In his column today, Krugman complains that Democrats "wanted another F.D.R., yet feel that they’re getting an oratorically upgraded version of Michael Bloomberg instead." In fact, FDR ran in 1932 more on personality than policy. He even ran on balancing the budget, attacking the meager half measures of the Reconstruction Finance Corporation. He governed, obviously, quite differently. The reason FDR won so convincingly was the power of his optimism and energy at a time when the GOP could only offer gloomy "realism" anchored to a dogmatic ideology. Roosevelt, like Obama, was never fixed to any particular ideological pole star, but instead guided himself by pragmatism.
FDR in 1932 is a great comparison to Obama in 2008.
The GOP is ideologically incapable of governing in the current crisis their policies helped create. The country is mired in economic stagnation brought about but Republican tax policy and easy credit. The war obviously provide a difference in detail, but not in the general sense of gloom.
And Obama's eloquent offer of hope precisely echoes FDR's campaign. As Meteor Blades points out, "We have nothing to fear but fear itself" was either naive or delusional. Roosevelt had few concrete plans as a candidate and relied more on experimentation to try and solve the nation's ills. Some experiments worked (CCC, SEC, TVA, Glass-Steagall), some didn't (NRA, 1st AAA).
Like FDR, Obama has been accused of being all flash and no substance. Roosevelt was all golden oratory and no principles. He had mastered the new mass medium in a way no previous candidate had. He was an intellectual light way, a closet communist - all charges that failed to de-rail his remarkable presidency.
We obviously have no way of knowing what Obama will be able to accomplish once he's elected. The GOP excels at obstructionism. Barring a 60 seat majority in the Senate, some compromise will be inevitable. This is why Obama's message-based campaign is tactically smarter than Clinton's policy-based campaign. Obama will have more flexibility to govern.
While presumably Obama's style is less confrontational than Clinton's (which proved so costly in 1993-4), there is absolutely ZERO evidence that Obama is a Broder/Bloomberg/Lieberman clone.
He is a progressive who talks like a centrist. Just like FDR.