Both Litton and Stone are conservatives, but Stone seems more political that Litton, more resistent to addressing racial issues and sexual abuse issues. The WSJ stated best:
‘Our Lord Isn’t Woke.’ Southern Baptists Clash Over Their Future.
One faction argues the SBC should step back from its role in electoral politics in order to broaden its reach and reverse a 15-year decline in membership. Another faction says the denomination has been drifting to the left, and the way to retain and attract members is to recommit to its conservative roots and stay politically engaged. Each side accuses the other of straying from the SBC’s core mission.
Under Rev. Stone ("Our Lord isn't woke!" ), I would suspect that the SBC stay too involved in US politics. The more politically active they are, the more will leave the denomination.
As to the sexual abuse issue, see :
Secret recordings show Southern Baptist dispute on sex abuse
Stone added that the SBC can’t dictate policies to its self-governing churches the way a hierarchical denomination can, and said a “heavy-handed” approach could prompt churches to leave the convention, with no improvement in children’s safety....
The problem that I see is that the SBC has already had a policy of not dictating policies to self-governing churches, though they sure do strongly encourage churches theologically (Baptist Faith and Message ). Nothing would change in that regard with Stone. The SBC could at least insist that local churches follow the laws in their state, county, city which require police are notified, and they could set up a data-base about the issues they have had with staff in regards to sexual abuse.