i'm s.e. cup. two weeks from today america elects a president. both candidates are on the trail this hour and sow are we. >> i'm toure back from boca and recovering from my romnesia. >> i'm krystal ball. they say a picture is worth a thousand words, so what did those freeze frames tell us last night. >> the best part is either side can argue they took the win. maybe not in that first one, but we'll let both sides make their case live this hour. >> i have a form invitation for all you undecided voters. rsvp to "the cycle" on october 23rd, 2012. the debates are done, and now the question is where do we go from here? we know one thing for sure. the candidates are now in a

two-week sprint to decision day 2012. the president began him by unveiling this magic book in florida. a repaj kajing of his plans. >> in this this campaign i've laid out a plan for jobs and middle class security. unlike mitt romney i'm actually proud to talk about what's in it. by the way, the math in my plan adds up. folks who are still not convinced can look right here and find out what it is i intend to do in a second term. >> i want to get my hands on that magic book. from there it's off to ohio for another rally in 45 minutes. we're there and have the president hopefully before the show is over. as for mitt romney, in about 15 minutes he and paul ryan will begin kicking off their sprint in nevada, and we'll have coverage live with the governor speaks. back to the debate last night. an orc snap poll put the president winning the debate 48%

to 40%. when you ask about able to be commander in chief come out about even. this comes from friend of show matt miller in the "washington post." mat writes, i don't get it. maybe it's me. for all the momentum romney's shown in recent weeks, i thought he still needed to shake thinging up in order to win. this was the last chance he had. he obviously didn't think he needed to. matt joins us now. matt, you've had a night to sleep on this. are you still confused? >> i'm a little clearer. i was so stunned last night, s.e., because i really assumed he wouldn't be appearing like he was the incumbent and obama would act as the challenger. as i slept on and talk to republican strategists today, i think they think they're ahead. he was like someone ahead trying to do no harm, and i think he accomplished what he set out to

do, which was establish that he had a presidential temperament and stature to be commander in chief, which the early reaction showed. fair-minded observers would say he hit that mark. he also wanted to take away the ability of the president in his closing arguments these next two weeks to cast romney as a warmonger, and i think he did that. i'm told they wanted to not scare women and turn it to the economy whenever they could, and he did all that. so i'm actually from obama's point of view very anxious a day after. it also suggests that kind of prevent/defend strategy shows how confident they were last night. >> matt, does romney seem competent as command ner chief when he continually is hugging the president's positions and saying i agree, i agree, i agree and i was no substantive critique of your foreign policy? >> i think the short answer yes,

is that won't please many progressives who know he flip-flopped light. for those who started to tune in to the debates recently, and i think that has broad appeal. i think it does meeted hurdle, and the democrats won't cast him as having flip-flopped around on the issues. they have to make a much deeper critique of the house republican agenda that he be bringing with him into the white house if they're going to really close the deal in the next couple weeks. >> matt, this was the foreign policy-specific debate last night, and by my count it was 27 minutes before the candidates decided to talk about domestic policy instead. it seemed like a constant battle between the classification of the debate and basic gravity, which was trending towards a domestic debate. we talked about this on the show before. this is a weird binary distinction between domestic and foreign. a lot of issues overlap.

i wonder if the experience of watching that debate last night you think going forward for 2016, have we seen the last finally of the foreign policy-specific debate? can we debate every issue at once? >> it's a great question. i think you can make a case, obviously, as you say, that in a globalized world where economic and social and all these issues from climate change to trade to jobs are all internationally intertwined you don't need that catego category. whatever title gets slapped on the debates going forward, they will use it for whatever suits the particular vote getting purposes that night live. so i do think there's a case for abolishing the category per se. i thought for example in the martha raddatz one, it felt off-key to me because of her comfort zone and her expertise to spend eight minutes on syria that night and not a word on american schools. so i do think we need to keep trying to refine these.

