The latest presidential debate which highlighted competency in, and an understanding of, good foreign policy, has shown the president to be a master of his art. He easily outclassed Bishop Mitt Romney in knowledge, sensitivity, diplomacy and global awareness. The good Bishop was no match for him, being out of his depth on such crucial issues.

After those three debates, how does such a clueless person still qualify to be president? Would you vote for Mitt Romney, or did the debate change your views significantly in any way?

Nothing changed for me with the debate. The President, without any doubt, earned his spurs in the last debate if he hadn't before. The debate simply emphasised why he should remain in the White House and leave Mr Romney to float aimlessly at sea with his outdated thoughts and ideas!!

And my best quote of the debate?

While we were coordinating an international coalition to make sure these sanctions were effective, you were still invested in a Chinese state oil company that was doing business with the Iranian oil sector. So I’ll let the American people decide, judge, who’s going to be more effective and more credible when it comes to imposing crippling sanctions.

Touché!! Great riposte that amply illustrates Romney's priorities and hypocrisy!

But how would you vote now, and what would be the key prompt for it?

I would expect the usual mature, cogent, relevant replies. Thank you.