Libya was disappointing and not the homeroom many of us thought it could have been, I guess it's correctly used. But blunder, as in an egregiously misstated policy or inappropriately used phrase or word, I didn't hear it and, I believe, neither did the American public: Obama's number didn't improve at all, but Romney's did. Now, that doesn't mean Romney couldn't blunder tonight. These debates can be perilous, as several of them throughout the last fifty plus years have shown, so I do believe that this one can be of signifigicance. In fact, as I have posted, this debate could be the most difficult one yet for Romney. He has to be strong, determined, and critical without being bellicose, strident or mean. He must not allow Obama to play the role of the poor, grieving, burdened commander in chief, as Obama tried to in the second debate. Given Romney's ability not to blunder in the first two debates, I'm confident he can pull it off. Last night, I watched the debate sponsored by Children of Holocaust Survivors. n nHope Romney has seen it. His surrogate was outstanding, especially on Jerusalem. n nAnd, Sen. Graham was oustanding on Benghazi versus Sen. Durbin. n nInteresting that tonight's debate will have everyone seated, similar to the veep debate. HillelA, I'm originally from Rhode Island; one of the top three Democratic states. On occasion, a Republican would win election state-wide. I know how far a Republican has to compromise with overwhelming Democratic numbers in