This is a snap reaction. We’ll probably have more in-depth stuff tomorrow.

Romney didn’t win by the margin he won by in the first debate. But he won.

He won because he had more memorable lines. A couple…

“We don’t have to live like this.”

“How the president said no to that pipeline, I’ll never know.”

Romney also won because his critique of Obama’s economic record, in response to a black guy who said he’d voted for the president four years ago and was unsure about doing it again because times seem so tough, was devastating.

He won because he gave a quick speech in response to the question about outsourcing which was so cogent, passionate and loaded with principle you could almost hear the Battle Hymn Of The Republic playing. Obama didn’t have anything like that.

Romney also got in a great dig on Obama’s bragging about the five million jobs that have been created – he mentioned that five million jobs is only half what you’d need to keep up with population growth, which is a point that can’t be made enough.

And he also won because Obama – again! – couldn’t look him in the eye.

But Obama performed a lot better in this debate, probably because his people told him if he didn’t show up this time the campaign was over.

So he was more aggressive, but the problem is he didn’t have anything to say. Basically, he trotted out all the tired old lines about how Romney’s a rich plutocrat, how we need to make the rich pay their fair share, blah blah blah. And he said something idiotic – namely, that gas prices were below $2.00 when he took office because the economy was down the tubes. So? They’re more than double that now. Does that mean the economy is blowin’ and goin’ now? Who’s going to believe that?

The Left probably thinks Obama won. But Luntz’ dunces – this batch was in Las Vegas – didn’t agree at all.

(link, just in case)

But regardless of who you think won the debate, Candy Crowley lost it. She lost it here…

Crowley later had to admit she was wrong.

She probably should have shut up. As it stood, she let Obama speak for three minutes longer than Romney did. And when she stepped on on the Libya question, she stifled the debate. Which was unacceptable.

But Romney could have put this whole election to bed if he had fired all his bullets on Libya tonight. And he didn’t. He didn’t take advantage of the opportunity.

I can live with that, though. Because Monday night we’ve got a debate solely on foreign policy and that’s a much better venue to take Libya apart than this was. Because if Romney can blow up Obama’s record on Libya and the Middle East the way he has on the economy in the last debate, there won’t be an opportunity for Obama to recover.

It wasn’t a knockout. It was a win on points. And it might not actually have looked that way, but when Obama gets investigated on oil drilling it’ll come out that he was flat-out lying. And on Libya, he’s going to come out looking like a fool. He took issue with Romney’s critique that he was out of touch on Benghazi because he gave some bullshit speech at the Rose Garden?

That’s pretty revealing. Obama thinks a speech equates to governance. That’s a pretty good explanation for where we are, isn’t it?