>> i agree with you. i mentioned yesterday i think libya and iran were probe the most talked about topics in this presidential election debate season, when clearly not at the top of mine share for what voters are looking at. i wanted to turn to another topic you wrote about, matt, which is joe biden's friend, paul ryan. i've actually been hearing from a fair number of moderate republicans that they're uncomfortable with paul ryan on the ticket. they think mitt romney's decision to put him on the ticket was poor judgment. they're unsure he's ready to be commander in chief, and one of the criticisms we heard a little bit last night was how weak romney is in terms of his experience on foreign policy and the fact that paul ryan also has no experience on foreign policy. has the president's team done enough to talk about legitimate concerns that voters have about paul ryan, his inexperience and his extreme positions on things like his budget? >> i think those are all fair

and important points, krystal. ryan doesn't look like someone highly competent day one to step into the commander in chief's role. having said that, i don't think most voters decide based on that. the real shocker to me about the ryan presence on the ticket is that in the nbc poll that came out the day before yesterday, romney -- the romney ticket is leading obama with senior citizens by 60 to 35. even though ryan put the medicare issue, the social security issue front and center for the democrats in ways that they usually want it, when it comes down to the last -- the homestretch of a race, romney's wiping the floor with seniors right now. i think that's going to provoke some real soul-searching among democrats when we see how the dust clears from this election. >> you were sounds decidedly bearish on obama's chances in two weeks. >> i'm very nervous about last night and the way it's going

this morning. i don't pretend to be a guru on the get out the vote effort in ohio, but for the president's sake i hope it's world class. >> thanks for coming in. >> sure. >> let's quickly, state of the race? where does everyone think this is a day after the debate? i'll go ahead and agree with cnn's john king this morning who said the trend line is moving in romney's direction. he's better off this morning than he was the day before the first debate. i think that's probably true. then again, two weeks i know this is cliche, two weeks in a long time and actually a lot can happen in 14 days before the election. so we'll see if that momentum keeps going. >> we still have donald trump's big reveal. >> thanks for reminding me. i would never make this decision without hearing what donald has to say about it first. >> i would put a finer point on what you just said. yes, romney is in better shape today than he was before the first debate, but i don't think

he's in better shape than he was a week or two weeks ago. i think the momentum of the first one brought him into a very, very slight lead in the national polls or a tie in the national horse racing. i don't think he's done anything for him since then, but at this point we have to look at the electoral college. there is clearly an obama advantage there in the states that decide this election. he's ahead by a substantial margin. it's not a huge margin but sfashl in the context of a very close race. we can explain in disconnect and we can put it up on the screen. let's compare regionally the breakdown of the vote between obama and mccain. look at this now. in the east a big obama win and in the midwest a solid win, solid win in the west and dead even in the south. let's look ar the most recent gallup data. he's dropping in the east, about the same in the midwest and not quite the same in the west. look at the south. they say obamafobia has gone through the roof in the reddest of the red portion of the

country. i wonder if this is artificially inflating romney's national number to make it look closer than it is in the swing states. >> who said na? i haven't heard anybody else make this point on this show yet. >> what? i told you that two weeks. >> what? >> what? >> i agree with the bill yant steve kornacki's insightful and original analysis. i do think there's a decent chance that romney is going to win the popular vote and the president is to win the electoral college. he still has many more paths to victory. it does look like it's likely to come down to ohio. nate silver was writing about that today. i want to disagree a bit with matt miller's analysis just now. i don't think the president could have donnie better than he did in last night's debate. i thought he got stronger each debate. he was crisp and confident and knew what he was talking about. he was very clear. and romney, i agree with matt that he really came in trying not to scare people.

i think the lasting image i think is that he felt unsure and uncomfortable and uncertain, and the line that the president kept repeating is he's all over the map. you need to be clear, if you're going to be a leader. i think that is something that resonates with swing voters. look, i don't think it's going to radically shift things, but i do think to your point the momentum that already slowed down i think could move now a bit more in the president's direction. >> we're in a skin-tight race, and i agree. the numbers in the south artificially romney's national number. obviously we come down to ohio, ohio, ohio where obama has a slight lead. he has a slight lead in several other key battleground states. >> i think it's going to come down to hawaii. >> maybe. or new hampshire. >> washington, d.c. >> we're talking about a battle between economic competence and likability. we're talking about a battle between white turnout and latino turnout.

