Third, Final Presidential Debate: Who Won?

The debates are now over - who do you think finished strongest?

Holding their third and final debate at Lynn University in Boca Raton, Florida Monday night, President Barack Obama and Governor Mitt Romney both took one last opportunity convince voters why they should support either candidate.

The topic of Monday night's debate focused on Foreign Policy. Tuesday morning, Patch will have flash survey results from Massachusetts political activists and leaders, both Republican and Democratic.

But now, with the third and final debate now over, what do you think? Who would you say 'won' this third presidential debate? Tell us in the comments sections below.

Kirby October 23, 2012 at 05:56 PM
President Obama sure "ranged insightfully" (sic) with this gem: "We have these things called aircraft carriers where planes land on them. We have these ships that go under water – nuclear submarines."
Emcee of Seekonk October 23, 2012 at 06:20 PM
'..."ranged insightfully"...' LOL. With Romney's complacent smile, It was a moment of condescending meets condescending.
Paul Lasiewski October 23, 2012 at 06:30 PM
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.
Anonymous October 23, 2012 at 06:42 PM
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.
deb of see-attleboro October 23, 2012 at 07:24 PM
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.
Stoughton12 October 23, 2012 at 07:29 PM
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.
DAN DEVINE October 23, 2012 at 07:32 PM
1/3 of the Country has already voted. . . ROMNEY/RYAN 2012
DAN DEVINE October 23, 2012 at 07:41 PM
ROMNEY appeared Presidental, OBAMA appeared angry & upset that he has to vacate the White House in January 2013.
Steve C October 23, 2012 at 08:12 PM
Sinclair, Which Cornelius Vanderbilt? The matriarch and industrialist? The man who built America's rail system, or the philanthropist that helped develop groups like the YMCA? Seems like a good group of guys to me. Maybe they should have ran for office. "To help an inefficient, ill-located, unnecessary school is a waste...it is highly probable that enough money has been squandered on unwise educational projects to have built up a national system of higher education adequate to our needs, if the money had been properly directed to that end" Rockefeller. Apply this theory to one of Obama's brilliant spending plans and lets see how that works out. I may just coin the phrase "The Rockefeller test" and apply it to any idea that throwing vast amounts of money at something is the way to fix it.
Indiana October 23, 2012 at 08:25 PM
trot - way to represent your union
Sinclair October 23, 2012 at 09:04 PM
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.
Paul Lasiewski October 23, 2012 at 09:13 PM
Actually, Romney may have looked presidential but he also looked like he was about to have a stroke or heart attack.
Steve C October 23, 2012 at 09:17 PM
Thank you for the correction and I do know the difference it was a typo while firing off a response. He was not actually illiterate, that is a myth, although he did not write well. I can appreciate your comment about the flip flopping on Romney's part and we all wish he would hold his course on some issues.
Paul Lasiewski October 23, 2012 at 09:18 PM
deb, you are just the person we need to get the people behind having a third party included in these debates. Why aren't the independents supporting that? We need a newer Ralph Nader!
G. Dub October 23, 2012 at 11:09 PM
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'.
Paul Lauenstein October 24, 2012 at 01:59 AM
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.
Sinclair October 24, 2012 at 02:38 AM
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 October 26, 2012 at 03:45 PM
Steve, I really ask you to be honest....Romney agreed with President Obama on 95% of the issues - he did not have command of facts and he failed geographically. He was SUPER WRONG TRYING TO USURP CREDIT ON THE AUTO BAILOUT - basic debating rules even show the Pres was the winner - Brown ill be honest - I have a great amount of disdain for because of his duplicity and fact-proven lies -his record of votes and cow-tow to Wall Street is reprehensible - He must be defeated! Trump announcement was a huge EPIC FAIL!
Darren Major October 26, 2012 at 03:46 PM
Darren Major October 26, 2012 at 03:49 PM
I posted about that - Obama doesn't control the IL State Pension he is a participant in......but Romney still is the "godfather of outsourcing" based on his earlier investments/actions to push this horrible practice forward
Tisiphone October 26, 2012 at 04:01 PM
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 October 26, 2012 at 07:02 PM
Darren, Why is Romney agreeing with President Obama a bad thing? If the president is correct, factual, and accurate with his statements then agreeing is the best response. You don't debate a valid point with someone just because you are in different political parties. I certainly don't think Romney won the 2nd or 3rd debate. He was wrong, in my opinion, with his stance on the bailout. Obama on the other hand threw around some great sounding information that can only be proved wrong with time. We will see 4 years from now how accurate the information was. I will be voting for Romney because I feel he is the best choice of the two prime candidates. I have no confidence in President Obama and his smooth talking isn't enough to bring my vote over.
Tisiphone October 26, 2012 at 08:06 PM
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.
David Dallaire November 01, 2012 at 05:34 PM
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 November 01, 2012 at 08:29 PM
I think it's Michelle who may be more upset about leaving the WH. She will no longer get her luxury vacations 3, 4, 5 or more times a year, at the Tax Payers expense. I think I may be upset if this happened to me....before I was expecting it to end. She'll then put all the blame on her husband for making her one of the "commoners" again. Poor, poor girl.
Emcee of Seekonk November 01, 2012 at 08:53 PM
@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.
Daniel F. Devine November 01, 2012 at 10:30 PM
INCORRECT, Emcee of Seekonk ~ The OBAMAS' will receive Secret Service protection for 10 years after leaving office, not for the rest of their lives.
Fiscal Conservative November 02, 2012 at 12:38 AM
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.
Tisiphone November 02, 2012 at 01:57 AM
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"?
Emcee of Seekonk November 02, 2012 at 11:30 AM
@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


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something