Notice, in my earlier post, that I didn't bother to ask who "won" the debate on policy. That would be a stupid question. Debates are basically pointless. Policy questions are complex. They cannot be boiled down to two-minute answers, and the two-minute answers that any candidate gives are gross oversimplifications at best.
If you already believe that tax cuts spur growth, then you will believe that Donald Trump's debate performance on the economy is superior to Hillary Clinton's. If you already believe that government spending spurs growth, you will believe that Hillary Clinton's performance on the economy is superior to Donald Trump's. In other words, your prior beliefs will explain your assessment of who beat whom on substance. So why bother arguing about it?
On the other hand, Donald Trump made some theater mistakes. Funny how art is more objective here.