one of the things that keeps me from being -- keeps from being awake all night at night is the cleveland plane dealer, which has gone with the winner has endorsed barack obama. they talked about a reluctant rehire, which is the mood for a lot of people. 60% of the country wants a different administration the second time as you pointed out in that poll, but a lot of the people like him. women like to return the incumbent and give him another chance. the road to 270 is easier for obama, harder for romney. if obama gets ohio and wisconsin, game blouses. >> well. from where we are now to last night in boca, neck up in "the spin," our favorite debate moments. where others fail, droid powers through.

introducing the new droid razr maxx hd by motorola. now more than ever droid does.

that makes watching tv even better. if your tv were a hot dog zeebox would be some sort of fancy, french mustard.

when they magically unite, people would think, "woah, this two dollar hot dog tastes like a fancy eight dollar hot dog." download zeebox free, and say "woah" every time you watch tv. after 270 minutes of magic the clock has run out on the presidential debate cycle. even someone from suffering from romnes romnesia, it's impossible to forget some of the fireworks last night. the moment of the night was this. >> you mentioned the navy, for example, and we have fewer ships than in 1916. governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets because of the nature of our military has changed. we have these things called aircraft carriers where planes land on them. we have shipping that go underwater, nuclear submarines. so the question is not a game of

battleship where we count ships. it's what are our capabilities? >> i think we saw twitter explode with that comment. the room that i was in definitely exploded. it's buzzy and funny and fits the narrative that obama has made about i know the new answers and complexities of the modern world and military, and you're stuck in the past. romney reminds a lot of people of a 1950s sitcom dad and this plays into that. you have this old school norman rockwell past guy and this looking to the future guy. >> it's a theme carried throughout the president's campaign, actually, forward. first question right out of the gate, bob schieffer asks about libya, and all the conservative in my twitter stream was so excited. then romney answered like this. >> governor romney, you said this was an example of an american policy in the middle east that is unraveling before our very eyes.

>> with the arab spring came a great deal of hope that there would be a change towards more moderation and opportunity for greater participation on the part of women in public life and in economic life in the middle east, but instead we've seen in nation after nation a number of disturbing events. of course, we see in syria 30,000 civilians have been been killed by the military there. we see in libya an attack apparently by -- i think we know now of terrorists of some kind against our people there, four people dead. our hearts and minds go to them. >> he barely mentions libya, which is the focus of his foreign policy critique of the president, his attacks over the past month. he seems lacking in confidence, unsure of himself. he starts to go down the geography b list like i did memorize my talking points. this sort of set the tone for the whole debate. it's the same mistake the president made in the first

debate. you cannot go in and play for a draw. you can't do it. it doesn't work. you can't be afraid of making a mistake. you have to go in with an aggressive stance going for the win. >> favorite moment here. this isn't a rah, rah favorite moment. it needs to be highlighted. let me play it and talk about it. >> let me ask you governor, because we know president obama's position on this. what is your position on the use of drones? >> well, i believe that we should use any and all means necessary to take out people who pose a threat to us and our friends around the world, and it's widely reported that drones are being used in drone strikes. i support that entirely and feel the president was right to up the usage of that technology and believe that we should continue to use it to continue to go after the people who represent a threat to this nation and to our friends. >> this is really troubling. i think this is symptomatic of something bigger than romney versus obama. i would like for romney in that situation as the opponent to have challenged him aggressively

on the issue of drones. >> s.e. wanted that, too. >> i would like the moderator to aggressively challenge him. i would like somebody in the press over the last few years to have a one on one interview with obama and press him on. this i don't think people appreciate the significance with the drones, these unmanned aircraft that are firing away halfway around the world. it's targeting killings of bad guys and it's marketed. the reality is any male over the age of 18 years old anywhere near one of these things hit is declared that was the enemy. it's okay. this is war. innocent people are dying and villages are destroyed and the bad will generated. there's the whole issue of the extra judicial nature of this of obama making life or death decisions sometimes involving american citizens. this is an extraordinary power. bob schieffer, as soon as mitt romney gave that answer, he gave

