warmaker :

"He seemed like he was timid and defeated."

This.

However, in Obama's defense, defending is much harder and more daunting than attacking is. While personal attacks were kept to a limit, Romney can poke holes in what has happened during Obama's presidency, whether or not it is entirely true.

Obama can't really do that back to Romney, since Romney hasn't been president. Sure he can make arguments about things that have passed through senate, but that's not entirely fair either, considering attacking Romney on issues passed through in senate, would be paramount to attacking the portion of senate that passed it through. While I have no hope for a system that works well together, that would only serve to divide the senate/house more.

I would say Romney got the better of the debate as well, although I don't think it's going to really alter the outcome of the election much at this point.

I find it hilarious that this year's choice isn't about who is going to make the country better, but more who is going to f*** it up the least.

I thought Romney did a great job last night. A definite upgrade over John Mccain from 2008. He seemed more confident and was aggressive and energetic, more so than the president. Plus I liked what Romney said. Obama to me just went back to the classic liberal rhetoric that Romney's for tax cuts for the wealthy and he would burden the middle class. I'm tired of hearing that.

legacyme3 :   I hadn't read through the WHOLE post you originally made, and I couldn't help a bit as I did, because I couldn't agree more.
I've heard from more students throughout the day and they all seem to agree that Obama was definitely the 'loser' of the debate.

They did say that Romney was rather nasty though.

My students didn't mention the Big Bird, thing, actually!
They did mention him being nasty to the moderator.  They said that he kept interrupting Obama, and when the mediator spoke up, he would run over the moderator.

Romney sounded better... more confident, more in control... but he also spoke a lot about nothing. Obama would say what Romney's plans were and what was wrong with them. Romney would continually refuted by saying those were NOT his plans but never explained what his plans actually were... he was very vague when he gave any info and didn't really explain how he would improve the nation.

Obama was very weak and didn't do a good job of actually answering the questions or clearly emphasizing his points. He also did a lot of pivoting.

Neither one seemed to do a good job of proving that they could improve the nation. I say it was a draw. Bad debate on both ends... but it was only the first, so hopefully they'll get better.

i think Obama was better tbh. He was defending, its easy to attack. Personally i would have attacked Romney on his involvement of religion in politics, his tax avoidance, his fraudulent business dealings, and finished by asking how would he fix a problem created by people like him?
All Romney did was attack. Im waiting on the miracle formula that will actually bring what he promises.
romney:
https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcROQE0o0Gf9PI6IFUR8VomgN6xJvDdHwRwyuH46hr6B3YmkkeW5

From what I heard Romney won this debate, he Came out better prepared for the debate than Obama and Romney really impressed some people with the way he handled himself.  From the details I got it was a disappointing debate for Obama and the Dem's, but I don't think this debate made a huge dent in his re-election campaign.  For now Romney won the battle but not the war.   We will see how well Obama handles between now and the second debate, and even how he deals with the second debate.   I am hoping that He can pull out a better performance than he did on the night of the debate especially if he intends on sealing a second term in office.