Some of these may be about being righteous about your views and/or that he does not agree with them - which is ok, except when it has one vote against someone who would not have caused anything that would negatively affect anything you valued and when the benefits he provided would be very positive.
Yes, we do like people who agree with us, but we do not want to cut off our noses to spite our faces. If there is no harm that could possibly be done to something we value, then that item would objectively not be up for consideration nor be used to offset the advantages Romney will provide us.
Neither abortion rights nor gay marriage will have laws passed through Congress, one way or the other. No minority has the power to pass laws against abortion nor against gay marriage. See why: Gay Rights. Pro-Choice - The issue is already settled and unchangeable.
THOSE OTHERS AS EVIL ONES
You could not like business people, which is akin to bigotry, at least close to it. People tend to make a whole class of people into the enemy, whether it be business or another nationality or whatever. Bad rulers can take advantage of that tendency but it is up to the people not to make such generalities nor engage in the politics of hate or labeling or "making wrong" or mocking or whatever else is disrespectful and/or dehumanizing.
One of the odd things is that those who protest against dehumanizing others engage in dehumanizing others, from businesspeople to the other party to people of a different class. Kind of ironic.
I have found some of the most gracious, kindest people to be among the rich and/or in business. They are people who have feelings, personal angst, relationships, etc., and they are not like some stereotype. Yet people will continue to sterotype them, rather than reach "across the aisle" to them, to work in a spirit of cooperation.
Obama, unfortunately, engages in this with his remarks like "fat cats", the 1%, Republicans want dirty air, dirty water, autistic kids not to be treated, etc. and etc. and etc. I cannot respect anyone who engages so much at that level. He appears to be the most divisive President in modern memory.
HELPING THE POOR
I think Romney will do as he said: He will fix the safety net. And he'll make it work better, more efficiently, but most importantly more effectively, making sure people who need to be covered are covered an making sure those who shouldn't be covered aren't covered, so that there is more for those who need it.
He has been accused, by two authors on the left in their book The Real Romney, of the fault of being overly altruistic and, I think, applauded for his concern for helping those less well off.
Here, to make things work, I suspect that he'll assure the system works, but expect that people take responsibility for paying for their own benefits. He is a man committed to education, but also responsibility.
As we return to a nation of more people who take responsibility, we will all prosper more. And when we prosper more, there is more we can afford to do.
Right now we have to be very efficient with our resources, or those who are going into college now will have to pay more down the road, based on a huge unsustainable debt that will force high tax loads and lowered standards of living. Of course, the normal thing is for the politician to promise relief, to give more, without mentioning the long term consequences.
He is an efficiency expert. But more importantly, he is an effectiveness expert. He'll bring more education through the encouragement of cost efficient teaching, but he'll magnify it by implementation of what will be more effective, so that we are equipped to be much more effective individuals. He'll start that path and determine that direction for the future - with a huge impact - which future generations will have him to thank for.
He'll assure that healthcare is taken care of, though lots of people gave him flack for when he did that in Massachusetts. He'll design an even better system, with the help of experts, but not pile in alot of future problems as he is a good anticipater of problems due to his analytical capabilities. And he won't let it be at the expense of the nation, other than for covering those who cannot do it for themselves.
SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE
Someone who does not want to do the necessary adjustments to preserve these benefits won't want to vote for him. But one should not believe that the magic fairy will somehow cover the difference. The Trustees of those two programs project a net "shortfall", present-valued, of upwards of $50 trillion, about 3 times our current official national debt.
If you highly favor unions, you will not want to vote for Romney, as he'll protect them but not allow them to abuse their power by causing financial harm. They will not be held back from their normal functions at all. States may vote for the right to work without forcing employees to join unions and without forcing people to pay dues when they don't want to (nor for political moneys).
I think all of the people will benefit more from the better functioning of the economy, whether they are not in unions or they are in unions.
He'll, by far, produce us having less of a tax burden.
Yes, he'll be less green, as he'll look at the tradeoffs in a more balanced way. He'll concentrate money and regulations on what has the greatest impact. And the greater prosperity of the nation will have us be more able to do more green things.
He had proposed in his "How To Save Detroit" op-ed to increase focused research by about quadruple to increase gas mileage, as that is a more effective way to do it than just kinda hope it'll happen in private industry by itself. (Note the failure of Obama's investments in non-economically viable entities such as Solyndra or barely viable entities in "hope" of future gains. Those are not smart, just wishful thinking.)
He'll protect the great majority of benefits, where things are effective, but provide more abundance so we can afford to do what we wish as citizens, who will have the money to put it where the mouth is in advocating green.
He'll actually handle it but not unethically nor just for political purposes or pandering. He does believe in some relief for those who were brought here at no fault of their own, but we will have effective illegal immigration management. He will not kick the can down the road. He will not do what is against the interests of the American citizens.
Prejudice (or "not liking" someone and making up a reason for it) is something you're entitled to, but that appears to be the only reason not to vote for Romney.
NOW IT IS TIME TO DECIDE
THIS IS IS DESPICABLE, SO I HOPE THIS WON'T BE A REASON
A bigot might not want to vote for someone of another religion, although there is no proof that such a religion will or ever has interfered with office. But that is what bigots do, judge without sufficient knowledge. Yet those same bigots at times protest loudly about bigots (those who disagree with them).
You will not successfully change the religion of the US either way nor will any small church. The is no magic wizard behind the curtain who can create that.