obama a pass on it, and it's wrong. >> i could not agree more. i've said this for weeks. all i wanted was for mitt romney to be the first person in four years to challenge this it president from the left, because it seems like a leftward criticism. it didn't happen last night. as for my quote-unquote favorite moment, i thought obama made some very easily argued points, and romney simply didn't argue them. i think you're right, krystal, hope for a draw do no harm kind of strategy. one of those moments was obama's breaking news last night. let's play that. >> first the sequestration is not something i proposed. it's something that congress proposed and will not happen. >> sequestration will not happen. obama did sign it into law. it very well could happen, and it seems as though obama might have just taken his biggest bargaining chip off the table. the "wall street journal" and politico called it a huge gaffe

today. i liked john mccain's response. >> i was astonished and almost fell out of my chair when he said don't worry, sequestration won't happen. we begged the president to come and sit down to avoid what his own secretary of defense has said would be a devastating blow to our national security. he said, don't worry. sequestration won't happen. he's not a dictator yet. >> he's not a dictator yet. it was a very bizarre moment, and again, romney said nothing. >> do we have an option of making his the dictator? is that what we're learning? >> you would if you could. i know it. i know it. >> who are the candidates? what are they for? be specific. what are their names? we'll clue krystal in, and we'll talk about all the foreign language stuff last night with lieutenant colonel and they'll tell us which candidate was on point.

time for "your business" bree prenear of the week. he works renaissance fairs, haunted houses and nightclubs. he sells bones, skulls and other items. he hooks, engaging and sells through performance and mirroring potential customer temperaments. for more watch "your business" sunday mornings at 7:30 on nbc.

♪ so now na we gave you our personal favorite moments of the debate, it's time to bring in experts on foreign policy. which won on stub stance and politics and who came across as the better commander in chief? in the guest spot we have two gentlemen that know this stuff inside and out. lieutenant colonel anthony shafer and aaron david miller, vice president of the woodrow wilson international center for scholars. he's also a former middle east peace negotiator. tony, let me start with you. obama put romney in a few different decades last night. let's play that. >> the 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy, because the cold war has been over for 20 years.

but governor, when it comes to our foreign policy, you seem to want to import the foreign policies of the 1980s like the social policies of the 1950s and the economic policies of it is 1920s. >> that was a great line, but he went on to accuse mitt romney of having the foreign policy of both george w. bush and obama. i'm confused. how can mitt romney's foreign policy span three decades and three different presidents? >> he also got the ships going under the water. submarines are boats, with na corrected as well. i've watched the network all day preparing for. this you cannot accuse governor romney of being too close to president obama on policies and say his policies are from 1980s. that doesn't work. i was in the 1980s, and i liked how it ran. we were on top of things. we started cutbacks under reagan. he took cuts during the time he was in office.

we were actually doing things well, and that's why we talked about the navy. the navy was effective back then, 500-ship navy. there were things they were trying to draw out of governor romney, that don't play well when you get to the redetails of it. >> steve spoke about this earlier, and i've been talking about it for a while as well. where is the outrage and the pushback on this president's foreign policy from the left when it comes to drones? where are code pink and moveon.org on the outrage on some policies? >> my friend on the left and i argue about this move with you guys. the drone thing is incredible. the kill capture program, we forgotten the capture part of the program, which creates a deficit of intelligence. that's why there's not good information about what's in the networks. you capture people understanding what's going on and penetrate the networks. until you get back on target, we

have to get past this level of using military strength only as a salve of creating stability in the middle east. >> aaron, i'd say romney's performance last night, he was passive and stayed away from the hawkish rhetoric in the republican primaries. i don't think he drew many meaningful distinctions with president obama. we have a clip that encapsulates this. we'll ask you about this. >> with regards to iraq, we believe as you president indicated and said at the time that i supported his action there. i couldn't agree more about going forward. first of all, i want to underscore the same point the president made. >> i'm glad that governor romney agrees with the steps we're taking. >> aaron, we're trying to figure out why romney took this tack last night. my sense is not because he thought he was ahead. he doesn't have much to say. he can't go at obama from the left and he's not about to go at him from the right and make him

sound like bush par two. he's stuck in the mushy middle. does that ring true to you? >> i have a different reading. aaron sorkin could produce a fictional presidency. the white house is the court in the world, and there's no question on my judgment that the president won the debate. the reality is in american politics smart guys don't always get to be president. al gore is a real smart guy. so was jimmy carter when he ran against ronald reagan. much smarter than their opponents. here it seems to me, president won the debate, no question. the question is whether he won the politics. i would argue, and i voted for republicans and democrats and worked for republicans and democrats. this is -- i would argue this is a fairly detached analysis. romney did himself two favors. on an issue like foreign policy, which plays to the president's

