We can predict the future behavior of a person relatively easily, as it is a continuation of the past behavior. Some promise to be different, but very, very few really change - don't rely on it, unless you have extraordinary new facts that are scientific. To judge each of these, I used facts not conjecture or areas that are strictly a difference of opinion or judgments - as those get to be ridiculous at times, and are very unprovable.
OBAMA - Big spending, much higher debt forcing more taxes (not possible to tax rich enough), business resistant, high regulation slowing business, hold back on oil production, impractical decisions, good long term ideals not implemented correctly, not able to manage/govern well, conflicts/blame, politically driven decisions,
ROMNEY - Results, set up for long term prosperity, efficiency, effectiveness, cooperation, responsibility society, do what is best for all Americans, avidly go after what works best, most efficient spending of all the candidates, effectively cover those who are unable and require responsibility of the others
SANTORUM - Conservativeness and righteousness, extreme positions, alienation, not able to manage/govern well
GINGRICH - Big ideas, contentiousness, anger driven, lack of team, arrogance?, not able to manage/govern well
All of these men are very capable, but only one has the developed, proven capabilities to do the job of being the chief executive officer of the United States Of America. See Qualifications To Be President.
______________________________________________________________________________
PROJECTIONS, IN MORE DETAIL
OBAMA (Paying a high price for small results, more dependency, continued high spending, higher taxes/debt, future generations having huge burden.) See the What To Expect From Obama's Second Term - And especiallly higher taxes for the middle class.
Ideals, balanced decisions? - Environment (green), will "highly" favor, with high cost, has made costly errors; give away more to people (add contraception to insurance, paying for people who could afford it on their own); has been 'marriage is for man and woman', but evolving; right to choose
Oil restricted Oil permits slow, federal lands restricted, production reduced through his actions (prior drilling permits from prior administrations created increase plus private and state land production increased dramatically)
Business regulation extremes - Regulations to try to control more to the ideal, not balanced
Foreign relations - ? Promote US as being nicer, but could be weak image created that could be costly, overrules military advisors with personal ideals and has political appearances rule
Lack of planning, confronting problems, and commitments - Too numerous to list here: Budget voted down 93-0 in senate, ignored Simpson-Bowles Commission recommendations; failure to confront need to balance the budget, as taxing the top 1% produces relatively little.
High spending - Has only decided to reduce spending when forced to do so by "hostage takers"; promises to help people (student loan forgiveness, mortgages reduced) without revealing there is cost to future generations.
On the job training - Holds back progress, trying to train him; more mistakes
Energy costs increasing dramatically - Not just from oil, but from reducing coal production (our cheapest energy) dramatically, to force use of alternative energy which is not cost feasible yet. Promised so in his first campaign. (Electricity costs will skyrocket - video)
(He will be politicking while "Rome burns", focusing on political issues and excuses and not addressing the key issues.)
ROMNEY (A shot at "smart government" and responsibility, and a "smart economy", taking care of those who really need it.
Great management - Using accountability, results monitoring, and other learned effective techniques of managing.
Results - Extraordinary results producer, producing benefits for stakeholders (who in this case are ALL Americans). He will do the most, by far, to set up a workable environment for prosperity.
Lowest feasible spending - Most efficient/effective operations, while covering all priorities, including social musts (cover those unable to do on their own AND responsibility is mandatory). Track record is indisputably clear.
Cooperative working relationships with all - Across the aisle, with those who disagree, etc.,
Highly effective use of experts - Understands what they say, analyzes, and effectively implements
Always fair - Uses conservative principles to do what is right and good for people.
Cut trade deficits - Dramatically, strengthens the dollar (cutting inflation pent up for the future)
More jobs from energy production - Alot more, instead of just in a narrow area.
Business more competitive internationally - Will bring back more jobs to US
Now outdated:
SANTORUM (Imposing on others, righteousness, inexperience, rhetoric)
On the job training - No management/governing experience
Gets a bit passionate about social issues, alienating - Can be alienating, especially beyond evangelicals. See Santorum Political Record (least popular of all senators)
Likely to try to impose his righteousness on others - See his record.
GINGRICH (Division, big ideas, not practical management)
Big ideas, huge frustrations - Not patient enough to persuade and attacks when he is not getting what he wants (see the quoted attacks on Reagan in Claiming Credit section)
Listen to the experts, take advice well? - He may be smart enough to not need others' ideas and inputs, but that does not produce good results (no management expert would disagree with that!)
Grandiosity -
Attacks, does the "against" routine -
Santorum additional notes:
He would, as president, reinstate Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, teach abstinence-only sex education in schools, end taxpayer money for contraception, veto all funding to Planned Parenthood, and pass two constitutional amendments – one to ban gay marriage and the other to ban abortion. He also said he would get rid of the judges on the United States Court of Appeal in San Francisco, the 9th Circuit that conservatives hate so much and then appoint conservative judges to those seats. He said he would accomplish this by having Congress abolish the Court and then re-instate it. Santorum would also provide Federal funding for groups that promote marriage and counseling against abortions.
Santorum is telling voters that as president he will have the power to amend the constitution and write laws, and pick one item out of the entire discretionary spending budget to veto. None of that is true. He is saying that a president can personally overturn a Congressional vote, can override a state’s jurisdiction on school curriculums. Neither of those things is true. He is saying that a President can decide where federal money will or won’t be spent. That is also not true. Presidents do not have the power to do any of the things he is telling Iowa voters he can do.
