I think Obama again defeated Romney in today's debate.  I think this was Romney's weakest debate of the three.  He basically agreed with Obama on most of his foreign policies.  In an attempt to move more to the middle he now tries to paint himself as a peace maker!  He now agrees with the sanction on Iran, with military action only a last resort.  He agrees that we should be out of Afghanistan by 2014.  One commentator actually said that McGovern has come back to life in the form of Romney.  Obama rightly points out that Romney kept changing his mind.  I think the Republican conservative base must be shocked by what Romney said tonight.

I don't like to use one issue to decide on a candidate but Romney said something that show how much understanding he lacks on foreign affairs.  He said that Iran is our greatest national security threat. This is totally absurd.  If and when Iran actually gets nuclear weapons, it will still has lot less bombs than about 8 other countries in the world.  In truth no nation will attack the U.S. because it know it will be destroyed.  Russia is the only one that can destroy us but even they will die as a result.  So no nation will try to use nuclear weapons against us.  Even if you are trying to pander to Israel, it is still irresponsible to say Iran is our greatest risk.  I am surprised that no commentator on CNN called him out on it.  Obama said terrorism is our biggest threat.  It is a much better answer but still not right in my opinion.  I think cyber attack is the greatest unless you consider that a type of terrorism.  Cyber attack does not require a strong nation or lots of people.  Cyber attack can stop our traffic, communications, electric grid, financial system, even our water supply.  So I think greater resources need to be spent on preventing this.

Overall grades for the 3 debates:  Romney:  B+ B C+   Obama:  C- A- A-

Tomorrow is the big debate.  Due to the closeness of the race, it can have an effect on the outcome of the election.  But I don't think there will be a big swing like it did with first debate.  The first one established Romney as a solid candidate and unless he really bombs in the second, he will still be in better shape than 3 weeks ago.  Obama must stop the bleeding but I doubt he can regain the lead he had even if he beats Romney this time.  Obama already has 4 years of record so most people have already made up their mind about him.  So I think this debate can move the polls only 1 or 2 points either way, not 5or 6 points like last time.  Given the closeness of the race though, 1 or 2 points maybe significant come November.

Romney is obviously trying to be more centrist as the election gets near.  But one thing Obama can point out is that there are several advisers from the Bush era that Romney is using in foreign policies.  Among them are neocons that advised Bush in nation building and spreading "democracy".  While I don't think Romney is agreeing with these people and would get us into war like in Iraq, the fact that he is listening to them is dangerous enough.  This should be pointed out by Obama.  One can argue about which economic policy is better, but the bottom line is Iraq cost us thousands of lives and one trillion dollars.  These neocons are the people we certainly should not listen to.

I have not been writing because I have been away, not because of the Obama debate debacle.  So today we have the vp debate.  I think it was a draw.  Both Biden and Ryan did what they were supposed to do:  Biden attacking and Ryan showing that he is much more capable than Palin four years ago.  The vp debates rarely have any significance on the election and given the draw today, this one certainly would not make any difference.  How Obama responds in the next two debates will go a long way in determining who wins this close race.

I think it is easier to be the challenger in these debates because one can always attack the policies of the incumbent.  Like the Middle East policies.  The region is a mess and nobody can possibly make things look good out there.  The challenger can say things like being tougher on Iran.  But there is nothing tougher that can be done short of waging war.  When pressed about what would be his criteria to go to war, Ryan says only if the security risks of the country is a stake.  Well, I don't see how Iran having nuclear weapons is of security risks to the U.S.  Anyone who thinks that Iran will wage nuclear war against the U.S. is crazy.  I think that if Romney/Ryan are elected, there will be a greater chance that we will preemptively attack Iran and I think that will be a grave error.