Please Don’t Vote for Mitt Romney

Dear Fellow American,

I ask that you please read the following, but know that I respect your independence.  I’ve provided hyperlinks to the sources of my information where it may be in question—please take a look at them if you don’t believe me.  Also, it may be that at the end of this essay, we simply disagree—if that’s the case, I hope there are no hard feelings.  Thank you for your time and consideration.

Today I’m asking you not to cast your vote for Mitt Romney.  I’m not asking you to vote for President Obama, nor do I believe he’s done a perfect job.  If you’re cynical about the whole process, know that I too share your cynicism.  At the end of the day, it seems more and more that we have to vote for the lesser of two evils, and sad as that may be, I hope you’ll agree that it’s still very important we make the right choice.  Again, please don’t vote for Mitt Romney—my reasons follow.

First, though I am definitely a liberal and usually vote for Democrats, I strongly believe that we need a conservative party in this country, to make sure that businesses are not saddled with unnecessary or burdensome regulations and taxes, as well as to preserve and protect our individual freedoms.  In other words, I’m not suggesting that conservative beliefs or political views are wrong—quite the opposite—I believe that they are necessary.

However, the biggest problem with Mitt Romney is that we don’t know what he stands for, and it strikes me that this is not a conservative value.  Is he a devout social conservative?  We don’t really know for sure.  Does he really have a plan to get the economy back on track?  He says he does, but he hasn’t been very specific about how this will happen, and when he has, it leaves more questions.  For example: how will he balance the promises he’s made to cut taxes by 20% and increase military spending with his promise to reduce the deficit?

In addition, there are a number of inconsistencies in his political views.  When he was governor of Massachusetts, he passed health care reform that served as the model for Obamacare.  Now he’s against it.  He used to be pro-choice; now he’s pro-life, in a party that increasingly wants to outlaw abortion even in the case of rape, incest, or danger to the mother.  He even wrote an op-ed in the New York Times titled, “Let Detroit Go Bankrupt”, but is now running ads in Ohio, stating that it was President Obama who allowed Detroit to go bankrupt.  Worse, earlier this year, Romney claimed that he would “take a lot of credit” for the auto industry revival.  In the end, the only thing we know about Romney is that we don’t know what he stands for, nor do we know what he’ll do as President.

However, the one thing we can be most sure of is that there’s a real chance of war if Romney is elected.  Why?  Because many of the men on his foreign policy team are the same men (17 out of 24) that advised George W. Bush during his time in office.  And again we have inconsistencies: for though he has been highly critical of the President on foreign policy, the last debate leaves us wondering what he would have done differently.  During the debate, Romney highlighted his desire for peace, but if you visit his own website, his foreign policy stance is quite aggressive.  The question is, do we really want to find ourselves paying for another unnecessary war of choice, like Iraq, if Romney become President?

This brings us to the last reason we should not elect Governor Romney, and that is the issue of abortion.  Now I know that most conservatives are pro-life, and I respect those views even though I believe the government should not be involved in such decisions.  But putting our larger differences aside, what about the case of rape, incest, or danger to the mother?  Shouldn’t women in these cases be allowed access to abortion?  Because more than 40 Republican candidates in this election want to outlaw all abortions, no matter what the case.  Romney, when given the chance to disavow himself of support for these candidates, hasn’t said anything—he’s ducking the question—yet more uncertainty.

Just so we’re clear, if these legislators get their way and Romney signs off on it, this means that if a woman is raped (could be your sister, wife, mother, girlfriend, or obviously if you’re a woman—you, etc.), she’ll be forced to carry the rapist’s baby to term and raise it as her own.  Similarly, if a pregnancy puts a woman’s life in danger, abortion is off the table, even if the child would die anyway.  Are we willing to risk this kind of extremism as a nation under President Romney?


