Mitt Romney should be the next president

"You made the statement that "In the economy's case, you pour strength into businesses. Find ways to increase production, to protect our businesses from foreign onslaught, and to create growth." I agree, but argue that Ron Paul's plan to eliminate the Federal Reserve return to the gold standard, and stop trying to maintain a foreign empire is the best way to do so". -- I don't see how Ron Paul's interest in economics makes him an expert on the economy. Mitt Romney not only has an interest in the economy, but he has genuine experience. His career was, in a word, the "economy". Ron Paul not only has no genuine experience in the economy, but as clear as I can see, he doesn't have ANY experience in the economy. I definitely have to say that I feel Romney is much more qualified to fix our economy and I think, aside from most Paul supporters, most people agree even if they don't support Romney. "To the notion of returning to the gold standard and eliminating the Federal Reserve, you stated that "I do not necessarily disagree with changes he wants to make. I haven't really taken the time to study all of the facts regarding these changes, but I know enough about the consequences to understand the drastic changes that would occur." How can you claim to know enough about the consequences of a plan if you admittedly haven't taken the time to study all of the facts? I was skeptical of what Ron Paul was advocating until I did my homework and was able to see the argument from all sides, and was able to give it an analysis based on ALL of the facts." --Its not the exact details that I need to know to understand what kind of effect those changes would have. A major economic change would have to be carefully made because an economy is a fragile things. A change of any kind would have to be made with caution, because any kind of change would have consequences that could be bad. My point is that a weakening economy does not need earth-shaking changes because it may not be able to absorb the shock of a new system. Romney wants to help the economy grow and expand. That's how you make a healthy economy. You increase production, create jobs, and encourage entrepeneurship. Growth is the key. Ron Paul wants to essentially give our economy a limit. He wants to bottle it up for safety. That's not a successful and vibrant economy. That's just a safe one. "There are a lot of economists within the academic realm who support Paul's economics, some of which have endorsed Paul on his website. Jim Cramer from Mad Money has been saying the same thing about the Federal Reserve for a long time, and invites Ron Paul on his show from time to time to talk about it." --Endorsements don't qualify a candidate for this kind of job though. A candidate MUST HAVE experience. Ron Paul may have economic ideas that many support, but that does not mean he has the experience to execute them. If they economy were to have an awful reaction and collapse, would Ron Paul have the know-how to fix it? I don't have enough faith in the miniscule experience to give him that chance. "Ron Paul is the only candidate without skeletons in his closet. He's got to where he's at by subscribing to constitutional governing principles and serving the people, not individual interests. He's the only candidate that will make our country safer by bringing our troops home from every country we're in, and will bail out our economy by doing so. Less $ for optimal security makes perfect sense to me." -- Though this has the potential to be another debate in and of itself, I will still state my views and this and Iraq. Leaving Iraq will not make our country safer. The terrorists hate us. They want us dead, and whether or not Ron Paul is right about it being our fault, they will follow us home. They wanna fight and they don't care where the battle is. Lets not forget who attack who first. If we leave Iraq, Al Qeada will declare victory and rally all of its supports. Recruitments will shoot through the roof, and they will come to fight the US within our borders if they have to. Im not saying there will be battles in the streets, but they will attack us with bombings, random shootings, and other attacks of terror. Bring the troops home would be bringing the fight home. That's not making America safer. That's making me worry if I'll make it home from the grocery store alive. We need to finish the fight on foreign soil, not start over on our own. Lastly, I don't want the United States to be known as the country that invades other countries...and then leaves them a mess. We broke Iraq, now we need to buy it ( or a better way of saying it would to fix it). Both of our top republican candidates have loads of experience in one area or another. McCain is excellent for national security. Romney is excellent for our economy. I don't feel like Ron Paul has any extensive experience anywhere outside of a hospital and on those grounds, I find him not to be the best candidate for President'