Mit Obviously won. His polices came threw so much clearer and he had a big picture and a great agenda for the future.

Mitt was nothing but the "me too" candidate. Obama won, clearly!!!!

Obama spoke in specifics while Romney continued with vague generalities. Obama seemed much more knowledge about foreign affairs......Obama was the clear winner.

Obama had a better performance and hit Romney hard on several points. His "fewer horses" comment was priceless. Romney looked like a little boy several times. Win goes to Obama tonight.

President after the first 15 mins looked presidential. Romney after first 15 mins looked like a finance guy with an opinion.

Obama looked angry and eager for a fight, because he knows he's losing. He may have landed more punches, but Romney was steady, knowledgeable and Presidential. Obama made a tactical error referencing the economy in many answers and it gave Romney the ability to hammer his dismal record over and over again.

Overall, Obama needed a knockout blow to stop Romney's momentum across the nation, and he did not get one. Therefore, Romney was the winner and will win the election convincingly.

Romney looked like a deer in the headlights. He was clearly out of his element and knowledge level. If he alienated the Brits, imagine what he would do with the rest of the world. He knows nothing, offers no specifics in any area, and he kept a low profile and even lower knowledge level. He still thinks Russia is our greatest enemy....cold war throwback. Will he put a bomb shelter in the White House???

Obama won. Romney (as usual) spouted obfuscations and was nothing more than a "me, too" candidate when it comes to foreign policy. I am certain that he knows that he is weak in foreign policy, just as he is weak in his mathematically improbable economic policy. Actually, Romney is simply ridiculous. He seems to believe that we, the electorate, are idiots, that we forget his own words..

Hope OBAMA enjoys his retirement in January!

Romeny's only job in elected office was obviously here in Massachusetts. The guy is getting crushed in this state by 25 points...what does that say when you can't even win the one place you actually have leadership experience? The guy is a bigger flip flopper than John Kerry in '04...Obama WILL win a second term.

What this debate determined is that Romney will be forever the gentleman and Obama will snipe and insult and be disrespectful and rude to the end. No matter. If you like insults and zingers, then Obama won. If inspiration is your thing, then Romney won. Quite frankly, I've grown tired of the debates that seem to bring out the worst in people... the crazy, incessant Biden laugh... the demeaning insults.

We can be better than this.

Romney 2012.

So Emcee...was Romney rude and disrespectful when he did that during the first debate?

More of the same Obama making up facts as he goes along, I cannot understand how people cannot see through this synthetic liar, look at his administration policies and what they have done in the past four years. I certainly will not vote for a manipulator who will affect the future of my country and direct it towards a third world nation status. The question is who is this guy ??? What is his agenda ? We will soon find out who is behind the mask. But regardless unfortunately for some he has sold his bill of goods even though his performance reflects his inability to lead this great country in the future he does have the ability to be the pied piper of the blind sheeple.

I'm pretty sure you need to get the popular vote in Mass to get the electoral numbers. If people think Mitt did such a great job like you people say, then he should be winning and he's not. And I am pretty sure the state elected a GOP Senator 2 years ago, so you can't tell me the State is whole heartedly blue.

John- Whats Romney's agenda? I mean he's flip flopped so much over the years you can't pin him on an issue...he was a moderate running for governor and now he is "Severely" conservative

And Emcee you are so dellusional...Romney was just as rude interrupting and disrecptful to Obama and because your guy got beat in debate 2 and couldn't gain ground in debate 3 Obama is the one who is mean and rude....c'mon dude get with it.

Trot, I don't believe debate 2 or 3 had much of a winner, in regards to swaying voters. It has made for interesting media coverage but everything has become such a tug of war that we just need to get this election done before the country tears in half. I would have a hard time saying that Romney won the debate, but I don't believe he lost it either.

MA did elect Scott Brown but it is looking like a race for the ages here. My gut tells me we will be in recount mode for days, if not weeks, after the election. This is probably a more important vote to MA residents than the presidential race is. This state will loose bipartisan representation if Warren is elected and our state turns Blue from top to bottom.

John, I think we have seen that the candidates will say what they want and let fact checkers sort the rest out. With only 2 weeks to go this may just boil down to who can keep from saying anything to off the wall. Waiting to here what Trumps big announcement is tomorrow regarding President Obama.

Anyone watching the final presidential debate tonight?

Mitt Romney won this debate by being clear, concise and pointing out his foriegn policy vision. Obama flipflopped a few times, especially when he said that under his Presidency, Israel continues to be a friend of the United States. Clearly, this has not been the case with the Obama administration, throwing Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu under the bus for their stance against Iran. Mr. Romney also pointed out the bad foreign policy of the Obama administration of meeting with or having talks with Iran's Prime Minister who is nothing more than a thug who supports terrorism.

It was painful to watch Mitt Romney look and sound as though he was reading from a cheat sheet, trying vainly to seem as though he had a personal grasp of complex foreign policy issues. It was as though he thought he was on Jeopardy, not in a presidential debate. President Obama was quite a contrast to Romney--cool and able to range insightfully over the whole range of foreign policy issues. Don't take my word for it. Review the debate and watch for how many times Romney was forced to agree with the president.

