Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501
You don't think Obama's sudden reversal on gay marriage wasn't a tactical decision to energize socially liberal independents? Or the sudden urgency behind issuing visas to young immigrants? Or the fact that Obama told Putin he would be given license to do more with Russia after the election?
Both parties are neutered by their base and both have to pander to get votes. It's the political process. Let's not pretend that it works for one party and not the other. I am a moderate and Romney is one of the first candidates to energize me, because I believe he is a true moderate. As a true moderate, I think it kills Romney that he has to take on sometimes crazy conservative ideologies that he doesn't necessarily agree with. What we saw in the debate was a Romney that I believe had his back to the wall and realized he was going to win by being himself, rather than a lackey for his party. I don't think it's intellectual dishonesty. I think Romney is a candidate who believes that bullheadedness on a belief isn't the way to go. I completely agree with and love the idea of a candidate who lays out principals then achieves bipartisan compromise to get it done. That's how it works in the business world. A CEO that gets into specific details about what cuts Congress should make... that's what you call a micro-manager.
As usual, Chiefzilla nailed it.