comparative strengths. when you're president you have the power of the inxwinlt see. you have the intel and the context. you talk about foreign policy all the time. the strategy, the details. you're really good at this. i think frankly it may well have been a draw in the sense that romney appeared -- there was no hollers or mispronounced names of countries. no howlers. he shared the stage with with the president of the united states, and he came off frankly fairly passive, but i think that was part of the strategy. his game was to create the image that putting the country in mitt romney's hands meant putting the country in centrist, moderate, safe hands. not the muscular, reckless, ideological force with which the republican party has been identified and which some of romney's own comments has made him ally of.

>> his advisers. >> on the politics i think he actually -- the big poll is comes up in less than two weeks. i think he did okay. >> aaron, there was definitely one hole e howlo ehowler. romney said he would have imposed sanctions sooner, and the president said imposed sanctions is not something he can do unilaterally. roll that. >> you thought that you'd do the same things we did, but you'd say them louder and somehow that would make a difference. it turns out that the work involved in setting up these crippling sanctions is pain-staking and meticulous. we started from the day we got into office. it's because we got everybody to agree that iran is seeing so much pressure, and we have to maintain that pressure. there is a deal to be had. >> aaron whashgs he's talking about is global governance.

the idea na america can no longer tell the world, this is what we want, and it will happen. we have to work with other nations in the world to make these sorts of things happen, and that creates a stronger batch of sanctions against iran rather than just going at it unilaterally. that's a key part of obama's foreign policy. >> it's true, but again, here's what i saw. i saw -- i'll describe it for what it is. i saw on that stage last night what i would describe to you as barackoromney. two guys who essentially agree on most of the core issues facing the country, and i think this is more than willful triangulation by a republican candidate who somehow wants to bring his positions rather late in the game actually. >> isn't it exactly that? romney is adpreeing with obama so he doesn't risk mistakes? he doesn't agree, and the president said that's not what you said before, governor?

>> no. what i think is the following, regardless of who becomes president, the foreign policy of this country is going to be sandwiched between two realities that no republican or democratic president is going to be able to change. number one is the reality of our domestic broken house. the priorities that the american public demand that we pay much more attention to fixing our own house than running around the world trying to fix someone else's. we're coming off the two longer wars in american history. one of those wars, afghanistan, is owned by the current president of the united states. he had his own iraqi surge. he doubled down in afghanistan. this is obama's war, and the standard for victory in both wars was not can we win? it was when can we leave? the american public understands the costs of those wars. democrat or republican, priority number one, fixing america's broken house. number two, you're operating in

a cruel and unforgiving world. in the middle east it's root canals and migraine headaches. we were sfuk tuck in a region w can't fix and we cannot leave. i would bet you -- i wonder where the expression dollars to doughnuts came from. i would bet you dollars to doughnuts that regardless of who becomes president of this republic, a heroic effort will be made on the central question on what to do about iran's nuclear program. a heroic effort will be made to find every conceivable alternative to unilaterally striking iran or green lighting the israelis to strike iran. >> whoa, whoa, whoa. >> in question is great britaoi critically important. the next president will be con strained by the nature of the world and the nature of our broken house. >> aaron is talking quite a bit about iran and libya, subjects we heard a lot about in these

debates. there were quite a few topics left out of the foreign policy debate in particular. climate change was not brought up at all in any debates for the first time since 1984, immigration, the european debt crisis, latin america, india. there was very little on trade. these were major topics missing from the foreign policy dpee ba debate. what's the most important topic left out of the debate? >> there are three. first, i didn't know china was an enemy. according to the president it is. we have to reform or defense infrastructure. the last major reform was in 1947, and i disagree with governor romney about restoring cuts. we need to focus on the strategy. we don't center a global strategy. let me predict it here on the show. we're going to face another cold war about energy, about the fact that we have a limited number of resources available to large, growing economy. once we get the economy back on track, things start happening,

