Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Democrats deny parallels between Presidents Obama and Carter
The Hill ^

Posted on 04/07/2012 5:47:21 AM PDT by Sub-Driver

Democrats deny parallels between Presidents Obama and Carter By Alexander Bolton - 04/07/12 08:00 AM ET

Democrats say the political prognosis for President Obama is much better than it was at the same point in former President Jimmy Carter's first term, even though the pace of the nation's job growth has slowed.

Obama was set back Friday by disappointing jobs numbers but the economy still created jobs at a faster pace than under Carter or former President George H.W. Bush, two of only four presidents to lose re-elections in the last 100 years.

Jobs are growing at a substantially faster clip than they did in 1980, when Carter lost to Ronald Reagan in a landslide, and 1992, when Bush lost narrowly to Bill Clinton.

Obama’s three-month average for 2012 is also better than the job growth former President George W. Bush saw when he was re-elected in 2004.

The economy is creating more jobs than it did in 2000, when former Vice President Al Gore (D-Tenn.) fumbled the handoff of the White House from Clinton, or 2004 when George W. Bush held off a strong challenge from Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.).

But jobs are not growing as fast as 1988, when then-Vice President George H.W. Bush successfully ran on Reagan’s economic record, or 1996, when Clinton won a second White-House term. Bush and Clinton won easily in those years.

While many political experts predicted this year’s presidential election would come down to the economy, the middling nature of the recovery signals that campaign tactics and the candidates’ performances may prove more decisive.

“The expectations of his situation are that the economy is going to be good enough that Obama can win but not so good that he’s going to have an easy re-election,” said Bruce Cain, a professor of political science at the University of California and director of UC’s Washington Center. “It’s sufficiently ambiguous that Republicans can envision [the economy] as a winning issue for them.

“When the structural conditions are like that, the amount of money, the quality of the candidate and the guts of the campaign mean a lot more,” he added.

The economy created 110,000 nonfarm jobs in March, compared to 240,000 in February and 275,000 in January, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. On average, jobs increased by 0.16 percent per month, considerably better than the 10-month average before the 1980 and 1992 elections.

The nation’s labor force grew by an average of 0.075 percent a month during the10 months leading up to the 1980 general election, according to survey data of employers kept on file by BLS.

Carter’s political hopes were killed by dismal jobs reports in April, May, June and July of that year, a span in which the economy shed 1.16 million jobs. Strong jobs reports in August and October made up for the losses but fell short of saving Carter’s presidency.

Political experts say Obama is in a much stronger position than Carter, the only Democratic president to lose re-election in more than 120 years.

“The situation was totally different. Interest rates were in the ionosphere, 14 percent and 16 percent to finance various projects. Carter had a difficult term in dealing with his own party. The thing that was the dagger that went into his political heart was the botched hostage rescue in Iran,” said former Sen. Richard Byran (D-Nev.), who was serving as attorney general of Nevada before winning election to Congress.

Republican strategists say the unemployment rate is not the only salient statistic in this election year. They argue Obama will be hurt by rising prices as Carter was by inflation more than thirty years ago.

“If your benchmark is Jimmy Carter, you are headed for the front of the one-term presidents pack,” said Sean Spicer, communications director the Republican National Committee. “Look at healthcare costs, college tuition costs, energy costs, groceries. Everything that matters is headed in the wrong direction.”

Democratic strategists say Obama does not need to get the unemployment rate down to a specific number to win as long as voters see steady improvement.

“The president’s in much better shape than President Carter, whom I worked for a long time ago,” said Tad Devine, a Democratic consultant who worked as a young staffer on Carter’s campaign. “Inflation was astronomical and malaise had set into the country. Americans were held hostage in Iran.

“The present situation is diametrically opposite,” Devine added. “It’s been 25 consecutive months of private sector job growth.”

George H.W. Bush endured even worse jobs numbers than Carter during the ten-month stretch leading to his 1992 loss. The economy suffered a net loss of jobs in only one month, February. But the job creation in other months was anemic. Only 267,000 jobs were created January, March, June, July and September, cumulatively. The workforce increased by an average of 0.0738 percent.

