...and the winner is...NO ONE. We all lose. Why weren't third parties represented? I did not see Dr. Jill Stein or Former Governor Gary Johnson discussing the issues with Obama and Romney. Most of that debate was two birds of a feather agreeing with each other, overall it was uninformative and boring. Blame the Commission on Presidential Debates for this pathetic attempt at informing the voters with useful information.

Obama was the clear winner. Romney's desperation was/is palpable and evidenced by the litany of "misinformation" he produced in last night's debate. Not only was Obama the clear winner last night, it is clear that we have had an able and wise leader for the last 4 years and with any luck, we will have him in the White House for the next 4 years.

Another thread started? Here we go again: 640 anonymous people throwing mud. OK.R3: Fact-checking. Obama lies about horses and bayonets. http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/23/obama-line-about-horses-bayonets-fails-fact-check/. Marines are annoyed. Obama sure didn't get that vet vote he was trying so hard to gain.

Not sure the debate changed any hearts or minds for those that are already left or right leaning.

As for the undecided, each probably looked for comments that already supported their conservative or liberal tendencies. Hopefully the debate gave each what they looked for to secure their decision.

I haven't seen a single poll that doesn't hand last night's debate to Obama.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/theoval/2012/10/23/obama-snap-polls-romney-foreign-policy-debate/1651291/

After his base being excited to see how Romney might come back in this debate on the subject of Libya, he instead coward on the subject when asked about it...

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/10/23/romney_opts_not_to_attack_on_libya.html

Personally, I am not sure if Obama did a better job at getting his own positions out or if Romney did a better job of agreeing with Obama's positions. At points it felt like this debate was Romney saying; "Here, just have it, I don't even want to run anymore. My wife hates this and my sons are unravelling."

Great post. I think Romney made the same error Obama made in the first debate - he was going for the draw, the "do no harm" - resulting in nothing ventured nothing gained. Win goes to home court, Obama.

The Obama we saw last night was great!
I hope he wins and replaces the guy who was President these last four years.

Anyone know if the President's new plan is posted online? They've apparently made millions of copies to hand out, but don't think online. A little disappointed since only 2 weeks to election, but better late than never. I hope is fills the blank spot and addresses tax reform and spending reforms (e.g., entitlements).

Although we need to raise revenues to help close DEBT gap, I'd be careful w this shaky economy. Many think"During the Clinton years, we raised taxed yet saw growth". However, some big differences now vs 90s:

(1) We saw a large increase in productivity and growth was spurred in 90s as a result of the Internet boom (and increased use of computers). In fact, such a boom it formed a bubble that popped in 2000 ("Dot Com Crash").

(2) The Republican Congress and Clinton implemented some important reform (e.g., Welfare) which helped the economy by increasing confidence and improving incentives.

(3) We face much much stiffer competition from global competitors.

(4) Higher ratio of entitlement recipients/workers compared to 90s.

(5) Global slowdown vs 90s.

(6) It's new post "credit boom" and the new normal.

In sum, our circumstances today are much different compared to 90s. We need tax reform (simplifying) and overall spending reforms ASAP.

Dear Locally Involved - OK, here are the facts. Obama inappropriately dressed down Romney saying there were "fewer horses and bayonets in 1916" than now. OK, I'll give the man the horses. In 1916, we had a total military combined of 108,000, both army and marines. Some may have had bayonets but they were expensive so they went to the front guard. Some may have brought their own horses. Today, the U.S. Army has 419,155 bayonets in inventory; Marine Corp has 195,334 (and plans to acquire 175,067 more). And 176 ponies left. Them's the facts (your previous email upbraided me for my source) Now, can we move on to something important like Benghazi-Gate?

Romney thinks Syria borders Iran.

Romney doesn’t know that about half Iran is surrounded by coastline and does not need to go through Syria to get to a sea.

Romney doesn’t know that Iranian oil has not come into our ports since the 1980’s.

Romney does not seem to have a grasp on our military’s state-of-the-art capabilities but simply uses raw ship-counting statistics to draw meaningless conclusions.

Romney spent a gaffe-filled week in Britain, insulting our allies and other key world players.

Romney seems to favor arming insurgents and nation building missions overseas.

Romney (nor his father, nor his 5 sons) has never served in the military and he took advantage of several deferments to avoid the draft in the Vietnam War.