resources are sucked up. we have to look at natural resources, energy, where it is coming from. there's issues regarding food and water not relating to climate change directly but just population growth in the far east. these are critical issues. the thing that affects u.s. citizens most directly is not terrorism but cyber. cyber security is something we have not broken the code on. we should have talked about it. transforming the military, making a foundation and funding that foundation based on strategy, not restoring cuts. this is something i wish they went through in detail. >> tony shafer, aaron david miller, thanks so much for joining us. we'll see you soon. straight ahead the candidates had very different game faces on last night. the body image expert is back to break down every smile and stare. what was with that tagg romney/obama bonding moment? we'll have that next.

i'm only in my 60's... i've got a nice long life ahead.

big plans. so when i found out medicare doesn't pay all my medical expenses, i looked at my options. then i got a medicare supplement insurance plan. [ male announcer ] if you're eligible for medicare, you may know it only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. call now and find out about an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement plans, it helps pick up some of what medicare doesn't pay. and could save you thousands in out-of-pocket costs. to me, relationships matter. i've been with my doctor for 12 years. now i know i'll be able to stick with him. [ male announcer ] with these types of plans, you'll be able to visit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. plus, there are no networks, and you never need a referral to see a specialist. so don't wait. call now and request

this free decision guide to help you better understand medicare... and which aarp medicare supplement plan might be best for you. there's a wide range to choose from. we love to travel -- and there's so much more to see. so we found a plan that can travel with us. anywhere in the country. [ male announcer ] join the millions of people who have already enrolled in the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp, an organization serving the needs of people 50 and over for generations. remember, all medicare supplement insurance plans help cover what medicare doesn't pay. and could save you thousands a year in out-of-pocket costs. call now to request your free decision guide. and learn more about the kinds of plans that will be here for you now -- and down the road. i have a lifetime of experience. so i know how important that is.

from 1 to 10, 10 being the most interesting and zero being complete snooze fest, lass night's debate 3.5. it lacked the near physical confront frags of hofstra and the near liberal massu side of the first debate in denver. it might have been the sleepiest of the three, but what they didn't say did speak volumes. we have media expert and ceo of clarity media group bill mcgowan back to break down the body language this time around. i noticed there was a lot going with romney's face. there was a lot going on with my mouth. there was the nose wrinkling and a lot of action in terms of his sort of facial gestures, if you will. what's up with athat? >> it's what we call in the trade busy mouth. it's that sort of twitching and

pursing and licking his lips in tense moments. it was sort of the equivalent of what ryan was doing drinking the water. i think it tended to happen more when the president went on the offensive and started calling romney out on contradictions in his statements and policies. >> bill, that was not the only busy thing going on romney's head. he was sweating profusing. he was nixoning like nixon in 1960. sweating against jfk. what does that tell you to see romney sweating so profusely there? >> it could be a factor of the lights. it could be maybe the democrats had their own makeup person in that night. it could have been a variety of facto factors, but he definitely looked shiny there. that was one of the first things i noticed last night. it was very nixonian. >> obama wasn't sweating, so it has to be i'm unxhafcomfortableh this topic. >> i was struck by how

uncomfortable i felt watching these two guys. >> were you sweating? >> i wasn't sweating but i was uncomfortable. they were incredibly close at the table and staring each other down. i remember in the first debate, you know, obama chs criticized for looking down in his notes. he learned from that lesson. he looked romney right in the eye and romney game it back to him. we're showing the intense moments. what did you make of that? >> the president actually was leaning in. he wasn't just looking at romney. his whole body engagement was much closer. it made them seem closer than they were. the one thing that i think the president probably would have been better off not doing in terms of the confrontation is the sarcasm on the line about the battleships. i think that -- >> that was a great line. it was the best line! >> i thought horses and bayonets is a good line. i don't think sarcasm is a great

