All we do is play into the Republican's most sacred meme
This is not 1980, folks. And Carter didn't lose because of the economy. He lost because:
1. He faced a fierce primary challenge from Ted Kennedy. (Full disclosure: I worked for Kennedy.)
2. The Iran hostage crisis, which made him and the country look week, especially after the failed rescue attempt.
3. Carter's public hand wringing -- i.e. the malaise speech (and yes, I know he never used the word malaise) and his reliance on the unholy Patrick Caddell.
4. Reagan cleaned his clock in the only debate that they had (Carter also looked weak by agreeing to only one debate) -- it was not only the "there you go again" and "are you bette off" but Carter quoting his daughter Amy about the most important issue of the day (nuclear weapons, duh.)
So yes, if say Hilary was running against him in the primary, and a U.S. Embassy was taken over, and if Obama was a poor public speaker and debater, I guess you could say he is Jimmy Carter 2.0.
Barack Obama is simply an entirely different type of political animal than Jimmy Carter -- he's more authentic, for one -- and these are very different times.
I know we all want him to start hitting back, I know we worry about this "only adult in the room" strategy. But that strategy might start looking like it makes a lot of sense as the Republican presidential primary rolls forward. That's going to get ugly, folks.
Which leads to the last point: Neither Rick Perry nor Mitt Romney come anywhere near Reagan's skill as a campaigner or communicator. At his core, Reagan was a nice guy -- and I think he was a hell of a lot smarter than people gave him credit for. I don't see that blend of smarts and personal warmth in either Perry or Romney. Neither candidate seems as comfortable in their own skin as Reagan was. It is hard to imagine Reagan needing to pose with six shooters -- as Perry has -- and I truly doubt even this fabled spokesman for G.E. would say something as brain dead "corporations are people, my friend."
So let's see Obama for what he really is -- something very different than what we've ever seen before in a president. Isn't that why we voted for him in the first place?