I'm not voting for either and don't feel like I have some kind of investment in either. And just like Romney's clear victory in the first debate, it's absolutely clear Obama won this debate and anyone who thinks otherwise is clearly taking their opinion from personal bias upon which they would have said Romney won short of some absolutely abominable gaffe.
I disagree with Obama STRONGLY on "natural gas" (the natural gas industry is funding a huge campaign that the majority of those who know the science and engineering of it disagree with, safe hydrofracking is like saying smoking isn't addictive - and the PR company that used to say that is the same exact one the natural gas companies are using) and "clean coal" (no consensus on it's validity as being "cleaner" at all), amongst other things - it wasn't his opinion, I judged it on how it was debated, and who could up the other. Obama very clearly won this, I don't even find it reasonably debatable.
But I don't think it matters. Sure national polling is somewhat close, but the electoral map the way it is and the way states are polling, Romney has a very, very steep hill to climb.
I was also disappointed that Obama didn't even say "climate change" during the energy discussion. Particularly because Romney has flip flopped on this and outright denial of it makes him look unreasonable. Carbon emissions absolutely need to be part of every energy debate. He should have asked Romney what he would do for bankrupted farmers and cities hit by hurricanes, etc.