Different Philosophy
I’m hoping I’m not alone in this, but I strongly disagree with Mitt Romney’s reason for becoming president (as told to the Wall Street Journal): to “… allow us to remain the world’s military and economic superpower for an indefinite period of time”.
I’m pretty sure the reason the United States came into being was so that the people would have “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”; not so that we could be the military and economic superpower for all time. Our president should always have, as his/her strongest driving force, these goals - that all people (rich and poor, Hispanic and white, gay and straight, Christian and atheist) are guaranteed the right to pursue their lives as they see fit, without interference.
While it’s true that we need to protect ourselves from realistic military threats to our lands, and that a sound economy are required - there is no need, nor is there any rationale, for us to be a “superpower” forever.
As a side note, the author of the article gives Romney a pass for his seemingly politically expedient position changes by saying “… what was a flip-flop becomes an openness to reconsider former positions”. It’s interesting that Kerry was pilloried in 2004 when he reconsidered his former positions. Here - Romney is praised or it.