Obama looked like he didn't want to be there. Never looked at Romney, looked down at the podium or looked at the moderater. adid.t have a clue on the facts. Definety needs teleproper

At times I couldn't tell if the president was supporting his argument or Mitt Romney's arguement. Romney showed more genuine passion about America's direction, while president Obama is good at telling stories about his Grandma.

When Bill Maur, the existential 'anti-Mitt' slams Obama for his poor performance, then what does that say about who won the debate. While Romney came accross as knowledgable, on point, compassionate, and bi-partisan, Obama in turn, poorly defended his record, repeated his Democrat campaign slurs, and was completely unprepared for a one-on-one confrontation. Keep in mind, Obama never had to debate such an opponent.
Telepromptors, reporters and audiences don't argue back. It's easy to spread falsehoods and exagerations about ones opponent when you have media support, but no challanger. Tonight we met the real Romney, and we saw the real Obama. He's good with rhetoric, but otherwise doesn't have a clue.

Mitt Romney appeared more passionate than Obama and that is why people feel Romney won the debate. People need to look beyond that. I will never forget the rhetoric from him and the Republican party over the last 12 years. I still have a hard time believing Romney. His proposed tax policy makes no sense. Sounds like he plans to lower taxes across the board, limit itemized deductions so that the his tax plan remains revenue neutral and that the lowered taxes will cause corporations to create jobs, 12 million by the end of his first term. I just don't believe it. I think the extra money the corporations have from lowered taxes will just go straight into the pockets of the corporate elite. Many companies out there are doing very well right now, including the one I work for. However, they cut down on hiring even when they need to because they developed the culture of running lean. Also, cutting programs the feds now supports will only make your local and state income taxes go up.

Maur, Maher, who cares. But, he did give a million to Obama's campaign, didn't he.
Whatever you think you knew about Romney came from democrat campaign garbage. For the first time Romney got the national spot light, and we got to judge him for ourselves rather than through the eyes of a smear campaign. Tonight it became clear that a new game is in play, and the liberal media now has some false charges to answer for.

Romney was presidential, substantive, articulate, decisive, persuasive, and likeable. He displayed strong leadership qualities. The momentum will now swing to Mitt.

Lol @ huffington post "fact checkers", the equivalent of a sophmore poli sci essay...

Jay - the fact check showed that both candidates lied through their teeth. Gov. Romney was more believable than President Obama and controlled the tone of the debate. Sadly, you don't win a debate by being completely honest.

Was there a debate... it looked like a debacle. Romney all the way - Fraud exposed.

Clearly, Romney won the debate. I can however, tell you, as a person who voted for MItt Romney for Governor of Massachusetts, that he will lie more than your average politician to get elected. He campaigned as a moderate in Massachusetts and now he is a Tea Party Republican. I agree people change their views, but this was a drastic change, and he clearly changes his entire view on issues depending on his audience. It's actually amazing to watch back on video. He was not a great governor, we were 47th in job growth, and he may say he didn't raise taxes, but he raised fees(aka taxes) on everything and he raised taxes on businesses. He also left office with a deficit where there was once a surplus. If how he governed in Massachusetts is any indication, we will be in more trouble, than we are now, if he wins in November.

No teleprompter, no substance. Obama has always been an empty suit that just happens to be an excellent orator IF he has the content in front of him. He proved it last night.

Mitt Romney knocked it out of the park! He shut Obama down at every turn. This is what the Romney team needed for a surge.

Obama was clearly out of his element without his teleprompter, he was disengaged and has no answer's. Every time he attacked Romney, Romney had 3 or more answer's for him. It was obvious Obama is not use to having to respond or defend his policies given the fact that that it wasnt a 30 second commercial or a campaign stop where he just puts out what he wants to say without being questioned. It was never clearer the differance between the DNC and the GOP with the direction they want to take America. Obama said it all in his closing remarks "fairness" and that is his vision of wealth redistribution which will destroy America as we know it.

Romney will win Nov. 4th

It is rather amusing seeing Obama's minions like Stephanie Cutter out there today trying to spin everything after last nights smack down lol !

Obama had a great line when he became president. Trouble is he never kept to that line by becoming mesmerized by the power and position of president. It's time for the O to Go..

