We didn't need the Long Island Medium to predict that the Sleepy-Time Obama from the Debacle in Denver would be replaced at this week's Hofstra debate with a much feistier POTUS -- or that the town hall format would lead to more verbal sparring than the locked-behind-a-podium approach. The breakout star of the event was Romney's "binders full of women" comment, an awkward turn of phrase that unleashed a bevy of tweets, Tumblr gifs, and video mashups. The top TiVo takeaway had to be Romney's epic fail as, eyebrows shooting upward, he tried to nail Obama on the words the president had used to describe the attack in Benghazi -- a dramatic moment highlighted by Candy Crowley's instant fact-check. Before the debate, I suggested that the real-time, crowd-sourced fact checking that has become a staple on Twitter should be made a standard part of the debate process. Candy's sharp memory demonstrated why it'd be so useful.

One final note on this: we were a little dumbstruck by the number of people who commented that Obama had managed to definitively parry the issue or put Libya to bed. No, no! It really is more than what phrases were used in certain speeches, we're afraid. There is a whole debate coming on Monday, exclusively about foreign policy. That debate's moderator, Bob Schieffer, is absolutely going to want to earn his stripes. He will absolutely re-raise the question. If he doesn't he will be pilloried. So the matter has not been put to bed. Hopefully, Schieffer will manage to steer the discussion to more substantive grounds.

President Obama won in 2008 largely because of support among independents. Whichever poll you want to look at, Obama badly trails Governor Romney among independents this year. And he is going to have to cut into Romney's independent support if he wants to win a second term.

I think the idea of differentiating between male and female moderators in fact is a bit outrageous and offensive, a reverse form of gender discrimination.

Last night's debate wasn't about how Obama performed on America's biggest stage; it was about how he had always performed on its smallest.

At stake tonight was whether the audience thought that President Barack Obama cared more about ordinary Americans than Mitt Romney, known for his extraordinary wealth and promotion of tax cuts for the wealthy.

If campaigns are about generating votes and televised debates reveal the true candidate, for the first time America may have seen a glimpse of the real fire inside both of these men in contrast from what we have seen before.

Although the "town meeting"-style debate isn't conducive to sharp give-and-take with Romney, look for every opportunity to nail him. Indignance doesn't come naturally to you, but you have every reason to be indignant on behalf of the American people.

Foreign policy debates are especially prone to leave obscure the key issues and fog our vision of each candidate's positions. Tuesday's Obama-Romney debate promises more of the same mix of platitudes, bromides and patriotic flourishes. In disorderly times, the land fills with loud patriots.