Obama... Romney seemed to flipped on more of his policies during this debate... he again needed thev last word, if he didn't he would have a hissy fit. Obama knows there is only so much a person can do... he agains need more time.

Romney. Obviously he had done his homework; very knowledgeable on the Middle East, China, Latin Am, etc. Big picture guy, presidential. Most of all, he did not just talk peace, he created a tone of peace by the end of the debate, showed America at its best in bringing opposing sides together. O was not asleep, defended himself well, given his poor record on all fronts, but he was somewhat petulant, petty, and kept sniping at R instead of laying out an agenda for the next 4 yrs. This has been a very contentious, vengeful and divisive campaign, per the attack ads, which has given me much anxiety. Romney calmed me down tonight, and that is a great accomplishment on his part.

Romney. The "o" could'nt spell out any plan for the next 4 yrs other than tax the rich. I am not rich, a plumber by trade and would one day like to operate my own rig. O's plan makes that much harder with o care and the tax rates going to get higher, they may say the top 1% but when thats not enough, and trust me, it wont be. Then they are going togo for middle income families.

Romney was the obvious winner. Obama resorted to sophomoricly rude and revealing reflective stabs at his challenger making the voter wonder how capable he, the president, would be when working under extreme pressure.

Who won the CHS football game this weekend?

Cbs commentators were saying mitt has no foreign policy experience. O had none either and he is all of a sudden has a complete grasp? No o does not. Romney had the forsight to bring up pakistan and what their collapse could mean.

I wish Romney would have been more forceful when attacked. But honestly, this debate did not change anyone's minds on how they are going to vote. I for one did not vote for Obama the first time, nor will I vote for him now. Am I better off now than I was 4 years ago? Hell NO!

So let me get this straight...romney's debate plan was to agree and copy everything President Obama was saying? Seems like it because during the campaign he had DIFFERENT views than the ones he was talking about in this debate!! On the other hand President Obama was credible and he knew what he was talking about and he has his record to back him up!!!!

President Romney won e debate. Obama seemed petty, desperate, angry, and more like the challenger away time has run out.

A tie is a win for the challenger in a debate where the incumbent has had 4 years of experience. O attacking R is not an agenda.

One word ROMNEY .......

Obama clearly had experience on this debate, Romney kept agreeing and copying president Oboma work, and then Romney try to switch the debate to domestic policy. What part of Foreign policy was that about, stop flipping around...and stay on course...or is this what we expect from Him.,,I hope not..

I personally feel that Obama 'won' the debate....but I'm still voting for Romney.

The easiest way to determine who you should vote for is: which one would you trust to manage your corporation's finances, it's future and your money?

Obama may have appeared strong, but he was lying through his teeth. I'm sorry Romney did not bring up the terrorist issue with our ambassador, nor that he shut down NASA and is outsourcing to China and Russia. I almost fell off the couch when Obama mentioned the space program as one of the things he supports. HE LIES, and that's the bottom line. The U.S. isn't strong...the world is laughing at us! What a shame.

Romney won the debate where it counts - whom do you want running the country for the next 4 years.

Obama flat out lied about not wanting to leave forces in Iraq. It even came up in the VP debate. Obama also lied about his "apology tour" which was widely recognized as such by everyone. Finally, in no respect is America "stronger now than 4 years ago". People in possession of the facts don't like liars.

I think Romney was smart to be "high altitude" and to go after Obama lightly on foreign policy. As above, Obama would have smoothly lied his way out of any attack and Romney would have gotten nothing - because the press would have covered for Obama - and Romney would have looked less presidential. This way, Romney looked like the president and Obama the (nasty) challenger. Given that Romney did not go after Obama on Libya, this had to be his key debate strategy, which he executed successfully.

Too much Fox for you guys. Romney showed himself to be a flip-flopping lightweight with no consistent stand on anything. You just hate Obama so much that you would vote for Honey Boo-Boo if she were running against him.

OBAMA OBAMA OBAMA!!!!! For Romney folks just like he was furring debate.... DESPARATION is a terrible thing and came through loud and clear! Not to mention inexperience !

Jeff, I couldn't have said it better.

Jeff, so sorry you helped get Obama elected in the first place, and so Happy to see your eyes have been opened and you are paying attention. Great Progress!

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney may have exchanged a tactical defeat for a strategic victory in Monday’s foreign policy debate, losing on points to the president by most accounts but scoring a solid performance that left major pundits declaring he had passed “the commander in chief test” in resounding fashion.

CNN’s flash poll taken immediately after the debate had President Barack Obama winning, 48 to 40 percent. But a host of pundits declared it a strategic win for Romney, who played it conservatively as Obama aggressively attacked his positions, repeatedly insisting to Romney “that’s not true,” and “you’ve been over the map.”

The major question for Romney going into the debate: Would he establish himself as a trustworthy alternative to Obama in the commander-in-chief’s role?

Alert: Obama Movie Exposes His Vision for America. Click here.

“I think Mitt Romney did something very important to his campaign tonight,” former presidential adviser David Gergen told CNN. “He passed the commander-in-chief test.
Newsmax contributor, foreign-policy expert, and Pulitzer Prize winner Judith Miller concurred.

