you don't want your President down on the floor wrestling with a bully.

to take Newt Gingrich's own words, "How do you debate someone who lies about everything?"

The president and his team knew this about Rmoney. He knew what Rmoney would do and we've seen it unfold as he tried to deny everything he campaigned on when he was called on it.

Yes, how does one debate someone who lies about everything.

but he was in control, unlike his opponent who kept acting like a Jack Russell Terrier: jump and yap, jump and yap.

Lehrer was simply not up to the rudeness of the Republican debating style and quickly lost control of the whole thing to Romney, who managed to get the last word in consistently.

However, Romney came across as wired, dishonest, and trying just a wee bit too hard. The rapid blinking will probably be mentioned tomorrow when the pundits have had a chance to think about it.

I just hope the President is well rested, that there are no retaliatory attacks against Syria by its neighbors and no other crises to keep him up until the wee hours.

which is really weird for a Mormon who doesn't drink caffiene.

I've never thought of Mitt as a dog before, but knowing our neighbor's dog so well, I could definitely see similarities!

And you made a good point.

We -- each of us, even the pundits -- don't know what's going on moment by moment that Obama must deal with. For all we know, there's some national security matter that's taking energy.

Where to start? There's just so much material to work with.

I agree with you.

Do you know the format? The next one is foreign affairs? And the last one is what?

I think everyone needs to watch the debate again or read the transcript. If you don't go into it wanting Obama to beat the crap out of Romney, you'll notice that he was thoughtful, presidential and made some excellent points. Romney was rude and obnoxious.

Romney looked crazy at times and acted like he'd had his first cup of coffee...ever!

Obama had the kind of laid back confidence of someone who had a little pre-debate anniversary sex.

Lies need to be rebutted instantaneously, while people are still watching, and before they've made up their minds.

opposite. Obama plays chess and Romney is playing tiddily winks.

Obama was low key in the last debates on the first night and increased his punch each time. Maybe that's a strategy. Personally, the second time watching I was totally impressed by Obama's control and totally unimpressed with Romney's nervous frazzle.

Those will have far more effect than any of the debates will.

won't that be a wash then? It's the SWING voters that matter here. There are many of these people already voting in SWING states. We could loose some of those early voters that were just waiting until this debate to make up their minds. At least for the next 48 hours all we're going to hear is how badly Romney beat down Obama. If you ask me, Romney wins. People are tired of hearing these attack ads already.

Only time will tell...

In theory, that should attract just about every voter, right?

(not)
You can fool some of the people ...

eta: I am not a troll.

I don't really believe that self-deception is helpful. I really don't. I doubt that this setback will fundamentally change the game in any way, shape or form. In 1984 Mondale absolutely trounced Reagan in the first debate so badly that even Reagan supporters were mumbling about Reagan's pathetic performance, "well, at least he didn't drool." Well, Obama was not that bad, But to the extent that it is possible to say that someone won a debate and someone lost a debate - it would be of course obvious to any reasonable observer who is not engaging in rather ridiculous self-delusion that Romney won this debate and Obama lost it. I don't think the loss was anywhere in the league of the trouncing Mondale gave Reagan during the first debate of 1984 - but it was nonetheless a clear loss. I doubt that it will change the final outcome anymore than the first debate of 1984 changed the final outcome - which considering that Reagan's humiliation from his inept performance in first debate was followed by a stellar performance in later debates and then one of the largest landslides in American history carrying 49 out of 50 states. That's not going to to happen either . But, to deny Romney had a much better night than Obama is to deny reality. I just don't see any point in doing that.