The President's performance last night reminded me of Ronald Reagan's performance in his first debate against Walter Mondale. It has led me to wonder if the incumbent president is at an inherent disadvantage in the first debates.
It should also be noted that Reagan came back with a vengance in the second debate and went on to a landslide victory.
The first Reagan-Mondale debate was a disaster for Reagan. His performance led to a significant drop in the polls, as it raised concerns about his age. He seemed distracted, and didn't seem to have the same intensity or command of facts as Mondale.
I remember my father (Reagan voter) pointing out that Reagan had to run the country, and he that may have had some work to do that day. Mondale was fully focused, emotionally and mentally, on debate prep.
In the second debate, Reagan was clearly ready.
Other examples:
Debate number one in 1992:
A poll conducted by CNN/USA TODAY on Oct. 11 found that of those watching, 47 percent rated Perot the winner, 30 percent voted Clinton and 16 percent voted Bush.
Bush was criticized for looking at his watch during the debates - again, the incumbent was distracted.
In 1996, Dole did well but not by a substantial marging.
In 2004, CNN reported:
In a CNN/USA Today/Gallup survey of 615 registered voters who watched the debate, most said Kerry did the better job and almost half said the debate made them think more favorably of Kerry
The President had to deal with events such as the shooting between Turkey and Syria, while Romney could focus his energy on the debate. As much as a sitting President may want to prepare, one suspects that running the country commands more emotional resources. The first debate will serve as a wake-up call to Obama the same way it did to Reagan.