You know what is funny - lying is a really good spin tactic. If so, why wasn't "O" ready to call out Will? All I'm saying is why didn't O take a stick to Will?

SAD that your little minds need to make Obama the winner....DREAM ON........the tooth fairy is real too......

Even the CNN poll say he won. Odd that spin is that he won by some sort lying. see #62

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/10/03/cnn-poll-romney-wins-debate-by-big-margin/?iref=allsearch

I'll repeat my earlier statement. Will the Thrill (my new name) came with an industrial size can of corporate whoop A** and took "O" to the woodshed.

Carville: 'Romney came with a chainsaw'...

Romney beat Obama like a red-headed stepchild.

Well, DOH!!

Journalists and PARTISAN commentators are clueless, who'd think it!.

What a ridiculous article. Keep repeating to yourself that Obama actually won, maybe some brain dead idiot will begin to believe you. The man had nothing to say all night because Romney was talking about how to fix things, going forward. All Obama seems to be able to talk about is what was wrong when he got there, what hasn't worked while he's been there, and begging us all to give him more time to do nothing but ruin our futures. NO THANKS!

ROMNEY/RYAN 2012

Sick nonsense you have to say who won, learn something but most is about perception not reality and truth

If Romney's changing position on the issues indicates anything it would be that he is working very hard to confuse voters to win the election so that he can continue to run America and Americans into the ground. Romney believes that Americans are gullible so he and the rest of the Republicans can continue the same failed economic policies pushing for more profits for the wealthy while stealing the pensions to play the stock market. America and Americans cannot survive another round of the irresponsible Republican economic policies.

So if your view is that Romney won then you failed to see that he is not running to fix the economic disaster but make it worse than the Great Depression ever was. It is shameful that Romney even opened his mouth to make himself appear as a potential president when he is clearly all about profits and not the America or the majority of the American people.

I think Obama saw that most of what Romney was saying was fiction, so he simply stood by and let Romney hang himself!! If he would confront Romney, that would give Romney some credibility, but just letting him continue to rant showed Romney's true nature: a bully and a chameleon. Romney is the typical salesman who will say whatever he needs to say to make the sale!! And now he is selling himself to the public, so he is saying whatever he thinks the public wants to hear him say.

Ah you libs. You like to use the term faux news when in fact, you actually frequent such a propaganda page as msnbc....laughable. Mitt didn't win the debate.

He wiped Hussein's butt all over the floor in that debate and did so with facts while reminding the American public at just how miserably this (non qualified) president failed.

I love the fact that Mitt gave the utmost attention and respect to Hussein every time he spoke, but when Mitt was speaking (kicking BHO's butt all over the place with the *facts* about how bad of a job he's done), Barak kept his head down in the podium. What a narcissistic tard. BHO single handedly increased the debt of our great grand children more than all former presidents combined! And for what??? Companies that never had a chance to succeed! Of course, he couldn't know this, because he's never ran a business (or managed a budget for that matter evidently) in his life!!! How can you guys not see this?? O.O

I know, you love your baby-killing policies to remain in place, and your disease causing life-style choices protected (even to the status of exalted citizen), and your "take from those who create jobs and give to those who deserve to freeload (you know, "share the wealth").

One of these days, we're going to wake up and realize the liberals have won. Unfortunately, we'll all have to learn arabic.

Now we join the rest of those country's that have fixed elections. this election is so one sided in every way it must have been decided in 08 when Obama won . They want to make history and bring the US INTO THE ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT. Change and Hope is only for Obama to make history. Why can't we have a real election ? Not one that is fixed . In the real world everything doesn't go Obama's way. All you people that support him will be sorry and the rest of us can say we told you so. But then it will be to late and china will own us.

Sorry guys, I voted for Obama in 08, I plan on voting for Obama in 12.......however lets be fair, comming from an Idaho Independant......Obama lost....(period)

O needs to learn that you can't work with wing nuts and you have to call every lie in real time. That said, I don't think the recons can buy this election. Reagan blew his re-election debates, as did W. Reagan won, and if you believe ohio voting machines W did too (barely) But the fact that you are simply better off than 4 years ago cannot be swept aside. It would take a big drop in the financial markets at this point to change the inevitable, O will be re=elected. Even Rove can't make that happen. Vegas odds are not based on emotion, they are based on greed. Betting men bet on winners and O is the winning horse. Long shots are a suckers bet.

It is shameful that Romney opened his mouth to make himself appear as a potential president when he is clearly all about profits and not the America or the majority of the American people. Wish Mitt would have been PUSHED about the 47%???????

Dave, your incest is an Abomination, not an Obamanation. At least gays don't screw their sisters

You guys can say what you want about it. I just tried to count all of Romney's eye-blinks in his closing statement and had to give up. It was non-stop. Maybe there are videos of it still around if you care to look. Methinks excessive blinking shows excessive lying. What do you think?

Also, we should know a little about how Obama plays poker by now. Let Romney lay out the lies. Put it all on public record. Then shred him piece by piece, lie by lie, in the next debate.

