[sickoflibs]

RE :”It's becoming crystal clear why Obama seemingly “screwed-up” at the crucial first prez debate-—giving Romney a huge opening (or so it seemed).
O’s debate screwup was no accident. Canny Obama and his cunning, sinister crew knew then that O would win...... no matter what Romney did or said. B/c the WH orders had already gone out——their massive voter fraud operation was already in place...”

My theory on this one is that O threw the first debate on purpose acting passive and not challenging Mitt and letting him dominate the stage, and it really looked good for Mitt at the time a clear win.
Why?? Because prior to that debate expectations were low for Mitt and high for O based on polling and O being the more well known POTUS. So Romney only had to hold his own to look good anyway.
So by O holding back in the the first debate the expectations for the following debates were more balanced, and then Obama went on the offensive putting Romney on the defensive in a number of cases.

Example : If you recall Romney said he was for a ‘path to citizenship’ in one of those last two debates. That was a defensive move and as you see it didnt get him any Hispanic votes,.

remember Romney dropped the whole Benghazi issue after the second debate, I posted here at the time I thought that was a mistake.

[PhilCollins]

I agree that illegal aliens should have a path to citizenship. The path would require them to return to their native countries and come to the U.S., legally. If Romney said that, he would have received more votes from conservatives.