I guess my question is, would you consider a serial rapist to be an expert on love and sex? If not, then why would you consider a person who makes their living raping companies be considered a good business man? The MYTH of R. Money.

It's troubling to hear Romney claim that Russia is our greatest enemy while al-Qaeda, the Taliban, Hamas, Iran and North Korea stand out in the minds of the general public. Meanwhile, we've been sharing a space station and the forefront of space technology with Russia.

At times like this, it's scary to think of Romney as being president of this country.

I couldn't get through it. I didn't think I could like Obama any less. Since I may just have to tolerate another four years of this love fest he has with himself, I bailed before half time.
Romney/Ryan 2012!!

Has the moving truck come to take "the empty chair" back to Chicago yet? 14 more days and then we vote!

Romney/Ryan 2012.

Sinclair commented: "It's troubling to hear Romney claim that Russia is our greatest enemy while al-Qaeda, the Taliban, Hamas, Iran and North Korea stand out in the minds of the general public.

Perhaps you recall WWII, some of us think of it as the signal event of the 20th century. Russia showed ample willingness to project power and "keep what it had gotten". They are rumbling about missing the old days and having a "strong man" again. When the "general public" knows, it is probably too late. The "general public" knew about al-Qaeda AFTER 9/11, a little late.

Why does anyone expect either candidate to be obliterated in one of these debates? It isn't as though either is a complete numbskull and hasn't spent a week preparing. It is simply better to watch them, consider the body language and the syntax. Right or wrong, does it look like he understands it?

My comment is about the "general public" knowing more than presidential candidate Mitt Romney as to whom our greatest enemies are today. Ask the families of those who have fallen in defense our country who they are?

Asked about the effectiveness of his administration's Iran nuclear sanctions, Obama took a swipe directly at the former Massachusetts governor, saying "The fact is, while we were coordinating an international coalition to make sure these sanctions were effective, [Romney was] still invested in a Chinese state oil company that was doing business with the Iranian oil sector."
Obama was right, but according to a recent tally by Mother Jones, the president actually underestimated the scale of investment by Romney's trusts in the country the former Massachusetts governor has pledged to label "a currency manipulator" on his first day in office.

While Obama cited only one oil company, China National Offshore Oil Corporation, the Romneys' 2010 and 2011 tax returns show investments in at least 10 Chinese companies, a total investment of at least $391,800.

Among them were New Oriental Education and Technology, a company in which the Romneys' blind trusts invested nearly $60,000. New Oriental is famous for stealing copyrighted U.S. academic tests, and was fined hundreds of thousands of dollars by a
Chinese court for it.
How can anyone trust Romney who says one thing and does another, or just says something different depending on the situation.

Paul, Do you mean how could he do something that was completely within the law and in the best interest of the business he was running? Sounds different when its put this way doesn't it? My assumption, and that is what it is, would be that Romney has first hand knowledge of the accusations he now makes about China and is ready to take action against it while serving this country and our interests.

He outsource because it was his duty as a CEO to ensure the highest possible profits for his company and shareholders. He utilized offshore investing to the same effect. All legal, all good business decisions, and all successful (overall). Sounds like a smart man and a good leader to me.

Remember this open mike misstep by Obama just this past March?

"This is my last election. After my re-election, I have more flexibility."

Isn't this an example of someone "who says one thing and does another, or just says something different depending on the situation."? I think you've just described Obama to a tee!

Oh. I know. Obama's positions "evolve". Romney is a flip flopper.
What a joke.

'..."ranged insightfully"...'

LOL. With Romney's complacent smile, It was a moment of condescending meets condescending.

deb, what Obama said was true, this IS his last election and he will have more flexibility with four more years to follow through with his agenda. he didn't say "This is my last election, but I'm going to run again in 2016". THAT would be flip flopping on his part. I give much credit to Romney for his business success. He is much like Donald Trump, both hard core businessmen. Unfortunately neither knows how to be diplomatic which would be a downfall as President. It is similar to a technician or a scientist trying to teach a college course, they lack people skills. Not a bad thing as long as they don't teach.

What I want to know is where Romney's comments regarding education belong in a foreign policy debate. I understand that America's foreign policy is rooted in our domestic policy, but that was a shameless plug that was irrelevant and incorrect. The scholarship that Romney eluded to is based on standardized testing, and was implemented well before he was elected Governor. Also, no matter how you look at it, the education system in MA was number one in the nation since the mid 1990's. NOT once Romney took office. So, why does he continue to take credit for something that he had absolutely no role in? The fact of the matter is, he's losing ground, and this debate displayed this clearly. Romney spent the entire hour and a half trying to catch up, while interrupting both Obama and the moderator, and even flat out ignoring questions to talk about how wonderful of a governor he was. Nice try, Governor.

Paul: You completely missed my point. I was not suggesting he will be eligible for re-election in 2016. My point is that Obama's foreign agenda is awful "sketchy".

