As for the election itself: Yes, it sets a very bad precedent if Romney can run as a self-declared "severe conservative" for FIVE YEARS, renounce all those positions a MONTH before the election, and still win. On the other hand, Bush kind of already set that precedent in 2000 and the pundit and public reaction was "OMG, how DARE Gore sigh when Bush lies out his rear saying he can spend half the trillion dollar surplus on a trillion dollar tax cut and the 'other half' on entitlements (though it actually went on Iraq instead) yet maintain the balanced budget?!"

Beyond that, any GOP nominee worthy of the title would mop the floor with Obama; the far right may still believe him a "socialist," but the young and/or disaffected libs who voted for him in '08 learned the hard way how absurd that is, and have abandoned him. The only reason this is even close is because Romney is such a "say anything" conservative AND moderate; a genuine conservative might beat Reagan, and a moderate would destroy him.

See, we can say all that stuff without the risk of an unbalanced person deciding it is a compelling argument for murder. Just because they need no reason does not mean we should give them one anyway. It is like saying, "that powder keg was always a menace; if my match had not set it off someone elses would have." Irresponsible at best, reckless endangerment at worst.