“What would have killed him was a Gaffe-gate,” she said of Romney. “One mistake, one Gerald Ford moment of Poland not being in the Warsaw Pact. And he was not about to let that happen.”

Miller was struck by the degree of consensus between the two leaders on a wide range of foreign policy issues. She said that by taking that approach, Romney “reassured people who fear a return to a more aggressive path. People are sick of war, and I think he did that. He reassured people that he is as steady in foreign policy as he did in domestic policy. I think he passed that test.”

Similarly, Fox News commentator and Newsmax contributor Doug Schoen, a Democratic pollster, told Newsmax shortly after the debate that Romney succeeded in demonstrating he is presidential “and on an equal footing with President Obama” in the foreign-policy arena.

Romney’s highlight came as he defended America’s role in maintaining global order. To do that, he said, the nation would have to remain strong, and continue to lead on the international stage.

“We have to also stand by our allies,” he said. “I think the tension that existed between Israel and the United States was very unfortunate. I think also that pulling our missile defense program out of Poland in the way we did was also unfortunate in terms of, if you will, disrupting the relationship in some ways that existed between us.

“And then of course,” he continued, “with regards to standing for our principles, when the students took to the streets in Tehran and the people there protested, the Green Revolution occurred. For the president to be silent I thought was an enormous mistake. We have to stand for our principles, stand for our allies, stand for a strong military and stand for a stronger economy.”

Alert: Obama Movie Exposes His Vision for America. Click here.

One of Obama’s strongest rebuttals came when Romney questioned his commitment to Israel.

“And when I went to Israel as a candidate, I didn't take donors, I didn't attend fundraisers, I went to Yad Vashem, the -- the Holocaust museum there, to remind myself the -- the nature of evil and why our bond with Israel will be unbreakable,” the president said.

The president appeared irritated at one point after Romney charged that the U.S. Navy under Obama is smaller than “any time since 1917.”

Romney said the Navy is down to 285 ships, and could dip into “the low 200s,” adding, “That’s unacceptable to me.”

Obama shot back, “I think Governor Romney maybe hasn't spent enough time looking at how our military works. You -- you mentioned the Navy, for example, and that we have fewer ships than we did in 1916 [sic]. Well, governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets -- (laughter) -- because the nature of our military's changed.”

Then the president made a statement that some may perceive as condescending. “We have these things called aircraft carriers where planes land on them,” Obama said. “We have these ships that go underwater, nuclear submarines.”

At one point in the debate, Romney addressed the more aggressive incumbent directly, stating: "Attacking me is not an agenda. Attacking me is not talking about how we’re going to deal with the challenges that exist in the Middle East and take advantage of the opportunity there and stem the tide of this violence."

Both candidates had their tactical moments, and at times appeared to largely agree on policies with the exception of a few specific, important details.

Both candidates agreed that war against Iran should be a last resort, for example, and that a united front is crucial in opposing the Islamic theocracy running that country. But Romney insists the Iranians should not be permitted to attain nuclear capability, while the Obama administration appears focused on preventing the Iranian regime from building an actual nuclear device, while possibly allowing it to have the capability to do so.

Overall, Romney avoided making any major blunders and repeatedly turned the discussion to the national-security impact of bolstering the U.S. economy.
Schoen tells Newsmax that Obama, who faces dwindling support in a number of recent polls, may be running out of time to reverse the dynamics that are driving the race.

“There is still room,” Schoen told Newsmax. “But increasingly the electorate is interested in what Gov. Romney has to say and increasingly the electorate feels they’ve heard enough from President Obama,” said Schoen.

Pundits Proclaim: Romney Passes ‘Commander-in-Chief Test’
Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election? Vote Here Now!

Jeff, Sorry to say I disagree with you. You seem to be back tracking from your previous comments... hmmm ... a little confusing. Let me refresh you: Jeff B
1 hour ago
Harris, I actually voted for Obama last time. I can't stand liars. Obama has lied so many times since he first emerged on the national stage and through last night that I find it hard to see how any thinking person could vote for him. He is totally unprincipled! You want a president where you have no idea if he is telling the truth, as obviously with the 'video" on Libya?

Also, his personality has been shown to be most unattractive - an arrogant, thin-skinned, petulant, schoolyard bully - and his entire Chicago-thug campaign has been run that way. Romney has more character and substance in his pinky than Obama has in his entire body. ... Sounds like you are contradicting youself...

Jeff, more of what you stated previously that contradicts your last statement posted:
Jeff B
3 hours ago
Romney won the debate where it counts - whom do you want running the country for the next 4 years.

Obama flat out lied about not wanting to leave forces in Iraq. It even came up in the VP debate. Obama also lied about his "apology tour" which was widely recognized as such by everyone. Finally, in no respect is America "stronger now than 4 years ago". People in possession of the facts don't like liars.

