You sank my battleship, Mr. President!

Long story short: Obama won a one-sided victory over Romney in tonight's presidential debate on foreign policy. It wasn't even close. This exchange says it all:

ROMNEY: Our Navy is old ... our Navy is smaller now than at any time since 1916. The Navy said they needed 313 ships to carry out their mission. We’re now at under 285. We’re headed down to the low 200s if we go through a sequestration. That’s unacceptable to me. I want to make sure that we have the ships that are required by our Navy. ... And I will not cut our military budget by a trillion dollars, which is a combination of the budget cuts the president has, as well as the sequestration cuts. That, in my view, is making -- is making our future less certain and less secure.

OBAMA: The budget that we are talking about is not reducing our military spending. It is maintaining it. But I think Governor Romney maybe hasn’t spent enough time looking at how our military works. You mentioned the Navy, for example, and that we have fewer ships than we did in 1916. Well, Governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets, because the nature of our military’s changed. We have these things called aircraft carriers, where planes land on them. We (also) have these ships that go underwater, nuclear submarines. And so the question is not a game of Battleship, where we’re counting ships. It’s what are our capabilities.

Ouch. Romney gets schooled -- again. Or put another way: Game, set, match.