The most interesting thing about the debate was Romney's move to the center. For the first time, on national TV, he admitted that there were things he liked about Obamacare, Dodd-Frank, Obama's Education Program, and Energy Independence, besides being in favor of bank bailouts.

Thus, he effectively threw conservatives under the bus.

But, he had to give them something...

...so he gave them The Bird.

Mitt is going to FIRE Big Bird ........ we could FIRE those that drank the Tea in 2010 & save the US billions !!!

At least, we now know that both major Parties agree on something.

Between Ryan's "don't worry, we won't touch your Medicare if you're over 50," and Romney's deficit spending until 2040, we can all now agree that it will, in fact, take a generation to recover from old "What's His Name?"

Any Social Media Analysis is a fraud thanks to Karl Rove's and Romney's 'Rent-a-Twitt' buying spree to game the system. One of the big players in this game has an ex-Bain employee and another is based in the Mormon Capital of Salt Lake City. Facebook and Twitter will be cleaning out these Zombie accounts for months after the election is over. Same people who gave us robo spam bots and spyware are working for the GOP now. You can rent an Indian programmer and a flood of English typing twitter users for a few dollars a day.

do not speak the name, du- dub- oh , it is a sin to even think it. He is the one that remains unnamed. Someday, Hannity will write a book to correct the history of Duby... oh, can't say it- sorry. He really wasn't a draft dodger, didn't torture animals and wasn't a drunk. Oh, he made America great and won the Iraq war. Yikes, this one can't be fixed, can it?

I am much farther left than Obama, but I thought Romney won the debate. I don't understand why Obama's advisors Axelrod and Plouffe didn't expect another etcha-sketch performance, with a brand new Romney for a brand new audience. Many of the things Romney said during the debate were new positions Romney had never before articulated, he's never said what he said on stage. The next day, Obama said what he should have said during the debate--that of all things, the American people deserve a President who will tell them the truth, not waffle from day to day based on who the audience is or what the polls say. Instead of coming out the next day and saying, essentially, who was that guy, he certainly wasn't the Mitt Romney who's been campaigning for a year, he should have said it in the debate.

I would have asked Romney, "Before tonight, when have you ever said _______________(don't want a $5 trillion cut, won't cut taxes for the wealthy when it could easily have been demonstrated that a 20% across the board cut will cut taxes on the wealthy far more than it will for middle class people, I'm in favor of teachers, would cut loopholes and deductions but won't say which ones or how much so no idea if proposals make economic sense, etc., etc." Or how about, "For how many days will you continue to hold the position you just espoused?" If Bush made hay with Kerry's flip-flops, Romney is a sheer chameleon of a politician who says different things from one day to the next.

Romney has to be called out as the empty suit that he is. He told Fox last night that he " was wrong about the 47% comment" but earlier said it was merely articulated inelegantly before polls showed him that doubling down wasn't going to cut it with too many people. So, if he was wrong several months ago when he was speaking to the wealthies, as he now claims, why doesn't someone ask him Romney why he wound up espousing an erroneous position to wealthy donors and didn't recant his error for at least three months after that? And why didn't he proclaim his error the day after the video went public? Why didn't Obama tell the American people the truth--that US president and US drilling policies don't affect gas prices:

20 Experts Who Say Drilling Won't Lower Gas Prices

March 22, 2012 12:37 pm ET by Jocelyn Fong

"In a pretty impressive act of journalism, the Associated Press recently conducted a "statistical analysis of 36 years of monthly, inflation-adjusted gasoline prices and U.S. domestic oil production." The result: "No statistical correlation between how much oil comes out of U.S. wells and the price at the pump." It's neat to see math cut through the talking points and get straight to the truth of the matter -- which is that expanding drilling is a fundamentally ineffectual response to gas price spikes.

"Given that changes in U.S. oil production don't move gasoline prices, it should be clear that U.S. government policies related to drilling are of even smaller consequence. Indeed, 92 percent of economists surveyed by the Chicago Booth School of Business agreed this week that "changes in U.S. gasoline prices over the past 10 years have predominantly been due to market factors rather than U.S. federal economic or energy policies."

"Still not convinced? How about another 20 economists and analysts from across the political spectrum who will tell you the same thing:

• Ken Green, American Enterprise Institute, "If the U.S. produced more of its own oil, it would probably reduce imports, but it's not likely that it would reduce prices ... We probably cannot produce so much oil to exert downward pressure on prices compared to the world market."
• Peter Van Doren and Jerry Taylor, Cato Institute: "Sure, more domestic oil creates the possibility of fewer refined imports tied to the price of Brent crude, but given that the price of Brent sets the price for crude generally, the result would be more profit for domestic crude producers rather than significantly lower gasoline prices for Americans (not that there's anything wrong with that)."