tool to use too often. >> he sunk romney's battleship. >> first of all, we should set this up. after the last debate, one of the 27ons of mitt romney, tagg romney, was the one went on a radio show and he was so upset watching the debate he wanted to take a swing at president obama. it caused a big controversy. at the end of last night's debate, it was captured on video. we might show it here. he actually went up to obama, and it was an interesting moment where he has his arm around obama and they're exchanging words and they're pleasant. the speculation is so kind of apology to obama there. what sticks out, there's mitt romney standing there sort of watching the whole thing. i can remember it's like the father who walks his kid over to the youth baseball coach and makes him apologize for staring at him or something. that was the dynamic i was picking up. what did you make of that? >> it had that feel to it, and the fact that romney's son made the overture, the hand around the back, short of a lip reader,

it had all the physical trappings of the apology and the president whispering in his ear something to the effect of, listen, kid, we all lose our temper. >> don't sweat it. >> it had that feel to it. >> next time we'll bring in a lip reader, too. >> up next the own version of the spin room with two experts watching this very closely. what's not debatable, though? the best zinger, fewer horses and bayonets. zing! hello, what do you know about these? well the furby can actually dance to your kids' music... my kids have a lot of music. and the itikes discover map has this cool 3d iphone app. they'd be so happy if i could get both. well, you could put them on layaway and pay a little at a time. done, and done! he shoots... he scores!!! touchdown!! [ imitates crowd cheering ] strike! [ male announcer ] shop now. get the hottest toys on your list today, like furby and the itikes discover map... then put it on layaway so you have more time to pay.

walmart.

both sides proclaiming victory for their candidates after three rounds of debates, we're left to ask who won? who won last night and who won all three combined and who is going to win the presidency? joining us is kevin daly, he's the co-founder of consumer bounds. charlie pierce, contributing editor for "esquire." you and i share a home state, so i give you the first question. it's actually related to massachusetts, because that means you have seen mitt romney through the years. you have seen the many different incarnations of mitt romney. it strikes me after three debates this year, after the debates from 2002 when he ran for governor from 1994 when he ran for u.s. senate there, the only common thread i can find in this guy's history of the face he puts onto the public is he

aligns himself with whatever his sort of constituency of moment is on every issue. do we have a sense after 18 years of watching mitt romney what this man actually holding deer ideologically?ideologicall? >> no. i think the only real principle in mitt romney's political career is that he's unprincipled. whatever he needs to do to get to that which he thinks he is entitled, in this case the president of the united states, he will do. i mean, the track record on this is impeccably clear, and you have to give his campaign credit. they telegraphed this punch, eric fehrnstrrhrnstromfehrnstro ago, and it seems to be working. to be paraphrase a previous president, fool me once, fool me twice, won't get fooled again. >> looking just at last night's debate on foreign policy, obama has gotten high marks on foreign policy, most of his actions have been popular, was there any way for mitt romney to go into a foreign policy debate and win it? >> in terms of going into a foreign policy debate, that's not his -- i suppose that's not

his strong suit, but in terms of handling the subject as we all have to handle subjects, some of which are our strong suit, some of which are not, he did a darn good job. he stood up there like a leader, and that was a big goal i think of his in going through the debate. he had to show that he could stand tote to toe, chest to chest with the president of the united states and look pretty darn good in doing it. not sure if charlie agrees with that, but that's the way i saw it. >> well, kevin -- >> i think he stood toe to toe and chest to chest with the president, just not toe to toe and chest to chest with reality. >> a lot has been made of the laid back approach romney took, but he did go on the attack a couple times. one time he accused the president of going on an apology tour. the president called that out as the whopper it is, and then went on to say this. >> and when i went to israel as a candidate, i didn't take

donors. i didn't attend fund-raisers. i went to the holocaust museum there to remind myself the nature of evil and why our bond with israel will be unbreakable. and then i went down to the border towns which had experienced missiles raining down from hamas, and i saw families there who showed me where missiles had come down near their children's bedrooms and i was reminded of what that would mean if those were my kids. >> so, kevin, when he did go on the attack there, the president sort of promptly put him in his place. last week when he went on the attack about libya, it was a terrible moment, probably the worst moment for him in the debates. isn't it possible he had to shift strategies because his normal campaign talking points on foreign policy just wouldn't stand up to muster in a debate situation? >> well, you can always say that. you can pick a debate apart as much as you want and, of course, we all do that, that's why we're