Romney has changed his position on Iraq and Afghanistan several times.

Etc., etc., etc.

I have seen little to nothing from Romney that would indicate to me that he has good grasp on Foreign Policy or would make a good Commander-in-Chief.

To Watts. Ah the creed of the liberal blogger: a) First, duck the argument re: the facta about Obama lying about bayonets (that I was having with "locally involved"; 2) second, nitpick, "now we can move on"; and d) vilify : "intellectually superior". So, just what did you add to the conversation with your comment? My point was with "locally involved". Can we now move on to something important like Banghazi-Gate? Or do you have something constructive to add to this thread on foreign affairs.

Michigan now TIED 47-47

http://www.myfoxdetroit.com/story/19905504/michigan-poll-obama-and-romney-in-dead-heat

Yeah, and there is a typo in line one. I was up all night with a sick kid. But the liberal reaction to straight-forward facts (that Obama, the commander-in-chief of the U.S. Armed Forces, lied about bayonets - in fact had the facts reversed - more than 8x the no. of bayonets) is always the same 1) duck argument; 2) second, nitpick, and 3) vilify opponent. Especially easy when one can sling mud as they can here hiding under nom de plumes. And now I will be vilified for using a "fancy word
. Can't win. Yawn, going back to bed.

Lee,

You seem to be making excuses about Romney's lack of knowledge about geography by changing the subject to their choice of ports, based on economics, as opposed to Romney saying it was their “only route to the sea.”

As I think I have said before, anyone can have a misstatement, but Romney has had a ton, and he often repeats them, which makes me believe he didn’t just misspeak once – he basically doesn’t know what he is talking about.

And yes, Clinton did some draft dodging too. But Obama was not of age during the draft.

Lastly, it doesn’t matter to me what Piers Morgan said about the Olympics. You are missing my point. Even if he was right and the Britain’s weren’t fully prepared for Olympics, you don’t go to someone else’s house and insult them. That’s what Romney does not get and how it speaks to his lack of common sense when it comes to diplomacy.

Yes, Barbara, you don't go to someone else's house and insult them. What Romney said was hardly an insult. It was trumped up by the media because of their love for Obama.
An insult is leaving Netanyahu in the White House waiting while you go upstairs for dinner.
An insult is "not having time" to meet with Netanyahu, but you do have time for The View and Letterman.
An insult is returning Churchill's bust--a gift from the UK.
An insult is blaming an Ambassador's death on a youtube video--even to the parents of the fallen.
An insult to the victims of the Fort Hood shooting is making comments publicly after all your "shout-outs" to people in the audience.
An insult to the victims of the Fort Hood shooting is calling it "workplace violence" --and thus depriving the victims of certain benefits and Purple Hearts.
Ditto the above to the soldiers killed in LIttle Rock recruitment center.
An insult to the fallen is taking your own photographer to Dover after announcing that the families do not want photography.
An insult is flying to Vegas right after receiving the remains of the fallen..

Lee,

I’m not sure what “inaccuracies” you are speaking of. I put out some facts about what Gov. Romney has said or done. But I realize that you and I can interpret that information differently.

For example, I think readers (and you?) got what I meant when I mentioned how Romney took advantage of multiple deferments during the Vietnam War (fact) and added that, "Obama was not of age during the draft," (fact). How you interpret that may be different than how I do. You responded by talking about the Selective Service. I wasn't talking about the Selective Service. Obama was born in 1961. The Vietnam War was from 1955 (approx.) to 1975. The draft ended in 1973. I think you get that.

Romney and Vietnam service is truly a non-issue. It became that after former president Bill Clinton successfully muted his "avoidance" of service as an issue when he ran for president. My tour in Vietnam was mid-1967 to mid-1968, and I've can't help but chuckle over how all of a sudden some have dredged up service/deferment, etc. as an issue related to Gov. Romney's candidacy.

Hi Walter,

I somewhat agree with you about the level of importance of the issue (not extremely high). And, as I mentioned earlier, I agree that Clinton was a draft dodger too. I only brought this up as one of several issues relating to Foreign Affairs, which is the topic of this particular Patch article.

