65 Comments

• Jack | Oct 07, 2012, 05:03 PM EDT

  Anglo-Norman is right on. Today's "democrats" like Obama are no way similar to those Democrats like JFK or Tip O'Neil. This "president" has vastly increased the use of food stamps and welfare but not through necesity but by relaxing the requirements to get on those programs/ He also increased the unemployment availability from 6 months to two years (99 weeks). PS: A study came out that after 99 weeks of unemployment most people find a job within three weeks. The reason Obama does this is by buying votes by giving away free money. This is the opposite JFK speech of "ask not what your country can do for you but ask what you can do for your country". Clinton moved people off welfare and back to work and Obama has totally reversed that. He's real socialist.

• BrianO | Oct 06, 2012, 09:42 AM EDT

  Ya EK. the Reagan years where a horrible time for the economy, sheesh.

• allentown | Oct 05, 2012, 11:07 PM EDT

  Ephraim, as Romney told President Obama: "you own a plane and a house, but you don't own your own facts".

• EphraimKibbey | Oct 05, 2012, 01:38 PM EDT

  susieq2 - Talk about "fooled me once, fooled me twice." Reagan - My tax cuts will help the economy so much that they will pay for themselves. Bush 1 called it VooDoo. Result - huge deficit for the time and sluggish economy. Reagan - we must now raise taxes to stimulate the economy. 2. W. - My tax cuts will not decrease what the rich pay and will pay for themselves as they will stimulate the economy. Result - very sluggish growth, doubling the deficit and a crash of historic proportion. 3. Magical Mitt the Mendacious - My 20% tax cut will be revenue neutral, will not decrease the taxes paid by the rich, will not raise the taxes of the middle class, will stimulate the economy and reduce the deficit. The country fell for this line of something for nothing twice before and it didn't work either time. Insanity - believing that doing the same thing over and over will have different results. Or - Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me; fool me thrice, I am an idiot incapable of learning from my mistakes!

• susieq2 | Oct 05, 2012, 11:00 AM EDT

  Arthur Cola... You said it all. I don't know why so many Irish were falling for Obama. He "Fooled me once - not twice!"

• Frosty38 | Oct 05, 2012, 10:45 AM EDT

  Romney and Ryan 2012 And Ryan for president 2020!!! i hope Ryan gets a NEW TAILOR he looks like a ragamuffin when he appears

• BrianO | Oct 05, 2012, 10:33 AM EDT

  Ephraim is really earning his money this week, After the election you might consider selling used cars. I would like to hear the real numbers from Obama, not axelrod, or a surrogate. I would like to know if he, Obama actually knows about free market capitalism.

• Arthur Cola | Oct 05, 2012, 10:22 AM EDT

  After multi millions of dollars have been spent on destroying the person of who Mitt Romney is the Presidential Debate introduced not a combative Presidential candidate but rather one who is knowledgeable,assertive, confident and ready to lead. What we saw in that 1st debate was that our current President is indeed a celebrity President. He's more comfortable with the Hollywood set, apearing on The View or David Letterman than preenting his own ideas, which of course, he found challenging to do because they are limited in nature. (Except for the Auto industry bail out). Secondly, one has heard that Romney has not been specific enough with details on how he would turn the economy around. Now he has produced an abundance of examples and media is saying that the people were overwhelmed by the facts and figures used in this debate. There will be no tax increase for the middle class. And the reason for that is clear, not a Clintonesque Math cliche'. Reduce the corporate tax structure, reduce the tax rates, increase trade of USA products are three examples of what Romney presented as how this $5 tillion dollar issue is not an issue. If we do those three things more people will be employed, businesses will grow and thus more taxes would be collected. This would enable the government to have increased revenue and set US on the road to real recovery.

• seanfer7 | Oct 05, 2012, 07:50 AM EDT

  I thought Romney sounded like a carnival barker. He was talking so fast you couldn't get your mind about what he was saying and what he said prior. Hurry up make a decision its going fast.

• Donegal6 | Oct 05, 2012, 02:11 AM EDT

  Obama, "everyone get's a fair share"...of what? based on what? Sounds a bit Marxist to me.

• anglo-norman | Oct 05, 2012, 01:23 AM EDT

  The Irish do have to give up that old emotional attachment to the Democrat Party & decide for themselves on the issues & the man. Obama is a spoofer & he can't pick himself up for the second debate then everyone will know the charade around this man.