• Doug Holtz-Eakin, American Action Forum: "Domestic action to increase production will not lower gas prices set on a global market."
• Christopher Knittel, MIT economist: "There are not many markets where the United States can't impose its will on market outcomes ... This is one we can't, and it's hard for the average American to understand that and it's easy for politicians to feed off that."
• Pinelopi Goldberg, Yale economist: "US domestic policy has only tiny effect on the world price of oil. US foreign policy is probably more relevant than energy policy."

• Steve Koonin, Institute for Defense Analyses: "When you hear the international oil companies advocating for energy independence, it's really about making money, which isn't a bad thing ... If they produce a million more barrels a day, they're not going to change the global price much. And since they know the global price is going up, they'll just make more money. There's nothing wrong with that, but it doesn't solve the price problem or the greenhouse gas problem."
• Michael Levi, Council on Foreign Relations: "The amount of oil you produce at home doesn't affect the price ... You can lower your vulnerability to price by lowering your consumption of oil, but not by increasing your production."
• Severin Borenstein, UC Berkeley economist: "Producing more oil domestically will enrich the U.S. economy, particularly U.S. oil companies and their workers. With oil so valuable, it may be a good idea, though the value must be weighed against environmental consequences. But it will have no discernible impact on gas prices, because it will change the world's supply/demand balance for oil by less than 2 or 3 percent over a decade or more."
• David Peterson, Duke statistician: "U.S. production and demand have little to do with the price of gasoline in the U.S."
• Edward Melnick, NYU statistician: When U.S. production goes up, the price of gas "is certainly not going down ... The data does not suggest that whatsoever."
• David Sandalow, former Brookings fellow: "Drilling offshore to lower oil prices is like walking an extra 20 feet per day to lose weight. ... It's just not going to make much of a difference."
• Tom Kloza, Oil Price Information Service: "This drill drill drill thing is tired ... It's a simplistic way of looking for a solution that doesn't exist."
• Richard Newell, former Administrator of Energy Information Administration: "We do not project additional volumes of oil that could flow from greater access to oil resources on Federal lands to have a large impact on prices given the globally integrated nature of the world oil market."
• Dean Baker, Center for Economic and Policy Research: "There is almost no disagreement among economists that drilling everywhere all the time offshore will have almost no impact on the price of gas in the United States. The reason is that we have a world market for oil. The additional oil that might come from offshore drilling is a drop in the bucket in a world oil market of almost 90 million barrels a day."
• Lou Crandall, Wrightson ICAP LLC: "Higher oil prices today are a global phenomenon, and the additional supply from increased drilling by the U.S. would not alter the global balance of supply and demand greatly. Gasoline prices at the pump would be higher either way. The only difference is that a somewhat larger share of the revenue would accrue to domestic interests (governmental and private) rather than to foreign suppliers."

• Paul Bledsoe, Bipartisan Policy Center: "The notion that somehow we can produce so much domestically that we will move the global price is incorrect."

• Tom O'Donnell, The New School: "The amount of extra oil that the U.S. would produce, as far as affecting the world price of oil, is almost insignificant."'

• Deborah Gordon, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace: "We can drill doggedly in our own backyards, but the price of gasoline will remain more a matter of speculation over externally-driven factors than tapping new sources of oil at home."

• Joseph Dukert, energy analyst: "Americans tend to exaggerate the price effects of fluctuations in domestic production in relation to the total amount of oil in global trade. On the larger stage, the perception of geopolitical risks is more important."

• Phyllis Martin, Energy Information Administration: "In 2009, the U.S. produced about 7 percent of what was produced in the entire world, so increasing the oil production in the U.S. is not going to make much of a difference in world markets and world prices ... It just gets lost. It's not that much."

"Even Fox's John Stossel acknowledged recently that U.S. energy policy "doesn't make that much of a difference" on gas prices, contrary to what others at Fox News are claiming.

"There's simply no excuse for political reporters to tolerate, let alone advance claims that more U.S. oil production will meaningfully address our gas price woes. (Here's a taste, from the past week alone, of the type of he-said/she-said reporting that is just not cutting it: CNN, New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, USA Today.) This is crucially important because once we understand that the U.S. is incapable of holding down the price of gasoline, we can start looking seriously at the options we do have to make ourselves less vulnerable to these inevitable price spikes."

Why let Romney perpetuate lies and myths that can so easily be exposed? Romney should be exposed for the shameless, mendacious opportunist that he is every time he speaks.

And I would never have yielded to the accusation that "if it happened during your watch, it's your fault" crap. The Party of No should be confronted with the costs of their obstructionism. To do otherwise is to reward Republicans for renouncing compromise as an essential part of governance and subordinating the welfare of the American people to the ideology of an unelected Republican lobbyist with a one-track mind.

There is ONLY (1) Presidential Candidate (Barack Obama) who cares about the working poor in the 47% of the American People.

I don't know of anyone who has followed Mitten & his boy Paul since they joined could has a conscience if they vote for R & R? R & R are liars .... PERIOD !!!

Who won the debate will always boil down to a person's personal opinion and not some institution's ruling. I think the powers behind the scenes want a closer race and Obama obliged them.