The draft dodging issue speaks to character and honesty, which I also wondered about when Clinton first ran. (I didn’t believe he “didn’t inhale” either).
I do not believe that having military experience is a necessity to be a good Commander-in-Chief. People like FDR, Clinton and Obama did not serve, but they were obviously very smart, took the time to get educated about world issues and foreign affairs, and sought out knowledgeable advisors. I can’t say the same about Romney. In the realm of foreign affairs he keeps making factual errors and huge misstatements and diplomatic blunders. And – as usual – he often flip-flops on positions relating to foreign affairs. I’m not sure who is advising him. His main planks seem to be “Label China a currency manipulator” and “Our military is too small,” and “End Iran’s nuclear program” (although he doesn’t say how).

Continued...

.... continued....

Romney also seems to be very aggressive when it comes to defense. He is quick to want commit our armed services. The fact that no one in his immediate family (his grandfather, his father, his 5 sons, nor himself,) has ever served in the military, and has never had war directly touch his family, is a little worrisome to me, especially since Romney speaks like he has his finger on the trigger. If Romney has been sheltered and has never been near it, he may lack perspective and may not really “get it” when it comes to the real impact of his decisions on American families.

What you didn't hear in the debate:

The real flip-flopper is Obama... Obama has done that so many times it's hard to keep track. He voted against increasing the debt limit, and then supported raising it. Campaigned against the Bush tax cuts, and then extended them. Promised to cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term, and then doubled it. Vowed the unemployment rate would be below 8% if his stimulus was passed, but then it broke 10%. Only an artificial stimulus by the Federal Reserve now has it under 8%, barely. Promised shovel ready jobs, then admitted they weren't shovel ready. Said if you like your health plan you can keep it, but then threw seniors off Medicare Plus and employers are now saying they'll dump people onto the public exchange. Promised to have health care negotiations on live tv, but then reversed himself. Indicated Bush violated the Constitution, then carried out warrantless wiretaps, indefinite detentions, secret renditions,quadrupled drone attacks, and kept Guantanamo Bay open. Voted against the Patriot Act, but then supported its extension. Said lobbyists wouldn't work in the White House, then gave them waivers to work there. Vowed to take public financing for his 2008 campaign, then refused it when he realized he would receive more without it. Obama said his administration would be the most transparent in history. Yet his lies and coverup attempts on Benghazi are still at hand, while he tries to wait it out past the election.

Every voter needs to read this article:

http://spectator.org/archives/2012/11/01/benghazi-obamas-core-deceit/

Please don't let Obama sweep Benghazi under the rug...
Lets not forget those four who were left to be slaughtered in Benghazi... Do not reward Obama for this epic failure…

Every voter needs to read this excellent article... Very well worth your time...

http://spectator.org/archives/2012/11/01/benghazi-obamas-core-deceit/

These are pretty good as well:

http://www.gazette.com/opinion/romney-146793-obama-benghazi.html

http://frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/benghazigate-obamas-many-lies-about-libya/

http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/50657

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/10/25/CBS-Busts-Obama--and-Itself-Hidden-60-Minutes-Clip-Proves-White-House-Lied-About-Benghazi

Romney/Ryan 2012

I saw Obama yesterday claiming the new job numbers are proof that his policies are working and that we are in an economic recovery... Fact is, that is not the truth, or even close to the truth...
First, the unemployment rate ticked up to 7.9% and the year-to-date monthly average of 157,000 payroll jobs is barely enough to keep up with population growth -- much less make up for the 8 million jobs lost during the Great Recession.
Second, the so-called real unemployment rate (U6) remains elevated at 14.6%, albeit down from 14.7% the prior month. Similarly, the labor participation rate is at 63.8%, up from its multi-decade low but still incredibly weak.
Third, average hourly earnings fell a penny in October and average hours worked fell to 34.4 from 34.5 in September.
Stagnant wages means "we're not generating income," Reinhart says. "That's a problem in terms of the durability of an economic expansion, which is usually fueled by consumption. To get consumption you've got to generate income."
Also, just look at your checkbook. We are paying a lot more for everything now than we did in 2008. The price of gas has doubled. At the same time, wages have gone down, and that's if you're lucky to have a job.
In 2008, 25 banks went out of business. In 2012, 48 banks have gone out of business. Almost double the amount. Does that sound like recovery to you? Don't believe the Obama lies!!

Romney/Ryan 2012