Early in the 2008 presidential primary season, when  was getting set to go head-to-head with  Caucus, he sat down for an interview with the editorial board of a Reno newspaper.  In the course of the interview, the candidate drew a comparison between his campaign and an earlier successful presidential drive.The candidate he invoked was not of one of the Democratic immortals such as Franklin D. Roosevelt or Harry Truman but of Ronald Reagan, a historical miscreant in the eyes of many Democrats.  "Ronald Reagan changed the trajectory of America in a way that Richard Nixon did not and in a way that Bill Clinton did not," Obama said. He added that "we want clarity, we want optimism, we want a return to that sense of dynamism and entrepreneurship that had been missing."  Obama's comment left him open to attacks from his Democratic opponents, who condemned him as an apostate. But his statement was an early clue to the course that he wanted to emulate. Now, a year-and-a-half into his presidency, both the political dynamics and Obama's response to them bear some remarkable resemblances to those surrounding Reagan. Though die-hard Reagan detractors might cringe from this prospect, Obama might well profit from Reagan's tactical and stylistic approaches to the presidency.  The Republican Party that accompanied Reagan to the White House in 1981 was unified on only one thing: the remarkable personality of the new president and the issues he championed. Below the surface, however, there were two Republican parties. One consisted of social conservatives who backed Reagan's anti-abortion, pro-nuclear family view, and a quite distinct group of fiscal conservatives who emphasized his tax-cutting proposals and anti-regulation positions.  In like manner, Obama's Democratic Party is divided. There is an ultraliberal wing that favors an quasi-pacifist foreign policy, a loosening of social restrictions on such issues as same-sex marriage, and broad protection for the environment and abortion rights. A more centrist faction wants to concentrate on fixing the economy and reversing job loss and favors moderate reform of financial regulations. The first group regards efforts to enlist centrist Republicans as a fool's errand; the second believes that no lasting reform can be achieved without bipartisan support.  With both Reagan and Obama, it is their personal appeal that serves as the glue that holds this uneasy coalition together. In both cases, promises made to their ideological bases were shunted aside to deal with the problems of the economy that they encountered on assuming office. So while Reagan consistently championed the anti-abortion cause, he never appeared in person at the annual rallies that mark the Supreme Court decision in the Roe v. Wadecase and never pushed for an anti-abortion legislative agenda. Obama vowed to end the Clinton-era policy of "don't ask, don't tell" that prevents gays from serving openly in the military, but he has deferred to the leaders of the armed services to come up with a solution.  The economic problems that Reagan faced when he took office were less drastic than those confronting Obama, but both felt the need to employ strong measures. Reagan faced what was known at the time as "stagflation," a toxic brew of low economic growth, high inflation and an unemployment rate slightly higher than 7%. His antidote consisted of deep cuts in the federal budget and sizeable tax cuts, which were enacted by a Congress split between a Democratic House and a Republican Senate. He got the votes of a number of conservative Sunbelt Democrats in the House known as the "Boll Weevils," a group very similar to the "Blue Dogs" in 2010, many of whom supported the Obama stimulus. It should be noted that the centrists who gave Reagan the votes he needed came from the opposition party; this is a benefit that Obama did not enjoy in 2009 and 2010.  Neither the tax and budget cuts of Reagan nor the economic stimulus of Obama immediately cured the nation's ailments. By the midterm elections in 1982, the unemployment rate was above 10% and the Republicans lost heavily. In 2010, the unemployment rate very nearly approximates the rate of 28 years ago. Reagan came to accept that his "supply side" approach to restoring the economic health of the nation was not working and endorsed Fed Chairman Paul Volcker's use of high interest rates to cure the inflation problem. Throughout this crisis, the eternally sunny Reagan urged Americans to stick with him. The phrase he used was "stay the course." Early in 1983, the economy began a dramatic improvement, and the year concluded with a 7.6% growth rate.  Obama will need to convince Congress that more stimulus is needed and recently asked Congress for $50 billion to prop up the job market. But the severity of economic crisis means that Obama will need to implore Americans to persevere as Reagan did 28 years ago, and they may well respond by rebuking Democrats in November as they did Reagan in 1982. Throw in the uneven government response to the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, the uncertainty of the military effort in Afghanistan and a rising fear about government indebtedness, and the Democrats could be facing a political apocalypse far larger than the one Reagan suffered in 1982.  Where the Reagan-Obama comparison breaks down most dramatically is that the political climate in the early 1980s was far more benign than it is today. Unlike Reagan, who came to rely on the occasional help of Democratic House Speaker Tip O'Neill, Obama has had little GOP support. A strong Republican showing in November may, paradoxically, improve the political atmosphere by bringing the Republicans into the governing process. But an even more important ingredient will be Obama's ability, as the person looked to by Americans, to project the same clarity and optimism that he attributed to Ronald Reagan.  Ross K. Baker is a political science professor at Rutgers University and is writing a book titled Profiles in Cover. He also is a member of USA TODAY's Board of Contributors.  You share in the USA TODAY community, so please keep your comments smart and civil. Don't attack other readers personally, and keep your language decent. Use the "Report Abuse" button to make a difference.
The political dynamics then and now are remarkably similar. The struggling president would be wise to emulate the GOP icon.