I actually acknowledge that this is a tough one. Hard to prove a potential negative. And, there are many subjective points involved. I don't assume we would have lost all of Detroit manufacturing, and I'm not sure that Obama thinks that either. We may be better off without Union contracts, especially all the debt involved with the retirement funds. $10-$20 billion could come back from the stock price, and it could come back from taxes going forward. Again, just difficult to prove the what-ifs or could have beens.
Obama completely ignored bankruptcy restructuring law and gave GM to the unions and shafted the bond holders. Romney would have done it differently and we wouldn't be looking at a $15 billion tax payer loss which will probably become a $30 billion loss with the rules Obama has imposed on GM.
GM didn't have to go hat in hand to the government. They could have filed bankruptcy and folded operations. The president doesn't have the power to simply ignore bankruptcy laws with no recourse for counter parties. You can try revisionist history all you want but the fact is that the GM board went to the governement for operating funds it could get nowhere else and a deal was struck. Romney would have done it differently because he said so. He would have denied GM access to US taxpayer funding. What am I arguing with you for? You don't know jackshit!