all here today, but what the audience out there gets is an impression. an impression of romney, an impression of obama. and i don't even know that -- other than they like that story that the president told about going to the section over there in the middle east, the fact that the thought came out that there was a tour that the president went on in order to apologize for the united states, see, that sticks. that sticks in the mind of the viewers. if you said who won that in terms of wait? i think romney won it to some degree. >> that's very interesting. way tonight give charles a chance to get in before we go. charles, you know, i know you are one of the great political writers today. great piece today. no nation in its right mind with put its foreign policy in the hands of the willard romney we saw last night. what do you think of the man who might become commander in chief? >> i think he has a lot of homework to do. the most dispiriting moment of the debate is when mitt romney

told the president, america does not support dictators, it frees people from dictators. that is a stunningly and a historically absurd statement to make. he can take it up with the people in chile, in guatemala. he can take it up with the people in iran where our problems began because we overthrew an elected government and installed a dictator. >> also iraq. >> that was a very empty platitude and i found it dispiriting for what is supposed to be a high-level foreign policy debate. >> kevin and charlie, thanks so much. sorry for the tight time in this bloc. up next, s.e.'s ode to the undecided voter. s to stay at re. while a body in motion tends to stay in motion. staying active can actually ease arthritis symptoms. but if you have arthritis, staying active can be difficult. prescription celebrex can help relieve arthritis pain so your body can stay in motion. because just one 200mg celebrex a day can provide 24 hour relief for many with arthritis pain and inflammation. plus, in clinical studies,

celebrex is proven to improve daily physical function so moving is easier. celebrex can be taken with or without food. and it's not a narcotic. you and your doctor should balance the benefits with the risks. all prescription nsaids, like celebrex, ibuprofen, naproxen, and meloxicam have the same cardiovascular warning. they all may increase the chance of heart attack or stroke, which can lead to death. this chance increases if you have heart disease or risk factors such as high blood pressure or when nsaids are taken for long periods. nsaids, including celebrex, increase the chance of serious skin or allergic reactions or stomach and intestine problems, such as bleeding and ulcers, which can occur without warning and may cause death. patients also taking aspirin and the elderly are at increased risk for stomach bleeding and ulcers. do not take celebrex if you've had an asthma attack, hives, or other allergies to aspirin, nsaids or sulfonamides. get help right away if you have swelling of the face or throat, or trouble breathing. tell your doctor your medical history and find an arthritis treatment for you. visit celebrex.com and ask your doctor about celebrex.

for a body in motion. woman: what do you mean, homeowners insurance doesn't cover floods? [ heart rate increases ] man: a few inches of water caused all this? [ heart rate increases ] woman #2: but i don't even live near the water. what you don't know about flood insurance may shock you -- including the fact that a preferred risk policy starts as low as $129 a year. for an agent, call the number that appears on your screen.

before you get our vote,

you're going to have to answer some questions. questions like -- >> when is the election? how soon do we have to decide? >> what are the names of the two people running? and be specific. >> who is the president right now? is he or she running? because if so, experience is maybe something we should consider. >> i have been told that when "snl" lampoons you, you've finally made it or maybe that's what helps me sleep at night. the other possibility is that you are simply so ripe for mockery, your mere existence is so absurd that "snl" cannot ignore you any longer. undecided voters i'm talking to you. take a look good, hard look in the mirror because this is your wake-up call. officially out of excuses. the debates are wrapped up and with two weeks left, it's time to make up your minds. we got to know these guys pretty well. i mean, i know the candidates better than i know my own neighbors. but that's because i hate them. if you still don't know who

president obama is, look around you. some will say he's like jesus, he is everywhere and in everything. he's in your higher milk prices an out of work cousin, in your second mortgage and your uncle who keeps telling you to buy gold and he's on "the view" everything morning. as for mitt romney, he's also been pretty easy to find from california to new hampshire, you can find him at any one of his 400 homes. you can find him at fox news 17 times a day. you can often find him on both sides of an issue, and sometimes you'll find he's the only candidate to show up at a debate. and so i don't buy this undecided nonsense. in 2011 a study found most women believed 180 seconds was long enough to decide whether a potential suitor was mr. right or mr. wrong. men make snap decisions all the time like when they decide to buy a mustang at 55. >> yep. >> or grow to mustache. colin powell made a study of good decision making insisting