I think Romney was smart to be "high altitude" and to go after Obama lightly on foreign policy. As above, Obama would have smoothly lied his way out of any attack and Romney would have gotten nothing - because the press would have covered for Obama - and Romney would have looked less presidential. This way, Romney looked like the president and Obama the (nasty) challenger. Given that Romney did not go after Obama on Libya, this had to be his key debate strategy, which he executed successfully.

My goodness Jeff B, I thought we were on the same team... your comments are very confusing... One minute you're for Mitt, the next minute you're bashing him... How do you really feel? Please clear up the confusion in your statements. Thx... from a true PATRIOT!

Obama looked snarky as his snippy answers. Romney spoke and looked polished.

Jeff B...this is what was confusing. I'm starting to think you are a different person than Jeffrey Boyle...My apologies.....

Jeffrey Boyle
3 hours ago
Carol, when everyone is talking about one candidate over the other, that candidate won the debate. And today, everyone is talking about President Obama, not Mitt Romney. Your citing Newsmax as a credible source of information speaks for itself. Newsmax is as much a propaganda machine for the right-wing as any source you can provide for the left. To say that Romney "avoided making any major blunders" also speaks for itself. He looked weak when he made is comment about the Navy, and even weaker when Obama countered about bayonets and horses. Given that he chose to get 4 deferments during Vietnam so he could bicycle through France instead (while his contemporaries were dying to protect Mr. Romney's freedoms), his credibility in that regard falls far short of where it should be. Unfortunately for Mr. Romney, the election is determined by the electoral college and not the popular vote, he has a distinct disadvantage in that regard. He continues to trail Obama in Ohio - a state that no Republican can lose and still win the office of president. Lastly, to accuse those who disagree with you of being "rebel (sic) rousers" shows a distinct lack of patriotism - we're a country that respects the opinions of others. Even when we don't agree with them.

I refuse to vote for people who intend to send the women in my life back to the 1950s. Women's rights are very important to me, and the right wingers want to take all those rights away. They would keep women barefoot, pregnant, and in the kitchen. Mitt's grandpa lived in Mexico, remember, so he could have multiple wives. No thank you, R & R will not get MY vote.

Women constitute more than half of the population. In 2008, 60% of voters were women. It is estimated that 10 million more women than men will vote in this election. Despite this, women make up only 16% of Congress. Women earn only 70 cents to each dollar men make. Women of color and undocumented women make less than white citizens. Mitt Romney and the Republican Party are determined to overturn Roe V. Wade. Romney has not supported equal pay for women (The Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act). Romney has vowed to defund Planned Parenthood. Romney has vowed to repeal the Affordable Care Act. Romney doesn't want health care to cover birth control. Romney says same sex marriage should be banned with a Constitutional Amendment.

This goes behind women's rights. First it is creating jobs. I lost mine and I am no longer collecting, so I'm pretty much invisible in the Obama polls. Second, it is making this country strong and respected again. This WILL NOT happen with Obama. They claim that Obama has women's votes and the Hispanic vote, well...I am both of those things and will not vote for him.

Harris, this is a democracy. I have the right to my opinion just as you to yours. You really believe that if Romney wins women will loose everything we fought for? Just a reminder, this is not a dictatorship. I pray that we'll see better days.

Harris, are you aware that Obama's Government Motors (GM) has used masses of taxpayer money to dramatically expand capacity in China? Are you aware that in his first two years in office Obama had absolute control of Congress and had a focus of ObamaCare over the economy?

This is a President who has "tempered" his true agenda from day one with the objective of winning a second tern. The next 4 years with no "brake" on Executive Directives will make his first 4 years look like a picnic. When the phone rings in the Oval Office with the voice on the other end saying "Barry why don't we play a little solitaire" we have no one to blame but ourselves. (With apologies to Richard Condon)

Folks, the choice is clear. We have the opportunity to elect an exceptional person in every respect (intellectually, morally, etc.) to the White House. Don't miss this opportunity to make Mitt Romney our next President.

Romney won without question. He pointed out that if our current spending and debt load continues under Obama leadership the USA will not have the ability to be influential on the world stage. He pointed out that Obama has put space between Israel and the USA which has emboldened Iran and others. Obama showed how condescending he is and that is why he cannot reach a hand over the aisle to build needed consensus in Washington. It believe me it is game over for Obama and thank goodness!!

I was asked this morning by a campaign volunteer if I'm better off today than I was 4 years ago. The answer is that I'm slightly better off than I was 4 years ago at the tail end of the Bush administration.
If the question had been about 5, 6, 7 or 8 years ago, in the prime of that administration, I'm way worse off than I was then. I don't know anybody who isn't.

Kathy, the Democrats had absolute control of both the House and Senate in Obama's first two years. What seems to be forgotten is that they also controlled the House and Senate from January 2007 until Obama came in January 2009. In January 2007, well before the recession started, the unemployment rate was 4.6%. In other words, the legislation passed before, during and after the recession to deal with the problems was within the Dems control.

They have really had nearly 6 years to fix things, yet refuse to even pass a budget. If our personal budget were so far out of whack that we borrowed 40 cents of every dollar spent, would we tolerate that? Why should it be tolerated any more from our leaders?