• EphraimKibbey | Oct 05, 2012, 12:29 AM EDT

  christinao't - Don't tell Ryan, but 2020 is a Tecumsah curse year. Look up what happened to the country and to every President elected in a 20 year multiple since Harrison. Recently, 1960 JDK shot; 1980 Reagan shot; 2000 W. 2 wars and financial collapse. Every 20 years the US suffers some catastrophe associated with the President they elect.

• EphraimKibbey | Oct 05, 2012, 12:15 AM EDT

  Poll of likely voters: PREDEBATE - Obama 47%, Romney 41%; POSTDEBATE - Obama 48%, Romney 43%. This seems to align with instant polling that gave Romney the debate win 46% to 21%. So Romney won 2 former undecided voters for every one that Obama won but the minds of already decided voters was not swayed. If the rest of the presidential debates go just as badly for Obama, it will end up Obama 50% and Romney 47%. Since the Libritarian candidate may take the remaining 3%, that still gives Obama a 3% win. Since this was a national poll rather than a swing state poll, Obama's win margin may be even greater in those states. Keep the faith!

• christinao't | Oct 05, 2012, 12:13 AM EDT

  Romney and Ryan 2012 And Ryan for president 2020!!!

• EphraimKibbey | Oct 04, 2012, 11:59 PM EDT

  Here is what no one has called Mitt the mendacious on yet: IF his tax cut will be revenue neutral, will not add to middle class tax burden, will not increase the deficit AND will not lower the taxes paid by the rich, WHERE OH WHERE will the extra money come from that the job creators are to get so they can increase investment and create more jobs. OH YEA, Romney flunked arithmatic, I forgot! Sadly, he doesn't even get VooDoo math.

• christinao't | Oct 04, 2012, 11:56 PM EDT

  Obama unscripted! No teleprompter, no adoring fans and adoring media covering up for him. None of the Obama is a media creation...reality is not so great. He wasn't very prepared or knowledgable about his own job...maybe because he spent so much of the last four years, playing golf vacationing and campaigning...do ya think? He has no clue. And honestly, I don't think he was EVER anything special...just ALL HYPE! He has made a complete crock of things here and it will take years to mop up his mess! Besides, he is being a jerk to the Catholic Church and people of conscience, he obviously has none of his own. The sooner he is gone the better for the country. Ryan with Romney is a good ticket. The Irish should end the "love affair" with the Democratic party. The platform is crazy...this Irish woman has moved on. Irish and Catholic but NOT Democrat!

• EphraimKibbey | Oct 04, 2012, 11:52 PM EDT

  jflanagan - Here is were the 5 trillion comes from: 1. Romney has been saying he wants a 20% reduction in Income tax rates to spur the economy. 2. That (without any offsets from deductions) would cut current revenues by half a trillion per year. 3. Congressional budgets are done for a 10 year period. 4. 10 times 1/2 trillion equals 5 trillion. 5. Since there is not enough money in deductions from the rich to cover that bill, middle class deductions would have to be also cut and even after the 20% rate reduction, that would add $2000 to the average family of four's tax liability. 6. The only way not to add to middle class taxes would be to put the rest of the 5 trillion on our tab with Red China. See Ryan, the math isn't THAT hard!

• anglo-norman | Oct 04, 2012, 11:19 PM EDT

  Obama was a disgrace to the office he holds & the american people with his meek performance last night. His demeanor is indictitive of his term in Office. Romney lied but so did every candidate before him including Obama. Clinton was a liar but a good President.

• pilib04 | Oct 04, 2012, 10:49 PM EDT

  Oh sure, we are to trust a Brit to run the country. Sorry folks, I'll stick with the man from Moneygall, Offaly, even though he obviously has not kissed the Blarney Stone.

• KatieMurphy | Oct 04, 2012, 10:48 PM EDT

  Just plss remember - Mitt has sold out to the very very wealthy of the repubs, eg $20 billion Koch brothers...........This gang would destroy Medicare and social security - the compacts between generations to insure our old folks and our selves eventually a comfortable old age and protection of life...........Voting for Romney is like voting for the leader of the devils lair............It could become like the dark ages of zero social and economic progress for the 99%........ As for Romney its not how he presents himself, its what the repub party goals are - making "middle class" a past tense idea in our society.