Governor Romney won and deserves to be the next President of the United States. Unsure whether or not that will happen; running against someone like Obama--whose votes stem from 'emotion' rather than the hard work pays off approach.

The people have to vote for someone to get elected....All the naysayers who sit home and complain when there TAXES go up have to get off there butts to veto....what can I say....

To quote Barack: "We won--you lost." I'm sure now that the shoe is on the other foot it hurts, 'ouch'. Sorry, Barack, your shoes don't fit, your suit is empty and your chair is waiting for a real president to occupy!

No teleprompter = no substance.

The Commander-in-Chief appeared to have overdosed on Nyquil! Certainly not the bombastic, brash candidate of 2008 for sure. Although this one clearly went to Romney, I was a bit disappointed that when he had him on the ropes, he didn't land the 1-2 punch! I know that the Prez will be well-groomed for the second debate, but I pray that Romney holds his own and influences the "undecided" faction....if we get another four years of this administration.....this Country as we know it, is a goner.

Prez had no promptor
Romney said what press would not
Is "the One" exposed?

now he is accusing Romney of lying. of all ppl to accuse someone else he takes the cake: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/05/us/politics/obama-team-tries-to-change-course-after-debate-disappoints.html?_r=1&nl=us&emc=edit_cn_20121004
amazing and typical of him

I think you should read some of these comments before you make one. Yours sound just like O'B stuttering

Did anyone notice that OBO tried to blame BUSH

Romney clearly won the debate. He also proved that he is a bully who doesn't have any regard for rules.

Jennifer, OBO has no regard for rules or the constiution. He just does what he wants and calls it executive privlidge and OBO is not a bully. He just bows and says how sorry the UNITED STATES is for whatever

Bully, lol, you have to be kidding....wtg P. Trolene

Jennifer,
In case you didn't know, Obama spoke 4 1/2 minutes longer than Romney. It was CNN who showed the time results. I assume you didn't notice when the moderator tried to limit Romney twice as often as Obama. If Romney had stopped then Obama would have spoken 7 to 8 minutes longer. Those extra minutes are crucial. It's too bad that Romney had to persist just to get his equal time. That is a poor reflection on the moderator's performance... Maybe he was giving extra time to Obama to make up for his studdering, and grasping for answers.

No worries, "lifer" - it's WHAT was said that counts - and what wasn't. Obama lost, and badly. He was the "home" team...and he failed to articulate any real forward thinking plans...no solutions, no admission of past failures or discussion of how they might be remedied - completely unapologetic.

I am no Romney Fan - but, were I judging it as a boxing match, whether by knockout or points, it was a Romney win.

This was, however, not the election, and we're in NJ, so I don't know that it will matter.

Meanwhile, the "Change the Rules" Pledge, Article the First, and the failure of the R's to meet the major party standard for performance in the Primary are not even on the radar with the Mainstream Media - (no bias there, right?)

The Article the First issue, from a "constructionist" standpoint, may be the most important Constitutional battle you've never heard of.

Tired of the status quo? Unwilling to surrender to the two Georges? (Gilmore and Norcross?)

10% approval rating in Congress, and a turn-out of less than 10% of those who cast ballots in the prior State Election at this June's primary. Elect a guy who only runs the plays as called by party leadership, special interests, and lobbyists?

Or, better still, another "major" party candidate, whose only message is that the other guy is 'no good'?

Where's the budget? Why are our troops still in Afghanistan?

WILL EITHER OF THEM SIGN THE PLEDGE - The "Change the Rules" Pledge, which restores campaign finance reform in a manner unassailable by the Judiciary?

I am running with (Independent) Democratic-Republicans for Freeholder, Donald E. Letton and Kim Johnson, for the seat that is open to election on November 6th for the NJ Third Congressional District.

We have joined together to restore the application of the Constitution - the WHOLE Constitution, and to seek out, expose, and excise any local, county, State, and National corruption we can find.

Our proposal, the "Change the Rules" Pledge, offers a solution to campaign finance reform that circumvents the Supreme Court decision of Citizens United v. Federal Election Board.

I would welcome the opportunity to speak with the people of your community. Less than a month remains.

"Stand for what's right, or settle for what's left" - Frederick John LaVergne,
"Democratic-Republican" for Congress, NJ's Third District