Presidential Debate Live Blog

10:35 p.m. -- Well, that's done. The remarkable thing about the debate on foreign policy was how little either candidate's positions have changed to reflect the emerging reality of the global financial crisis. This, despite the fact that both candidates said, explicitly, that our military might was underwritten by our economic health.

On the crucial issue of whether the U.S. should intervene around the world to prevent genocide, both candidates only stressed the downside of inaction. The costs of action, either in blood, treasure, or unintended consequences, barely merited a mention.

As with any debate, it's interesting to note what issues didn't come up. Nothing on globalization or trade. And no China. Can we really go through three debates without bringing up America's relationship with China? Surely a country of a billion people, with nuclear weapons, billions of dollars of American debt, sitting across a disputed territory that America is obligated to go to war to protect, merits some mention. -- Greg Scoblete

10:28 p.m. -- I really don’t believe that either candidate is very serious about Iran. Talk of a second Holocaust really seems to be a bit hyperbolic to me, and there is a much larger—and more immediate—list of bad Iranian behavior that we must address.

Sanctions can only work when you have leverage. Alternative energy is years away. We need to talk to the Iranians on a very incremental level, start with Iraq security, and see if we can move forward from there in some form of regional cooperation. We can give the Iranians security, and through Iraq and Afghanistan we should leverage that to affect their nuclear program, as well as their exportation of radicalism in Lebanon and Palestine. -- Kevin Sullivan