To liberals, Mitt Romney is a laissez-faire corporate aristocrat. To conservatives, he's a "Massachusetts liberal" scarcely distinguishable from President Obama. So who's right?
The campaign rhetoric makes it hard to tell, of course, since attacks on Romney up till now have been intended to caricature his record, not illuminate it. But as Romney comes closer to winning the Republican nomination, the internecine warfare among Republicans will die down, and Romney vs. Obama will begin in earnest.
Romney is, in fact, less of a bomb-thrower than some of the Republicans he's been competing against for the GOP nomination. He doesn't want to throw out the whole tax code, shackle the Federal Reserve, or turn Washington into a ghost town. But Romney differs from Obama in many substantive ways, and if he ends up as the GOP nominee, voters will have a clear choice between two distinct philosophies on how to manage the economy.
To highlight their differences, I focused mostly on each candidate's policy proposals for the future, rather than their actions in the past, because the next president is likely to face momentous and perhaps unprecedented decisions on taxes, spending, job creation, and the entire role of government. Romney has outlined many of his ideas in a detailed plan that's available on his website, while filling in a few blanks in recent speeches and policy statements. Obama released his own set of economic proposals last September, and he, too, continues to refine his economic policies while stumping. Read more.......