Obama is a Marxist. I'm pretty sure Romney is not.
Obama clearly detests free enterprise and American exceptionalism, and wants to redistribute our wealth to other countries. Romney obviously does not.
Obama pursues policies than intentionally increase the cost of fossil fuel products, while reducing their availability. Romney would certainly encourage domestic energy production instead.
Obama routinely takes the side of America's adversaries in foreign disputes. I cannot picture Romney ever doing so.
Obama repeatedly and intentionally provokes division between groups and then tries to capitalize politically on the resultant strife. Romney seems like he would rather duct-tape his own mouth shut than say a bad word about anyone (personally, not politically, that is).
Obama wants the government to control your health care decisions. Romney... oh, yeah, well, he sort of does, too. Crap.
And then there are the issues of border security and illegal aliens, gay "marriage", gun rights, Federal spending and growing national debt... where one is hard-pressed to find significant differences between what Obama has done and what Romney might do instead.
And that's why so many of us are all struggling to find a reason to vote for the guy, even against a Marxist quisling like Obama.
OK, Romney is not a Marxist. But he's far too much of a statist to be counted a true free enterprise person. His only quibble is about whether the feds, the state, or cities and towns should rule. Even in his much-touted Olympics (still don't know what that was all about) and Bain experience, not to mention his experience as MA governor, he's a huge fan of gov't bailout, gov't subsidies, gov't in general, especially where it can be lobbied to further his own interests (as in the "carried interest" that let's him pay the 15% capital gains rate on income that isn't).