# Is the presidential winner going to end up the loser

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-presidential-winner-going-to-end-up-the-loser/465799>\
**Category:** Great Debates\
**Created:** [September 30, 2008, 2:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-presidential-winner-going-to-end-up-the-loser/465799 "2008-09-30T02:55:29Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Page:** 2

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\
**Post date:** [October 3, 2008, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-presidential-winner-going-to-end-up-the-loser/465799/21 "2008-10-03T23:13:30Z")

</div>

> [@spoke-](#):
>
> The situation reminds me a little of when Carter took office. Inflation and a stagnant economy had been around since the Nixon administration, but then the Iran revolution and the energy crisis came along, the economy _really_ cratered, and Carter took _all_ the blame. (And yet it was Carter who appointed Paul Volker to the Fed. Volker’s policies reined in inflation, and Reagan took the credit.)
> 
> So yeah, I have some concern that Obama might wind up getting pilloried like Carter, not because of any failing on his part but because of all the crap that could be coming down the pike on his watch.

Carter wasn’t effective at solving things - not quickly enough, anyway, and the situation got a lot worse under him. The change in attitude under Reagan is a better example. Plus, in 1992 it was common knowledge that deficits would never go away. Under new leadership, they did.

It is amazing how insoluble problems become soluble once the ideological blinders get taken off. The economy didn’t get much better under FDR, but people started feeling like the government cared, and that made all the difference.

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-presidential-winner-going-to-end-up-the-loser/465799.md?page=1)