Obama’s burden is the national unemployment rate is higher this year than it was in 1992 and 1980. A Labor Department survey of households reported the national unemployment rate at 8.2 percent in March. It was 8.3 percent in January and February.

The nation’s unemployment rate averaged 7.5 percent in the ten months before the 1992 election and 7.1 percent in 1980.

Obama inherited a much worse economy than Bush senior, who took control of the White House when the unemployment rate was 5.4 percent. Carter took office when the rate was 7.5 percent, the same as it was in November of 1980. It was 7.8 percent when Obama swore his oath of office in January of 2009.

Chris Lehane, a Democratic strategist who served as senior advisor to Gore’s 2000 presidential campaign, said Obama will win if the economy continues to show improvement. But he warned that the climb to victory would be much tougher if the economy shows mixed signals.

“People aren’t expecting you to be at 3.9 percent unemployment. They want to get a sense that things are turning around,” he said. “So long as data is out there that things are beginning to turn around in the right direction, he wins. If the data is inconsistent, it’s a much bigger challenge.”


TOPICS: News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS:
Utterly Bizarre............
1 posted on 04/07/2012 5:47:22 AM PDT by Sub-Driver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

Just an odd observation....but they both got Nobel Peace Prize awards...it’s just that Jimmy had to work for a number of years to get his, and the President just got it for becoming the President. If you ask me....Jimmy probably rates a notch above the President...which is sad when you have to compare the two in the same bucket.


2 posted on 04/07/2012 5:51:46 AM PDT by pepsionice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

Big difference. Carter was and remains the quintessential Useful Idiot in the advance of communism.

Barry is an actual practicing communist willingly and knowingly doing everything he can to push the advance of communism.

So yes. A very big difference.


3 posted on 04/07/2012 5:53:07 AM PDT by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

Carter is more of a bitter whack-job now than he was as President, but, at least he didn’t insult me and my beliefs on a daily basis, or appear to be deliberately trying to undermine American traditions in every aspect of life. In his day, I think he was more incompetent and clueless than malevolent.

From that perspective, IMO, he’s different from ‘the One’.


4 posted on 04/07/2012 5:53:07 AM PDT by DJ Frisat ((optional, printed after my name on post))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

Parallels nothing ..

The messiah is a million times worse than the malaisey one.


5 posted on 04/07/2012 5:53:28 AM PDT by Vaquero (Don't pick a fight with an old guy. If he is too old to fight, he'll just kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

I’m sure - Carter is a much better President than Obama - neither of course needs or needed to be in the office!

Pretty sad that the media is still providing a cover for Obama - he’s a failure under what the US Republic should be - but a highly successful socialist in everything he has accomplished in the last 3 yrs!


6 posted on 04/07/2012 5:54:47 AM PDT by BCW (http://babylonscovertwar.com/index.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

The Democrats are right: Carter and Obama are different!!

1) Obama cranks the heat at the white house while Carter wore a cardigan sweater and kept the thermostat at 68!

2) Carter served in the military while we don’t even know if Obama filled out a selective service card

3) Obama bows to foreign leaders while Carter just smiled.

4) Carter could operate an umbrella successfully while Obama struggles.

5) Carter was born in Georgia. We have NO CLUE were Obama was born.

sarc/


7 posted on 04/07/2012 5:57:47 AM PDT by Le Chien Rouge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver
They admit that they're in denial.

The reason that this won't work, is that there is a flaw in the design of the algorithm used to calculate the unemployment rate: it is a systematic error which excludes the long-term unemployed, and over-rates part-term and underemployment.

Guess which disaffected voters have the most incentive to vote Obaama OUT, and will be least affected by the weak efforts at propaganda.

A life without money or prospects has a way of focusing one's priorities and honing the ol' bullshit detector.

NO Cheers, unfortunately.

8 posted on 04/07/2012 5:58:27 AM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

The parallels are not yet complete, They will be as soon as election day is over. I don’t care how many hoodies are at the polls, zer0 is one and done.


