Redstate

I got a late start this morning and am running full-speed to try to get out the door so I will try to follow-up on this a bit later.

My statement on Mitt is here. My summary is:

1) Gets the job done in difficult circumstances (a Republican "behind enemy lines", etc.)
2) Competent, steady leadership
3) Good platform, and he generally governs to the right of his campaigns and far better than he campaigns
4) I believe he will dance with the gal who brung him to the dance (he will govern at or to the right of his campaign platform) - again, based on what I saw when he was MA GOV.
5) Demosntrated he can not only hold the line with an overwhelming opposition legislature but can actually carry the day often as not (his much-maligned healthcare reform is a good example)

Gotta run - I'll look forward to comments and try to follow-up with specifics if I don't get snowed-in at work.

Great series, by the way.

-------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

It helps that I know you're a supporter of Fred Thompson, and my rankings are just that: Thompson, then Romney, so I'll just work from where I like.

I'm not asking you to make Romney your #1 choice, but I would urge you to consider him a fine alternative to Thompson.

Why? Look at the stands on his issues. Really. From foreign policy with respect to countries like Iran, to domestic policy on medical care, tariffs, subsidies, taxes, marriage, abortion, you name it, Mitt Romney has been positioning himself as a candidate in tune with the Ronald Reagan wing of the party. Just like Fred Thompson.

And also like Fred Thompson, he hasn't always held these positions in the past. There are reasons for that though.

Firstly, he was making a deal of sorts in his runs in Massachusetts. He knew that in that state, like in California which I know so well, you just can't win as an anti-abortion candidate, no matter how well you can reach out to people on other issues. It's just a deal breaker.

So what he did was, agree to a cease fire of sorts on abortion. No new restrictions, but no new incentives or relaxations either. So as Governor, Mitt Romney didn't roll back abortion, but he also had the opportunity to veto many pro-abortion laws passed by the Democrats.

Also, he was guided by his church for a time. The LDS church doesn't instruct its followers to take specific political positions, the way some other churches do, so that gave him a sort of predisposition to letting people make their own mistakes, even if he was personally against abortion.

Yes, I know that many Democrats say the same thing, but just look at the man. Take a good, long look, and evaluate it. It's easy to look at the behavior of a Kerry or a Clinton and know that it's all talk, but don't just make a knee-jerk reaction against rhetoric. Evaluate the man, and decide for yourself.

Character counts.

HTML Help for Red Staters

I think the key to appreciating Romney as a candidate is seeing how much of the total picture he matches. Go down the list of important issues:

Taxes
Spending
Defense
Trade policy
Foreign policy
Role of government
Crime and Punishment
Immigration
Life issues
Second Amendment
Judges

He is good on all of them, stellar on most.

Now look at the intangibles:

Drive
Presence
Intelligence
Business experience
Executive experience

Again, good on all, stellar on most.

So what are the critiques?

Flip-flops -- a creation of the MSM (which I think he scares to death). The only meaningful issue on which he has changed is abortion, and he gives a solid explanation for that. (I will also note, this is the one place where his religion enters slightly into my assessment. He moved to a position that is shared by the vast majority of his co-religionists. That strikes me as making the shift more reliable in the long term. If he shifted away from a position held by most people who share his values, I would see it as much more likely to be a matter of convenience that might disappear later.)

Too plastic -- I would like to see him open up a bit, but this is not really a statement about how he would be as president. Furthermore, it is not unusual to have a candidate over-handled in the early stages of a campaign and for the candidate ultimately to break out of the constraints. I hope that will happen with Romney.

Not electable -- I guess I have a hard time believing that a Republican who is elected Governor of Massachusetts is unelectable. Electability is normally just an excuse to sell a candidate who is sub-standard on the issues. In Romney's case, he has proven electability in the toughest environment imaginable.

The overall picture to me is that this is a candidate we would be hard pressed to match most years. In fact, he looks to me to be a more complete candidate than anyone we have put up in over twenty years.