I will answer opinion with opinion.
It isn't good journalism. It's opinion. And, of course, we can expect an opinion from someone so clearly allied with the candidate to glow like candle-light on fine china.
This is a defense of the candidate as "A good man." And the author goes about splicing data to suggest Romney was the favorite among the middle class. Uh-huh.
The author never pauses to consider that among all the clowns in the Republican Party primary clown-car, Romney almost never got higher than 33% among republicans and consistently rode shotgun to one of any number of badly flawed candidates. Even republicans found him dishonest and in turns would have voted for anyone BUT Romney.
You can google any statement the candidate made and find him contradicting any given position that he had ever held. He passed health care reform in Mass and then had to run against a program that seems to be working there. Even those who live in the state where Mitt was a one-term governor voted in droves against him.
Then you get the 47% comments. The photographs of him and his corporate raider cronies stuffing their vests and pockets with cash. The stories about a man putting his dog on the roof of his car. Of a man who led a gang of idiots to run down a gay kid and forcibly chop his hair off. Then you get the fact that the man would not release his tax forms. You can only guess what an examination of this rich man's finances would have revealed about this "good man."
Yep. This election was close if you believe for one second that the GOP hasn't been tipping 10% of the electronic voting machine tabulations for the last decade.
Anyone claiming this opinion is a balanced and strong opinion is simply someone listening only to someone they already agree with. There's no thought in this. Garbage like this merely proves the old adage about opinions... you know, everybody has one.