9 posted on 04/07/2012 6:01:14 AM PDT by reefdiver ("Let His day's be few And another takes His office")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pepsionice

Jimmah could never match Berry’s PAIR OF DOWNGRADES.


10 posted on 04/07/2012 6:08:39 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks (Beware the Sweater Vest)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver
Photobucket
Photobucket

Carter has a nicer smile.

11 posted on 04/07/2012 6:13:20 AM PDT by EGPWS (Trust in God, question everyone else)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EGPWS

12 posted on 04/07/2012 6:15:59 AM PDT by Sirius Lee (Sofa King Mitt Odd Did Obamneycare)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver; mickie; surfer; Chigirl 26; Bizzy Bugz; seenenuf; Bob Ireland
"Obama was set back Friday by disappointing job numbers...."

I noticed that in virtually ALL accounts by the MSM the word "disappointing" preceded the words "job numbers" or "employment figures". It was the Word of the Day.

We didn't read "appalling job numbers", "disgusting job numbers", "disturbing job numbers", "predictable job numbers", "unforgiveable job numbers", "scary job numbers" or "unacceptable job numbers".

Nope, the media used "disappointing" when citing those inconvenient numerical statistics that came up suddenly and hit our poor, young president in the face.....causing him to become a "disappointed" and unfortunate victim of uncontrollable forces.

"Disappointing job numbers" is obviously the best phrase the interlocking mediawhores could come up with to turn a destructive perp into an innocent victim to be sympathized with.

Leni

13 posted on 04/07/2012 6:16:19 AM PDT by MinuteGal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver
"While many political experts predicted this year’s presidential election would come down to the economy, the middling nature of the recovery signals that campaign tactics and the candidates’ performances may prove more decisive."

LOL, oh sure, if it isn't working out the way you thought it would, why just change the parameters.

14 posted on 04/07/2012 6:20:18 AM PDT by getgo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver
Hard to deny, although I will grant that Carter's incompetence was exacerbated more by his liberal tendencies, stubbornness, ignorance, stupidity and vanity, and less by a dislike of the country as is the case with Obama.


15 posted on 04/07/2012 6:24:43 AM PDT by rlmorel (A knife in the chest from a unapologetic liberal is preferable to a knife in the back from a RINO.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

When He ran the first time, I called Obama “Carter II”. Now I call Carter “Obama I”. Obama is so bad that I would vote for Carter this year just to get Obama out of there. And Jimmy Carter was absolutely awful.

I would vote for a termite instead of Obama.


16 posted on 04/07/2012 6:26:21 AM PDT by Tom Bombadil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

Yeah, Obama out-Cartered Carter ages ago.


17 posted on 04/07/2012 6:39:35 AM PDT by NonValueAdded (Steyn: "If Greece has been knocking back the ouzo, we're face down in the vat.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

Peas in the pod, RATS


18 posted on 04/07/2012 6:44:09 AM PDT by rod1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

Carter was MUCH better

Just proves the Nobel committee is on drugs...


19 posted on 04/07/2012 6:48:16 AM PDT by bigbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Le Chien Rouge
5) Carter was born in Georgia. We have NO CLUE were Obama was born.

Well, we do have some clues but they don't agree entirely with each other.

20 posted on 04/07/2012 6:50:35 AM PDT by arthurus (Read Hazlitt's "Economics In One Lesson.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: pepsionice
The dems are right to deny the parallels because things are MUCH worse now they they were under Carter. To wit, the key metrics about the labor force participation rate and employment to population ratio are absolutely horrendous. The dems are claiming improvements in unemployment that are caused by a massive shrinkage of the labor force.


21 posted on 04/07/2012 6:50:59 AM PDT by ProtectOurFreedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

It’s an insult to Carter to compare him with Obama.

Carter is just a bumbling leftist fool.
He is a Christian (of sorts) and didn’t intentionally set out to damage America, even if that is the result of his misguided ineptness.

On the other hand, Obama is a died-in-the-wool Marxist/Leninist, a racist, and a muslim at heart. He holds a deep rooted hate for America that he can barely disguise most of the time.

