Editorial: 2nd presidential debate a split decision

• Romney continued to undermine the Democratic strategy of casting him as a dangerous extremist.
• Obama delivered a forceful, presidential performance that sometimes dominated the stage.
• Neither addressed key "fiscal cliff" tax and spending decisions that the winner will confront early in the next term.

In the annals of presidential debates, the town hall sessions have typically been a refreshing change of pace.

They tend to be less scripted than those run entirely by journalists, sometimes venturing into unforeseen territory. They also make it harder for candidates to take the questions simply as cues to launch into memorized monologues or harsh attacks on their opponents.

After a ragged start, Tuesday's town hall debate in Hempstead, N.Y., featuring questions from uncommitted voters, proved no exception. Initially, the voters' role was overshadowed by moderator Candy Crowley's follow-ups and extended, combative exchanges between President Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney on education, energy costs and middle-class tax cuts. But as the debate went on, it settled into an exchange that presented a contrast of ideas that viewers could absorb more easily than they did the statistics-laden first debate.

As for who won, it could be looked at in a variety of ways.

Mostly obviously, Romney's perfomance continued to undermine the Democratic strategy of casting him as a dangerous extremist. As in the first debate, the former Massachusetts governor presented himself as reasonable and focused on the audience's concerns, and particularly the insecurity brought on by a sluggish economy.

But unlike the first debate, this was no clear-cut Romney win. In fact, after the first 30 minutes, Obama -- so lackluster in the first debate -- delivered a forceful, presidential performance that sometimes dominated the stage. The apex came in response to a question about why requests for added security at the American mission had been denied before the deaths of four diplomats, an issue Romney has been trying to capitalize on for weeks. Without directly answering the security-denial question, Obama forcefully said the responsibility was his. He then attacked Romney for suggesting that he -- as president -- would play politics with American lives at stake, angrily calling it offensive and leaving Romney with no effective response.

In the end, each candidate achieved what he needed to do, with early reaction suggesting either a split decision or an Obama win. Political activists and national journalists on Twitter, who almost universally saw a Romney win in the first debate, were divided this time, as was wider commentary. Instant polls by CBS and CNN both found an Obama victory by 7 points.

So much for style points and flash reactions.

As for substance, the economy remained the dominant issue, and here the candidates continued to fall short on specifics. Both pitched more middle-class tax cuts without acknowledging the need to raise more revenue to reduce deficits. Neither addressed key "fiscal cliff" tax and spending decisions that the winner will confront early in the next term.

With the candidates ducking the tough choices and polls showing a tight contest, many voters regard the debates as chances to see how comfortable each candidate is in his own skin and how well each can relate to voters' concerns. Tuesday's debate, coming three weeks before the election, provided ample opportunity to take that measure.