Look, everyone knows our economy isn’t as good as we’d like it to be, and the one thing we need most is more jobs.  But, as much as you may not like Obama, under his leadership, our economy is recovering.  Beating expectations, our GDP grew by 2% this last quarter.  In addition, the unemployment rate is falling slowly but steadily, the housing market is picking up dramatically, and we’ve now had 25 straight months of private sector job growth.

Also, in terms of foreign policy, China is finally dealing with its currency manipulation, Iran is getting broken by international sanctions, and we’re effectively fighting the war on terror, killing terrorist figureheads all over the world, including Osama Bin Laden.

The fact is, like him or not, we know what we’ve got with President Obama: a recovering economy, effective foreign relations, and four years of experience on the job.  With Romney, God’s honest truth is that we don’t know what we’re getting.  We do know, however, about the people that are going to influence him.  Foreign policy advisors that believe in war, and legislators that believe in outlawing abortion in cases of rape, incest, or if the mother’s life is in danger.

Finally, the Republican and conservative brand may be damaged a great deal if Romney’s elected.   Because the fact of the matter is, if he doesn’t dramatically improve the economy (so far his only major proposal is to cut taxes—which certainly didn’t work during the Bush Administration), if he isn’t prepared to lead on foreign policy, and if he’s as indecisive and wishy-washy as he’s been on the campaign trail, like it or not, Americans will associate those flaws with the Republican Party.  Conservatives have some great candidates waiting in the wings; people like Chris Christie, Mitch Daniels, and Jeb Bush.  But if Romney’s elected, these men will have to wait eight years to run for President, and by that time, who knows what the political climate of our country will be—in other words, by electing Romney, Republicans may be sacrificing both their party brand, as well as some of their best candidates.

Again, I urge you, please don’t vote for Mitt Romney this November.  We don’t know what we’re getting, and the stakes are just too high.

About The Author: Jay Scott


  • Reply Ohm51

    Excellent analysis and dovetails my feelings exactly on most of your thoughts as well as the need for the Conservative voice.

    I was outraged by the incredible size of the debt under President Bush, and to remain consistent I cannot ignore that I am also very alarmed at the growth of the debt under President Obama _ but before folks interpret that as liberal admission that Obama needs to be replaced there are caveats to such formulations.

    The size of the debt moreso proves something that I was very loathe to consider at the time of its implementation _ that the 2009 stimulus was not nearly large enough.

    The bottom-line being that the only solution to current deficit spending is economic growth _ and what we had saved on the front end of insufficient stimulus spending we are now paying double on the backend; in lost revenues from sluggish growth and continued unemployment _ while simultaneously meeting the costs associated with citizens in need and the burdens on government that presents to the overall economy.

    Then consider that we are still for the most part governed by the Bush economic policy, as the Bush tax cuts were not sun-setted as intended when written into law, and contrary to popular mythologies _ taxes have never been lower in the last 100 years and Obama has actually reduced taxes on small business and the middle class.

    One other observation I have of Romney’s economic plan _ specifically regarding his ideas on energy development as the key to economic growth reminds me of what happened in Honduras.

    100 years ago Honduras’ most plentiful and valuable resource was old growth stands of mahogany timber and they cut it at alarming rates _ putting short terms profits ahead of a more tempered management and sacrficed the exponetially greater value and long term profitabilty that a more sustained aproach would have yeilded. They used mahogany to heat homes and cooking _ and it burned up real good.

    What is conservative about being pennywise and pound foolish _ and burning up a resource that will only become exponentially more valuable as time passes?

    Further I believe Romney’s energy policy is in actuality simply a ploy for Big Oil to be allowed access to national resources at the current bargain basement pricing _ before Americans wake up to realize the future economic value and the bad economic deal we have historicallyt been getting from them.

  • Reply Jacalyn

    Cherie, I did a search on Amazon and found them on sale for $1.99 that didn’t include shipping which wasn’t too bad. Just type in Sizzix Tags, Scallop #2. I wod&;nl#8217ut wait to order, they are on clearance even on the Sizzix home site but I think they sold out there. Good Luck.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.