A contentious first debate between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump didn’t produce a memorable gaffe or misstep by either candidate, but local political observers said that, on balance, the night went to the Democratic nominee, who turned in a steady and focused performance.

Trump, by contrast, seemed to fade as the night went on and struggled to capitalize on a debate format that gave him multiple opportunities to undermine Clinton’s policy positions and attack her record while in office.

“While Trump was sort of ready and prepared for the first 20 to 30 minutes, the later part of the debate was more in Clinton’s favor, I think,” said Michael Coulter, a professor of political science at Grove City College.

Coulter said Trump came off as underprepared. Clinton, by contrast, seemed “clearly prepared and calm,” throughout a debate in which the candidates clashed with each other repeatedly and enthusiastically on everything from foreign policy to Trump’s refusal to release his tax returns.

Trump seemed to miss opportunities to strike back at Clinton when the conversation turned to issues like temperament and judgment. He failed to bring up the former secretary of state’s “basket of deplorables” comment, made earlier this month on the campaign trail, and only briefly touched on the controversy surrounding her use of a private e-mail server while in office.

Clinton, by contrast, mounted a sustained critique of Trump’s comments as a candidate, as well as his record as a businessman. The jabs seemed to exasperate and anger the real estate mogul.

“If I had to sum up one difference between the candidates last night, it was preparedness,” said Andrew Bloeser, a professor of political science at Allegheny College.

Bloeser agreed that Trump managed to avoid a major gaffe, but said that he often failed to articulate his policies or refute policy positions put forth by Clinton on Monday night. In at least two cases — nuclear arms and cyber terrorism — Bloeser said Trump failed badly by giving convoluted answers.

“I’m not even sure what he was trying to convey,” Blouser said.

“Hillary Clinton was very on point talking about the importance of allies with NATO, very clear in her message about nuclear deterrence ... and Donald Trump did not have a clear response to that,” he said. “He didn’t say anything that undermined what Clinton was trying to (argue).”

It wasn’t all bad for the Republican nominee, though. Former congressman Phil English said he believes Trump did enough to position himself for general election success, and that some of Clinton’s positions — such as her pledge to raise taxes on the wealthy and corporations — would push moderate conservatives toward Trump in November.

English called the debate “a wake up call,” for Trump, but said that if he can learn to shrug off some of the attacks that visibly irked him on Monday, he will turn in stronger performances in the future.

“This is a lot like when (Ronald) Reagan in ’84 did poorly in his first debate, and then he repositioned himself,” English said. “I think on balance it helped him. The clear thing is, he went toe to toe with a very established politician.”

English pointed out that Clinton wasn’t perfect, either. In addition to policies that likely won’t please many conservative voters, he noted one moment, toward the debate’s conclusion, when Clinton focused on her resume rather than her accomplishments while in office. He said the move — “a classic Washington mistake” — played into Trump’s critique of Clinton as a “typical politician,” in a year when the electorate is thirsty to upend the status quo.

“Hillary Clinton was more polished. But probably in terms of positioning for the election, this debate will be seen as helping Trump,” English said.