• Maere | Oct 04, 2012, 10:05 PM EDT

  I was sickened while listening to Romney saying how much he cares about the elderly. I contacted his office when he was Governor of Massachusetts regarding the abuse of my elderly mother, Peggy Revene, who had MS and alzheimer's. My mother was a victim of elder abuse. Because one of the family members involved with the abuse was a snitch for the Westboro Police Department and according to former PD Chief, Glenn Parker, the abuser was also a snitch for the MA State Police. I NEVER heard back from romney. Two years ago this month, I went to an MS function, to speak to ann romney. She just announced that she had breast cancer as well as her well publicized MS. I was handed a microphone and the whole presentation was being recorded. ann was gracious and sympathetic when I told her my mother was also a breast cancer survivor and had MS and alzheimer's and was a victim of elder abuse. I asked for her help (didn't mention anything about the former gov) and she volunteered that "they" still had friends in high places in MA. She asked that I provide my contact info to the event coordinator, which I did. I called several times without getting a response and was finally told that mrs. romney doesn't deal with the public. We are the public. maureen.revene@hotmail.com

• Tom Mo | Oct 04, 2012, 09:38 PM EDT

  By the way Niall, I, for one one, was not "befuddled" by the facts. The lies were straightened out though. Notice The Won never brought up the 47% or the "war on women."?

• Tom Mo | Oct 04, 2012, 09:33 PM EDT

  I think Prince Albert Gore got it right. The altitude affected The Won. It was either that or the latitude, or probably the attitute of The Won. He felt it was beneath him to even be there. Wonder how Michelle felt? Him getting screwed by another man on their anniversary.

• jflanagan | Oct 04, 2012, 08:58 PM EDT

  I think it showed that the President was very good against Senator McCain, not the best orator, but was as overwhelmed by Governor Romney as he has been by the Presidency. Also, the rich don't even make a TOTAL of 5 Trillion Dollars a year so how can he give them a 5 Trillion Dollar tax break? Just a bunch of divisive lies to try and pander to the poor while he dismantles the middle class.

• Smyrnian | Oct 04, 2012, 08:26 PM EDT

  I think Big Bird is quite safe; not so Obama's reelection chances.

• IrishAndProud | Oct 04, 2012, 07:36 PM EDT

  Of course, Obama will now go aggressive and negative, big time, against Romney in the remaining debates. The problem is, he still won't have any substance to do it, with. So instead of just being mopey and incompetent, he'll be loud, brash, obnoxious and offensive, in ADDITION to being mopey and incompetent. His dwindling supporters still don't get it. Even though they and what remains of Obama's fawning press will declare his next performance(s) to be '100% better than last time -- he really came out swinging!', it still won't ultimately matter. Obama will still have no record to brag about, and nothing nationally will have changed since the first debate (save for even less support for Obama, since then)...and shouting his nonsense at Romney rather than speaking it won't help him at all; quite the reverse.

• eiriamach | Oct 04, 2012, 07:32 PM EDT

  Look at the fact-checking fallout before congratulating Mitt. Obama is not the only one dizzy from Romney-spin, and Big Bird is hiring bodyguards. Today, Obama is asking which Romney was onstage last night: "I met this very spirited fellow who claimed to be Mitt Romney,... But it couldn’t be Mitt Romney, because the real Mitt Romney has been running around the country for the last year promising $5 trillion in tax cuts that favor the wealthy. The fellow onstage last night said he didn’t know anything about that" (NY Times). Big Bird tweeted, "Newt just called: 'If I had a penny for every time Romney lies; I could fund PBS AND build a Moon Colony.'" When the people have heard enough, they'll realize that voting for Romney would put a compulsive liar in the Oval Office.

• kaydog1 | Oct 04, 2012, 07:12 PM EDT

  Actually, Niall, I think Obama DID bring his "A" game to the debate last night - it simply isn't a very good level of "A" game. This debate put me in mind of the opening sequence of the movie "Apocalypse, Now", where Captain Willard voice-overs that the time he has spent in a Saigon hotel has made him weak, while the time "Charlie" (the Vietcong) has spent "squatting in the bush" has made Charlie stronger. In this case, Romney has continued to prepare ever since the 2008 election cycle. He's dealt with hostility from 'impartial journalists' who hate hime for who they think he is, for who they pretend he is, and for things they've simply made up about him. Romney has had to think out his defenses, fine-tune his message, and deal with all the negativity and hatred of the Left. It has made him strong. During the same 4 years, Obama has NEVER gone anywhere without first packing the location with cheering sycophants, has held very few press conferences and for those always carefully selected the questions to be asked, and only gave media interviews to his most loyal adherents among the lap-dog media. This same media have covered for Obama at every turn, and so the best description I can think of to identify a Liberal Journalist is 'one who has never EVER criticized Obama.' That would be almost ALL of them. The end result of all this coddling from the Obama/Media personality cult is that last night, probably for the first time EVER, someone told Mr Obama that he was WRONG, and disagreed with him - right there to his face!!!! And there were no cheering crowds to tell him how good, and how right, and how wonderful, and how noble he is. It was like watching a toddler hear the word "NO" for the very first time - he was shattered. Yes, it's a beautiful thing to watch our no-talent-hack little boy of a President growing up before our very eyes, isn't it ?

