I actually watched the whole debate, although in Europe it started at 2 am.
For me Romney was not the winner. He was indeed MUCH better than I expected. But in on the one hand the contents of his policies are jut bad, also as some already have pointed out he took some new positions and distanced himself from himself.
Some argue that Obama should have attacked Romney more. But why should he. I knew even before the debate that Obama would not attack Romney on where he had misspoken. Sure that would have been a big mistake. Especially as americans, more than Europeans hate aggressive politicians. So Obama went to take some hits from the start. That never surprised me.
Romney did the best that he could, he looked very nervous and acted aggressively. Obama did not his best to counter the attacks. He was unsure what to do so I guess he rather stood to the campaign plan which was to talk to the viewers and explain what he did and plans to do. He looked much more often into the camera.
What would have happened if he had countered the attacks of Romney as aggressive we will never know. My guess is that the outcome would be worse. Romney had nothing to loose but much to gain. The opposite is true for Romney.
So what we could see was exactly what we could expect. It went quite well for Romney. But I think the more important impact o the debate will be now if everything Romney has said will be investigated.
He opened up a lot of holes in his line of arguments.