I can see it a couple ways...
When I observe and hear Obama speak, I hear someone who reveres Karl Marx, thinks the Russians could've had a good thing going had they done it a little differently, actively desires more power and, given his covered him history and pre-senate buddies, could be actively planning on huge draconian totalitarian power seizures...
When I observe and hear Romney speak, I think it is someone who believes that Marx is wrong, communism, dictatorship, etc is bad, socialism is bad, likes the idea of market economies, etc... but has NO IDEA how markets actually work, has NO MORAL FOUNDATION to why freedom is RIGHT and is BENEFICIAL (so he equates subsidies and bailing out private, failing businesses with market economy), and lacks the backbone to steer us towards freedom when the mess hits the fan while the sheeple (urged on by self-serving, knowledgeable special interests) are yelling for him to take command and be a strong bold leader in the face of economic collapse.
Most presidents utilizes the precedents set by previous presidents, so I think Mitt Romney's first term would be worse than Obama's first term, but he'll still want to get re-elected, and I think that would temper some actions. I think Obama's second term would be far worse than his first term and likely would be worse than Romney's 1st term. There's no telling what things could be like in 2016, so I can't speculate on Romney's 2nd term... I think it comes back to his lack of principles in the face of economic disaster that would be dangerous.
Either choice means war, debt, inflation, etc.
"You must be frank with the world; frankness is the child of honesty and courage...Never do anything wrong to make a friend or keep one...Above all do not appear to others what you are not" - Robert E. Lee, CSA
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here:
Content of posts and comments on the Daily Paul represent the opinions of the original