There is a theory that Obama perceives the United States as a whole IS the 1% and our wealth must be redistributed globally. And I do not think for one minute the American middle class will come out of this new world order unscathed.
What other explanation is there for Obama receiving the Nobel Peace for doing zero . And now the EU?
But maybe you are drawn to Obama because of this progressive, global redistributive agenda. That's ok. But I think it is a theory that should be considered by libertarian leaning independents, like myself, who want something different.

I think I have it figured out. Romney supporters like him because there is always something different. Like when they watch their favorite tv shows, and the season ends, they all look forward to the beginning of the next season. With Romney, he reboots every what, 4 weeks? So there is always a new season coming along with newer vague facts that can't be contested because there are no facts behind them. So he can sit there and tell them that when he gets elected, there will be 100% more unicorns and he will create 12 million jobs. Very exciting stuff. Since his last reboot was around Oct 5th, he will be cutting it close to Election Day. So a night or two before don't be surprised if he promises a Daddy's Dairy on every corner(12 million jobs right there) and horseless carriage in every driveway.

ROMNEY appeared Presidental, OBAMA appeared angry & upset that he has to vacate the White House in January 2013.

trot - way to represent your union

Cornelius Vanderbilt (the first) would be a patriarch not a matriarch. (A matriarch is a woman) He was also totally illiterate which proves that one can do business without reading. Vanderbilt and Rockefellar were robber barons. I won't go into anymore translating. However, I don't think they would be presidential material and that's an understatement.

In my book, none of the two show any promise whatsoever, as far as defense policy is concerned.

Romney: A subscriber to the neoconservative world view.
Last night proved to me he has not distanced himself from the PNAC. In fact, he spoke as if he had highlighted talking points straight out of "Rebuilding America's Defenses..." A, 'fight and win two simultaneous wars'. B. Raise the level of defense spending.
Romney, to me, is after the same old policies that work together to create the goals outlined in "Rebuilding America's Defenses." I cannot vote for a candidate who alligns himself with the revolutionary movement that hijacked our country, re wired policy and politics to suit their needs at the cost of every American's safety, health and welfare. Securing future wars should never trump the strive for peace.

Obama: Simply put, as it was in 2008, as is now, Weak leadership, Weak appointments, go hand in hand with a weak left aisle. The reason Obama is pinned down to reverse bad policy is because the Dem party is weak. There are far too many members of congress who lay down before neocon charged legislation. 'Go along to get along gets you bowled over every time'.

Obama won the third debate. Romney agreed with just about everything Obama said. The free world needs a steady hand at the helm, not a flip-flopper.

Vanderbilt was illiterate by any standard. And writing standards including education were steeped in the classics during his time. He did occassionally attempt to write with words spelled phonetically and when doing so, would spell a word three different ways in the same paragraph. I saw some samples of his attempts to write and I can tell you his illiteracy was not a myth. It was kept a secret and I suspect a coverup.

Darren Major also commented :
"Steve, I really ask you to be honest....Romney agreed with President Obama on 95% of the issues "

Why am I overwhelmed with the idea that I have been in another country for a couple of years? Hasn't the problem been "gridlock"? This, of course, was the result of Republican nastiness. Now we see some agreement on a few issues and that is Republican weakness. Can't have it both ways.

Steve C: " He was wrong, in my opinion, with his stance on the bailout."

As I recall he desired a "structured" Chapter 11. This does not differ much from what happened. What did happen was that some bankruptcy rules were stood on their head to ensure that a greater than normal burden fell on the bondholders.

President OBlarney knew nothing about foreign affairs before taking office. After apologizing to just about every country that has harmed Americans, The VFW and American Legion should be up in arms over this bend me over president.

@Fiscal Conservative: "She'll then put all the blame on her husband for making her one of the "commoners" again."

The Obamas will never be commoners again. They are now millionaires who never really have to work unless they want to. Their children will attend the best private schools. Obama can be like Clinton and go on speaking tours or campaign for other Democrats, if that appeals to him. He will always be a hero to many and can do a lot of good in that respect.

The downside to it all is that they will never walk freely in a crowd again, nothing will ever be spur-of-the-moment. Secret service men will be assigned for the rest of their lives. Waters will no longer part for them. I hope they don't get bored.

Fiscal Conservative : "All I meant was there won't be as many people cowtowing to her. She will be part of the elite, but, hopefully on her dime, not yours & mine."

You're right, ask any politican, it is tough to go back to that two family in Des Moines. Still, a la Clinton, they can sell a few pardons. It is tough for a lame duck president, without another term coming up, to get large "book advances". Wasn't it his pal Deval that got a $1.25 million "advance" on a book that sold 6,000 copies? What's that? $208 per book? How long are Americans going to buy pay offs/donations disguised as "book advances"?

@Dan Devine...You are correct about the Secret Service protection.

"In 1997, legislation became effective limiting Secret Service protection to former Presidents and their spouses for a period of 10 years from the date the former President leaves office, making Bill and Hillary Clinton the last to receive lifetime protection." --Wikipedia