• Springfield9 | Oct 04, 2012, 05:52 PM EDT

  is there no limit to your arrogance???? I am not "befuddled" by facts and figures. perhaps it is because I majored in Engineering instead of classes where Journalism is really releasing butterflies from your ears.

• Canal Rat | Oct 04, 2012, 05:40 PM EDT

  Searlit, Can you give an example of what you found rude about Gov. Romney. Considering that politics ain't bean bag, he seemed to me to be a gentleman. You're the first person I've heard say that he was rude.

• IrishAndProud | Oct 04, 2012, 05:11 PM EDT

  Well, when you've been sheltered from reality all your life -- merely surfing white-guilt to the top and babied and pampered with a sympathetic press, to boot -- how can you be expected to deal with reality when it hits you (devoid of all that)? Even Obama's own people -- in addition to all the usual left-wing pundits -- are saying he did AWFUL, last night. Did anyone hear Chris Matthews, railing on Obama? Sheesh! Most FOX people don't even let him have it, like that. The tiny-minority liberals (just 21% of Americans, according to Gallup) is inching, slowly but surely, toward the reality that all the rest of us have known for YEARS, now: Barack Obama will lose next month. And that's a colossal understatement.

• Smyrnian | Oct 04, 2012, 05:05 PM EDT

  Obama had that scolded schoolboy, dazed, deer in the headlights look. No teleprompter and no record to run on. He was roadkill by the end if the debate.

• oTuachair | Oct 04, 2012, 04:40 PM EDT

  If these are the only choices I think I'll write in Mickey Mouse's name on my ballot...

• pilib04 | Oct 04, 2012, 04:31 PM EDT

  My son told me that Obama is playing it safe. I don't know. One thing is for certain, if Obama had behaved like that in the Democratic primary debates four years ago, Hillary would have be President. I will grant that Obama has other things to do besides campaign unlike Romney who hasn't held a job since being Governor in 2006. So I guess Romney did have more time to prepare. But still, it just didn't look real.

• pilib04 | Oct 04, 2012, 04:23 PM EDT

  The Guardian made some good points about President Obama "taking a dive" in the debate. The simple stuff was not calling Romney a flip/flopper on the 5 Billion tax giveaway. Not nailing him to his own Healthcare plan. Not making Romney come clean on Medicare and Social Security. But the "coup de grace" came with the President's complete silence on Romney's infamous Let Detroit go bankrupt!!!

• PiperMac52 | Oct 04, 2012, 04:12 PM EDT

  So let me get this straight, by your reasoning Romney's facts and figures were more befuddling than Obama's? Thing is Obama has had four years to prove himself and his facts and figures still don't add up to any fo the promises he made in 2008.

• PiperMac52 | Oct 04, 2012, 03:30 PM EDT

  Eschetic | Oct 04, 2012, 12:58 PM EDT It was an interesting evening, and only the most "conservative" sources convinced themselves that Romney hit a home run.--------------- Wow. The most "conservative sources" include Rachael Maddow, Chris Matthews, Ed Schultz, Lawerence O'Donnell, James Carvile, and every political writer and TV person I have heard. The only people who saw something different were people who post to this and other blogs and even they are in the vast minority.

• RedBranch | Oct 04, 2012, 03:08 PM EDT

  Romney had a bigger flag pin, I think I'll vote for him!

• EphraimKibbey | Oct 04, 2012, 02:52 PM EDT

  I think the score depends on what style you value most and whether you believe in independent fact checkers or never let the truth ruin a good story. To me, Romney was full of sound and fury while signifying nothing while the President was his calm, cool presidential self. Romney shape shifted into moderate mode while Obama stated exactly what he has been saying all along. Only in Romney World, does the truth change from moment to moment and is dependent on to whom you are talking. I wonder if Romney will be attacked from the far right for his etch-a-sketching away many of the things they hold near and dear or if they will assume that he was just lying to attract undecided voters and give him a pass?