But he does like our wealth and enterprise - as long as he can use both to further his own agenda.

Unlike the bumbling Carter, Obama intentionally set out to destroy America and remake it into some sort of Socialist/Islamist mecca for other disgruntled misfits.


22 posted on 04/07/2012 6:55:35 AM PDT by Iron Munro (If Repub's paid as much attention to Rush Limbaugh as the Dem's do, we wouldn't be in this mess)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

23 posted on 04/07/2012 7:14:05 AM PDT by TheCipher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver
They deny everything... they deny their evil and project their guilt upon the innocent... dims are ALL of satan.

LLS

24 posted on 04/07/2012 7:15:20 AM PDT by LibLieSlayer (WOLVERINES!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

.....and the housing foreclosure rate during Carter was......? ..../crickets


25 posted on 04/07/2012 7:28:37 AM PDT by spokeshave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

I agree with The Hill. Carter was far brighter, more competent, and effective.


26 posted on 04/07/2012 7:49:29 AM PDT by norwaypinesavage (Galileo: In science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of one individual)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver
Obama is much worse than Carter.

The remnants of Carter's administration have, by now, been largely eradicated from American life. Obama is much closer to LBJ, a man for whom his ruinous policies will continue to scourge this nation for generations long after he has left office.

27 posted on 04/07/2012 7:54:37 AM PDT by Drew68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: norwaypinesavage

Carter may been misguided and a leftist, but he was not some evil WMD against this nation like slumbama is.


28 posted on 04/07/2012 7:56:39 AM PDT by GlockThe Vote (The Obama Adminstration: 2nd wave of attacks on America after 9/11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: TheCipher
Carter saves his most passionate hatred for Israel.

Obama saves his most passionate hatred for America.

29 posted on 04/07/2012 7:59:23 AM PDT by Vigilanteman (Obama: Fake black man. Fake Messiah. Fake American. How many fakes can you fit in one Zer0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: GlockThe Vote
"Carter may been misguided and a leftist, but he was not some evil WMD against this nation like slumbama is."

I agree, but being evil does not make Obambi smart. He makes too many really, really bad decisions to be considered "bright". He may have memorized the Alinsky "Rules for Radicals", but that doesn't take brains, only a lifetime of indoctrination.

30 posted on 04/07/2012 8:11:15 AM PDT by norwaypinesavage (Galileo: In science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of one individual)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

and Nancy Pelosi is also predicting that the Dems will retake the House, and Chucky Schumer expects to keep control of the Senate..yeah..right...


31 posted on 04/07/2012 8:11:38 AM PDT by ken5050
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver
There is a certain similarity between Jimmy Carter and Barack Obama. Carter is a socialist, but Barry is a Marxist. Carter gave us galloping inflation, but got paralyzed by the 444 day American Embassy hostage seizure in Iran. Carter was an incompetent boob. Obama is actually trying, with the help of the Left, Donkeys, and MSM to destroy the United States. That's why Obama must go or be removed.
32 posted on 04/07/2012 8:26:42 AM PDT by MasterGunner01 (11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

They are right—there is NO comparison.

I’ve lived through both men’s occupation of the Oval Office.

Carter was better.


33 posted on 04/07/2012 9:28:04 AM PDT by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: samtheman

” Big difference. Carter was and remains the quintessential Useful Idiot in the advance of communism.

Barry is an actual practicing communist willingly and knowingly doing everything he can to push the advance of communism.

So yes. A very big difference.”

Bingo


34 posted on 04/07/2012 11:33:20 AM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (God, family, country, mom, apple pie, the girl next door and a Ford F250 to pull my boat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

Obama is going!


35 posted on 04/07/2012 12:28:31 PM PDT by maxwellsmart_agent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver; All
Last of the article:And the BLS has hundreds of number crunchers working 24/7 seeing to it the numbers will be favorable to nobama.
36 posted on 04/07/2012 12:47:26 PM PDT by upchuck (Need is not an acceptable lifestyle choice; dependent is not a career. ~ Dr. Tim Nerenz)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson