By John A. Tures, Professor of Political Science, LaGrange College

After former President Donald Trump handily won the debate in the polls, Democrats were contemplating replacing President Joe Biden after his uninspired performance on television. But should they? History is replete with cases where a candidate wins the first debate, yet fails to prevail at the ballot box in November. I explore why in this column.

There are several cases where the winner of the first debate loses the next one. For example, President Ronald Reagan blew it in the first debate in 1984 against former Vice-President Walter Mondale, sounding as unfocused as Biden in 2024. He lost by double-digits, in fact (just like Biden). He recovered in the second debate to win by three points, hardly enough to make up for a nearly 20-point loss, but good enough to show he could competently share the stage. Reagan won in a landslide, of course.

Then there’s 1988. Massachusetts Governor Michael Dukakis won the debate against Vice-President George H. W. Bush by one point or nine points, depending on which poll you looked at. But he performed so miserably in answering a tough question in the next debate that people forgot all about that early election, as Bush took the second debate and election as well.

In 1992, Texas Businessman H. Ross Perot was the media darling, the “new thing” hyped his unprecedented inclusion and snappy answers. But in the next contest, with a town-hall format, it was Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton who was smooth and charming. Perot began to resemble his Saturday Night Live spoof. Clinton’s victory was so lopsided it seemed to make the third debate moot. Clinton prevailed in the election that year.

In 2000, Al Gore was judged in the poll to be the winner, 48 percent to 41 percent. But media pundit critiques of his sighing during Bush’s answers led the Vice-President’s performance to be more muted in the second debate. Gore didn’t pounce on Texas Governor George W. Bush’s answers when he should have, leading to a double-digit deficit in the polls, and a close election.

As for 2012, Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney could outfox President Barack Obama by abandoning his conservative principles in favor of more moderate policy proposals in the first debate. But by the second debate, everyone was ready for Romney 2.0, and he failed to capture either of the next two debates. Like Reagan before him, Obama found his footing just in time to win reelection.

In other cases, a candidate won all of the debates, but it hardly mattered. That was the case in 2004, when Massachusetts Senator John Kerry won all three debates against President George W. Bush, but it didn’t really matter. Kerry had to answer for some of his questionable lines (as Trump might have to for the line “black jobs” and for claiming he could end the Russian invasion of Ukraine before he becomes president), while Bush did well enough to hold his base.

In 2016, former New York Senator and ex-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton won all three debates against businessman Donald Trump. But that’s because Clinton wanted to prove she could punch with Trump, instead of explaining what four years under Clinton would look like. It made winning the debate as irrelevant to victory as the popular vote.

So, debate winners don’t always win the election; first-time debate winners barely take a third of all elections. These can be from overconfidence, failing to articulate a clear vision instead of using zingers and attacks, or learning the wrong lesson from pundits. Whether Biden is replaced or not is up to Democrats, but it’s clear that winning at the podium isn’t a guarantee of success in early November.

John A. Tures is a professor of political science at LaGrange College in LaGrange, Georgia. His views are his own. He can be reached at jtures@lagrange.edu. His “X” account is JohnTures2.