• EphraimKibbey | Oct 04, 2012, 02:34 PM EDT

  cillowen - don't look now but some imposter stole your good name for a post at 11:16 AM EDT. Don't worry though, we all can recognise your eloquence and that post wasn't even close!

• Willipotts | Oct 04, 2012, 01:54 PM EDT

  I was very disappointed in Barak's performance. He missed a number of opportunities where he could have nailed Romney, e.g. his flip/flop on coal burning generation plants, abortion, medical care, etc. Romney was sharp, organized and articulate while Obama was lethargic, jerky presentation and too many generalizations. Had I been on the fence I might have been swayed to Romney. I wanted to kick Barak's ass for him.

• MegK311 | Oct 04, 2012, 01:13 PM EDT

  There is no doubt in my mind that Romney was the winner. He knew what he was talking about. Obama for once was not able to slither through on his charm. He didn't have his teleprompter and looked very uncomfortable all evening.

• Searlit | Oct 04, 2012, 01:07 PM EDT

  To me Romney comes off very robot like, whereas President Obama is sincere and able to keep his composure, in spite of Romney's rudeness & posturing. Imagine the pressure of all that elitist money being spent to try and spin things. I think the President did alright, and Mr. Romney looked like a lurch.

• FastEddy | Oct 04, 2012, 01:06 PM EDT

  It ain't over 'til it's over ... Jamthecat: we could do better. We could have had Ron Paul!

• Skibberrean | Oct 04, 2012, 01:05 PM EDT

  Ditto MotherIrish......Obama was pathetic as usual. Without his teleprompter and being coached what to say,he is a complete failure. No previous experience with jobs, governing, peoples health, foreign affairs, the list can go on and on. he walked the streets in hi local communities and stirred the pot of Acorn! he is a fraud, a liar and a self serving blowhard!! he needs to go NOW!

• Eschetic | Oct 04, 2012, 12:58 PM EDT

  It was an interesting evening, and only the most "conservative" sources convinced themselves that Romney hit a home run. The best thing about it, that virtually everyone acknowledged was that it was the first "Presidential Debate" since Kennedy-Nixon which was actually about substantive issues and, like Kennedy-Nixon, who "won" largely depended on whether you were watching or listening. Mitt was composed and easy going even though he continued to refuse to give any hard specifics with his promises (just repeated "I'll work that out with Congress"), while , the president was in high "Perry Como mode" defending his superb performance in office adapting Republican ideas to the real world (even though radical Republicans would no longer support them when a Democrat backed them!). The unbiased "fact checkers" after the debate caught distortions on both sides, but those from Mitt tended to be whoppers bordering on knowing prevarications rather than the President's mere questions of interpretations - ESPECIALLY when it came to Mitt's assertions regarding tax rates and the impact of Obama's adaptation of his own Massachusetts healthcare plan. The one thing I was sorry the president didn't hit him with was in the face of Romney's assertion that his healthcare program was great if done by the individual states, the Federal government is THERE to take needed action when the states refuse to, and to date most of the states have refused to take responsible action on health care - and the charges about the the cost and impact of "Obama Care" are almost entirely fraudulent as even the most cursory investigation into the program easily demonstrates (and most of the "fact checkers" following the debate last night confirmed.

• howareya | Oct 04, 2012, 12:25 PM EDT

  Oh come on gksmithlcw...do you actually think that Obama did not fictionalize any of his supposed facts? Obama wrongly said that over the last two years, health care premiums have gone up slower than any time in the last 50 years due to Obamacare. Not true. Obama claimed that 5 million jobs in the private sector were created in his term. He's about half a million jobs short and he's counting "projected" numbers that will not be final until next year. Obama keeps saying that his tax plan would return rates for the wealthy back to where they were during economically prosperous times under Clinton. But not true! They will increase due to the additional taxes to pay for his health care law. And on and and on... That's not to say Romney did anything different..but don't label one as spewing fiction and the other as speaking God's truth!!!!!

• katieherk | Oct 04, 2012, 12:07 PM EDT

  Mitt was definitely the winner! Obama seemed lost and was truly pitiful!!

• CelticQueenUSA | Oct 04, 2012, 12:06 PM EDT

  Mit Romney was his usual obnoxious self, interrupting when he felt like it and talking over the President and the moderator. I was reminded of a bully know it all and worst of all shades of Tricky Dick. He gave no indication of HOW he was going to deliver his platform but I just cannot see him as President. He will destroy America.

