To the Editor:

For those undecided in the upcoming election, please consider doing what's best for the next generation and our country, not what might be best for "me," short term, even who speaks or looks better. What's important is how they have performed over their last one or more positions,, not how many and how well made were their excuses, or what they plan to do.

The following is a list of just some of the negatives of Obama's term:

Unemployment has remained over 8 percent.

GDP growth is the lowest for any post-recession recovery since World War 2.

Far fewer oil/gas drilling permits have been approved in his 3 and a half years versus the prior 3 and a half period.

The keystone pipeline was canceled for frivolous environmental claims. Many thousands of jobs were blocked and we are more dependent on Mid-Eastern oil.

Federal spending estimates for his four years in office will average about 24.1 percent of GDP. In Bush's eight years the average was 20.1 percent, and for all the years since World War 2 to Obama, the average was slightly under 20 percent of GDP.

his apologetic rhetoric and indecisive dealings with some mid-eastern entities have led to and are leading to many more disastrous situations.

On the other hand, Mitt Romney's history as listed below shows integrity, competence and openness in working with those of differing views.

He founded and ran Bain Capital with a history of many successful company turnarounds.

As governor of Massachusetts, while working with a predominantly Democratic Legislature, still managed to improve procedures and efficiency to change the inherited $3 billion deficit to $600-700 million surpluses in his last two years.

Was hired as CEO to straighten out the floundering Olympic committee and succeeded in making the 2002 Winter Olym pics a great success.

Was far more generous in his charitable giving ($50 million over 20 years) than Obama and Biden.

To sum up, vote for what's best for the next generation, and for this great country.

Val Loueiro Manchester