Of course, it is ok for one to vote for his own self-interests.
But we do complain about politicians doing that, rather than voting rationally and for the greatest good of all the people.
I would urge you vote for who will do the best for you. The best appears, as far as I can deduce, to be Romney.
Yes, he may not fit perfectly ideologically for all of you. And there may be some interests that are personal that force you to vote for him rather than for the good of the nation and for the betterment of you.
If you want America to return to strong values, economic strength, and prosperity for the future, there is only one reasonable choice.
FOR THE RIGHT
But the right will have to acknowledge certain things.
Americans in the majority favor abortion rights, so the right will not prevail on this issue - and hoping otherwise will bear no fruit. It is better not to expend the effort. As in the Serenity Prayer: "Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference." Add to that "the wisdom to not expend my energy uselessly and to not be stuck in righteousness."
Gay rights are favored by the majority, so that will happen. The best you can do there is to protect "marriage" as an institution and to encourage honoring those who believe in that by allowing civil unions with the same rights. Your moral opinion is something you can have, but respect of others' opinions is, I think, what any true holy figure would recommend.
FOR THE LEFT
As discussed above, a Republican President cannot change the items above, so they are irrelevant, unless one wants to be "righteous" or engage in "make wrong", which would cost you four more years of financial suffering and meandering.
Romney is committed to doing the people's will and has stated that he will not impose any personal beliefs upon the majority. I think, therefore, for those two reasons that he will not damage what you want for yourself ideologically - but he will benefit you financially, by running a much better government (saving lots of money) and getting things restructured for us to grow financially.
You have much to benefit from hiring Romney - and Obama changing and being capable of executing the duties of the President is, in my opinion, not a reasonable expectation - he cannot learn what is needed, even in four more years, as it takes years and years to get real experience. As in Ron Suskinds conclusion to Confidence Men, Obama is a "brilliant amateur". I think he would be great if he were in the right job for him. See The Evaluation Of Obama's Presidency. Obama is a good man, just not the right man for the job, unfortunately. He is committed to preserving all the safety nets so they can serve those people who must depend on them. There is no threat there at all. Of course, pure math will suggest that we may have to pay in a bit more to balance the books for Social Security and Medicare - and probably (as it is unavoidable if we don't want to ruin our children's financial future) adjust the costs by having a later starting age. Only by dealing with these on a sound financial basis can we preserve them - otherwise we are engaging in wishful thinking.
For the majority of Democrats, I think that they will benefit more from electing Romney than Obama - and the downside for electing Obama is pretty high and it is not wise to rely on the hope for miraculous change.
We must restructure the foundation for America. Things have changed and we have some forces against us, with jobs going overseas because it is cheaper or easier, with American jobs going unfilled because we don't have people trained for them, with many people not being educated sufficiently characterwise and/or skillwise. The culture must change to some extent to one where we all are taking the bull by the horns and working together to build a stronger workforce that is growing the size of the pie and building an economically strong America, for all the people.