I was reading Dan’s blog here and Jesse’s blog here about Mitt.   I realized that I pretty much disagreed with both of them on several issues.  Here’s my random thoughts and musings concerning their posts:

I understand in concept that Mitt needs to move over to the right idealogically to win the nomination.  I’m not sure with the mood of the nation, if this move is going to cost him. Idealistically and unrealistically, I’d like to see a politician portray what they think, and not say what they think will score the most points.  However, I don’t think that Romney necessarily fits this quote or this is a fair assessment of his shift.:

Americans should ask themselves why they keep voting for people who compromise their principles, so that when good candidates seek office, they have to compromise also or they won’t get in. Is this really the kind of process we want in selecting righteous and good leaders? 


 As much as I admire Sen. McCain, I don’t think he’ll be president, but I think Guiliani may be underestimated. 

 As far as Sen. Clinton goes, I can’t think of a more polarizing figure out there, and the Democratic Party knows this.  Kerry, Pres. Bush, and Pres. Clinton?  They are country uniters compared to the good Senator from New York. 

Obama.  I think it may be a serious mistake for him to run for President in ’08, but I can see why he’s going to do it. 

 Romney’s fiscal conservative track record is one reason I’d vote for him.  Fiscal responsibility is one issue I’m very keen on.

Then there’s the fact that I share the same religion with Romney.  I support him, and am looking forward to watch his run unfold, but I’m still not sure if he’s got my vote.