After viewing the recording of the Romney-Obama debate, it does not at all appear that Romney won. In fact, the pundits claimed that Obama didn't even look Romney in the eye; but, in fact, he looked at him often. President Obama looked at Mitt Romney with a condescending face, as you would look upon a person who just didn't know. Romney spoke with his hands--like a person who was emotionally unsure of what they were trying to communicate. He never added to his points, but merely repeated the same theme with unsubstantiated claims. Obama stated his goals and accomplishments, but was met with rebuttal each time, not substance change. Most of the points on healthcare were statements about the changes now offered in the system, which the challenger Romney agreed he would not oppose. The President didn't see how deviations the challenger suggested in his "Obamacare" would be paid for by Romney's presentation of empty tax cut ideas.
There was no challenging substance. Apart from the "I can do a better job," against "This is what we accomplished," it was an argument between a guy who shakes his hands, steps aside from the podium and shows that he wants desperately to become the president of the United States, and the confident, proud, accomplished man who holds that office.
The idea of government creating jobs for "we the people" is preposterous. Making it more inviting to hire, creating employment programs and dispersing more currency into the system by working for Congress is what Obama has done. Mitt Romney never suggested the rules of civics would contribute to an atmosphere of employers having more money and opportunity to employ people. That seems to hold the manner of the leader creating jobs.
So, we gave money to China, and they had even less reason to remain Communists. We let them laugh at the fact that they now employ us and use U.S. dollars while we secretly applaud them for paying us in U.S. dollars. Even more unspoken is that we did not export jobs to China--we exported employers. Neither candidate clarified what is happening outside the nation, with the exception of ending costly wars. One guy threw accounting pages at the other who espoused his platform and accomplishments. There was only one undeniable thing that was proven and that no one said: Mitt Romney is shorter than the incumbent.
It would be hard to believe our US President would not have facts to bring to the debate and the challenger stands reduced to argue against these facts with consistent presentation of statistics that are presently governing our country. We in the audience, sit watching the numbers change before our eyes between one mouth or another. Then, for the national press to claim that the guy who argued against facts with empty claims was the winner is an outright calamity against the fourth estate. The press got it wrong.