You asked for it. You see, I actually do read links that someone who disagrees with me posts. So EVERY thing that I post below is from YOUR link, which YOU provided as evidence against the sheep. I will go thru all 15 issues that they analyzed.TARP
: The article posted that Romney did no flip flop on TARP, and was a consistent supporter of it. So there was no flip flop, but Romney's consistent position is the incorrect, unconsitutional position. No flip-flop, but still wrong. (He did oppose some of the later uses that TARP funds were put to, but supported it in general.
Flip-flop: 0/15 Wrong: 1/15Auto Bailout
: Romney did not flip-flop and supported a managed bankruptcy using no federal funds. This was the correct, constitutional position.
Flip-Flop: 0/15 Wrong: 1/15 Right: 1/15Obama's Stimulus Plan
: No flip-flop, he opposed Obama's stimulus plan but supported a different stimulus plan - so still consitutionally the wrong position.
Flip-Flop: 0/15 Wrong: 2/15 Right: 1/15Race to the Top program
: No flip-flop, and correctly supported some of the goals of the program, but also correctly stated it should not be pursued at the federal level.
Flip-Flop: 0/15 Wrong: 2/15 Right: 2/15ObamaCare (Healthcare):
No flip flop. He has said that RomneyCare should not be forced on states by the federal government, HOWEVER he has said that the federal government should use some "carrots and sticks" on the states to get all of their citizens insured. I'lll award half-right for consitently opposing ObamaCare and half wrong for believing thee Federal Government should entice and/or punish states to get compliance.
Flip-Flop: 0/15 Wrong: 2.5/15 Right: 2.5/15Minimum Wage
: No flip flop and Consitutionally sound, since it only applied to Massachusetts.
Flip-Flop: 0/15 Wrong: 2.5/15 Right: 3.5/15Illegal immigrant hiring:
No flip flop, was not regarding government policy but a private action, which he followed the law.
Flip-Flop: 0/15 Wrong: 2.5/15 Right: 4.5/15Don't ask, don't tell:
Romney has been consistent that gays should be able to serve openly in the military, but does not believe the policy should have been changed in the middle of an armed conflict. No flip-flop, and there are valid arguments on both sides as to whether that was the "constitutional" position to take. No flip and I will split the score between right/wrong as I don't know.
Flip-Flop: 0/15 Wrong: 3/15 Right: 5/15Ohio Issue 2:
article posted says he did a "half flip" on it. Not really a national issue so no points either way regarding consitutionality.
Flip-Flop: .5/15 Wrong: 3/14 Right: 5/14Assault weapon ban:
Ful flip-flop, yet his current position is unclear. It appears he opposes new assault weapons bans but supports existing ones, yet claims to support the second amendment. He appears to be trying to have it both ways currently.
Flip-Flop: 1.5/15 Wrong: 3/14 Right: 5/14 unclear on principles: 1/14Tax pledge:
Flip-flop, no consitutional right or wrong answer.
Flip-Flop: 2.5/15 Wrong: 3/14 Right: 5/14 unclear on principles: 1/14Abortion:
Full 180 degree flip flop, but now does support the correct, constitutional position.
Flip-Flop: 3.5/15 Wrong: 3/14 Right: 5/14 unclear on principles: 1/14Ronald Reagan:
The article posted gives Romney a full flip-flop on Reagan - I'm willing to give Romney the benefit of the doubt and say his position on Reagan "evolved". No scoring.Climate Change:
The article gives Romney a flip-flop-flip on this: In other words he did a 180 and then reverted back to his original position. Reading all of the quotes involved, I am only going to give him half a flip and I believe his position is pretty much where it should be regarding policy. I don;t see any support for carbon taxes and it seems like his more or less consistent position is - Climate change is happening, we don't know to what extent it is being caused by man, and we shouldn't spend billions of dollars trying to fix a problem we are not sure we understand. I do believe he thinks we should be "wise stewards" of the resources we have. Wise position and within constitutional bounds.
Flip-Flop: 4/15 Wrong: 3/14 Right: 6/14 unclear on principles: 1/14Conclusion:
On 4 of the 15 issues, Romney has done a 180. I'll admit, not as bad as I thought, and certainly a person has a right to change his mind. I get suspicious when those changes are made exactly when it is to his benefit politically. Of the 15 points the article addressed, I found 1 to not involve right or wrong in regards to the constitution. Of the remaining 14, I consider Romney wrong on 3, right on 6, and either unclear or that arguments could go either way whether it was consitutional or not on 5. Not as bad as I had expected, but not good enough for me to support, either. Going outside of this article, I have found Romney's understanding of the constitution or even an attitude showing that he holds the constitution in reverence and would use it as a yardstick against which he would measure his decision - lacking.