battle and go for something that will actually create a benefit for them, and for all Americans.)
Will social security and Medicare be wiped out and grandma pushed over the cliff? Of course not! The Republicans will not allow that any more than the Democrats would. But the Republicans will address it, while the Democrats have not proven themselves to be willing to confront it. Of course, we need a President that can work with both parties to solve this - and only Romney has the proven ability to do that. The solution will work - and the rich will get fewer benefits, as "means-testing" will come about where they get no or fewer benefits while the money goes to those in need. (They don't call this "taxes", but the essence of it is the equivalent.)
In any event, we have a sufficient "checks and balances" system to assure that things don't get too far out of whack on either side - it works, at least from the viewpoint of inhibiting things [although I'd like to see more cooperation in changing things!).