Head to head: Obama and Romney face off in final debate

President Barack Obama and Republican nominee Mitt Romney discussed Libya, Syria, and America's position in the world at the start of the final presidential debate. 

Rick Wilking/Reuters
US Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney (l.) speaks as President Barack Obama listens during the final US presidential debate in Boca Raton, Florida October 22.

President Barack Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney battled over foreign policy on Monday in their third and final debate as they sought to break a deadlock in opinion polls heading into the final two weeks of campaigning.

The debate was the last major opportunity for either candidate to appeal directly to millions of voters - especially the roughly 20 percent who have yet to make up their minds or who could still switch their support at the Nov. 6 election.

World hot spots like Libya and Iran were likely to figure prominently, with Romney seeking to put pressure on Obama over what the Republican considers weak responses to the killing of the U.S. ambassador to Libya on Sept. 11 and Iran's nuclear ambitions.

RELATED: 5 national security issues next president must tackle

The stakes are high in the 90-minute encounter at Boca Raton's Lynn University moderated by CBS News' Bob Schieffer.

The two candidates were tied at 46 percent each in the Reuters/Ipsos online daily tracking poll. Other surveys show a similar picture.

Obama came to Boca Raton with the advantage of having led U.S. national security and foreign affairs for the past 3 1/2 years. He gets credit for ending the Iraq war and the killing of al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden in 2011.

But Romney will have many opportunities to steer the conversation back toward the weak U.S. economy, a topic on which voters see him as more credible. His goal was to appear as a credible alternative to Obama and avoid any gaffes that could deflate his recent surge.

Presidential debates have not always been consequential, but they have had an impact this year.

Romney's strong performance in the first debate in Denver on Oct. 3 helped him recover from a series of stumbles and wiped out Obama's advantage in opinion polls.

Obama fared better in their second encounter on Oct. 16, in what was deemed to be one of the most confrontational presidential debates ever, but that has not helped him regain the lead.

The viewership for the third debate could be lower than the others, since foreign affairs is not typically a priority for most voters and the two candidates were competing with a professional football game and a baseball playoff game on other channels.

The Obama campaign is now playing defense as it tries to limit Romney's gains in several of the battleground states that will decide the election.

Romney could have a hard time winning the White House if he does not carry Ohio. A new Quinnipiac/CBS poll shows Obama leading by 5 percentage points in the Midwestern state, but another by Suffolk University shows the two candidates tied there.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.