Reagan contrasted with Romney: Reagan realized he was wrong and never went that way again.
Romney was pro-choice, pro-life, pro-choice, pro-life, then pro-rape, incest life, and the pro-rape/incest/life/health, and then pro rape/incest/life.
So, there’s really no comparison.
I should have added my caveat from the last few days: if Romney lives up to his word in his first administration, then I’ll support him.
However, I want to see it first.
In the meantime, I prefer not to discuss his failings. I would much rather spend my time attacking Obama.
Reagan was willing to sign a bill overturning Roe v Wade with the very exceptions you are complaining about, and would have got it but the very same exception Romney calls for today became a stumbling block for purist pro-lifers. Reagan would have signed it, it would have become law, but purists stopped it.
Why is that different?
From what I am reading, you wouldn't vote for Reagan in 1980 if you had the same standards then. You know Reagan was true to his word only because he continued that way as president, not because of his record which was worse than Romney's. That you wouldn't give Romney the same chance to prove himself, when you KNOW what his opposition will do is simply foolishness.
Is this because Romney's a Mormon? Please answer straight because your logic isn't holding water.