• CitizenWhy | Oct 04, 2012, 11:38 AM EDT

  Compare Romney's words in the debate with Obama to his web site. Two different "narratives" on policy. Shifty guy.

• Frosty38 | Oct 04, 2012, 11:33 AM EDT

  I don't know what that was about but he was not that great a gOV was he?

• CitizenWhy | Oct 04, 2012, 11:21 AM EDT

  Romney basically claimed Obama's fiscal policies and Obama was random in response. Recommended phrases for Obama: "You said last week, that's not what you're saying now," "You said last month . . . ," "You said on . . . ' I cannot believe Obama's coaches failed to prepare him for Romney to sound compeletely different, with stands in conflict with his prior stands. They obviously obsessed on making Obama look mild and likable, not pompously professorial. Instead he looked like a wimp.

• cillowen | Oct 04, 2012, 11:20 AM EDT

  funny what people want to see - I saw a herky jerky fella looking at Obama appearing to being about to cry time after time. The Mejia seems desperate for content - VP debate would be devoid of anything to excite were the Prez to strongly insist on an answer from a jesus/lucifer mormon believer who's focus appears to be on the 53% of us in the most glorious nation that has no equal on planet earth. We'll be left to shop around for healt insurance among states whose interest should be on their own citizens. Beam me up Scotty!

• cillowen | Oct 04, 2012, 11:16 AM EDT

  It is very well known that Obama can only deliver with prepared speeches with his prompter. He does poorly ad-libbing as was evident last night. He had his chance to make changes. We've already heard numerous times what you inherited. It is time to step aside and give someone else a shot.

• jamthecat | Oct 04, 2012, 11:13 AM EDT

  God help us, our choices for president are a wimp and a sociopath. I'm washing my hands of them, both, and voting for Jill Stein.

• PhlutiePhan | Oct 04, 2012, 10:23 AM EDT

  It is still best out of three and the third will be for all the marbles. Next up is Biden versus Ryan. One is a graduate of Clown College and the other is a "stuffed shirt". If Ryan keeps scaring the old people, then momentum shifts back to Obama.

• robinjeanne326 | Oct 04, 2012, 10:10 AM EDT

  If Romney needed to REMIND Obama that it was not a 5 trillion tax cut, I was going to scream! I guess it was the only thing that Obama could think of. Poorly done on Obama's side. Keep it up Mitt! This country needs you!

• rpbrown | Oct 04, 2012, 10:06 AM EDT

  Yes Romney won the minds of all simpletons and sheep. President Obama was sticking to facts he has been sticking too and Romney was busy making broad sweeping statement that were contrary to what he and his running mate have previously said. This is the same nonsense George W. did. And Americans want to fall for that BS fairy-tale again. Which is so fascinating because Mitt Romney's plan says it will help the middle class, but by doing it indirectly. This NEVER works. It's the old "tax-cuts for small businesses creates jobs" BS. If you want to help America, stopping give the rich huge tax cuts, give tax cuts to the middle class and stop corporate America from stifling a freer trade market.

• rpbrown | Oct 04, 2012, 09:49 AM EDT

  no matter who the moderator is or was " you still cant make a silk purse out of a sows ear"

• MotherIrish | Oct 04, 2012, 09:40 AM EDT

  If you did not even listen to the words but just looked at the posturing and facial expressions of Obama, you knew you were looking at the body of a defeatd man. Romney was all over him!!! He had the facts and answers each and every time. Obama gets stuck in a rut and keeps on digging it deeper. Who looked, talked and acted presidential last night?? in a word ROMNEY!

• hancock | Oct 04, 2012, 09:39 AM EDT

  Romney won this one, get over it.

• tom/peggy | Oct 04, 2012, 09:38 AM EDT

  Another Univision moment for the President. Most of his responses were campaign stump speeches. This one wasn't even close.

• tom/peggy | Oct 04, 2012, 07:45 AM EDT

  Romney performed better but the problem with the everyone claiming he won is that his facts and figures are mostly fiction. Can you claim victory when all you did was lie better than the other guy told the truth?

• like2tweet | Oct 04, 2012, 06:54 AM EDT

  I think Romney's victory overstated. There was no knock out punch

• Seanmor | Oct 04, 2012, 12:05 AM EDT

  Tomney may have won, but only by a narrow margin. The above article claims that Obama "landed some punches" by focusing on Romneys plan to cut taxes by $5 trillion. But Romney made it clear at least twice that his tax-reduction plan would become effective only if it DIDN'T add to the national feficit.