Is it 1982 or 1978?

Reportedly the White House has accepted that the Democrats will have major losses in 2010 but are comparing this year to 1982. At that point, Ronald Reagan was half-way through his first term and the economy was still doing badly - the country was in a double-dip recession and unemployment was the worst since the Great Depression. The Republicans suffered major losses in Congress and in state government across the country.

In 1983 the economy picked up, starting a boom that would last nearly 30 years. In 1980 Reagan won the election on the question, "Are you better today than you were four years ago?". By 1984 he could campaign on the same question. Both inflation and unemployment were lower than in 1980. The economy was booming. The only real question was if Reagan could win in all 50 states (he carried 49).

So, can President Obama start writing his 2013 inaugural address? I doubt it.

President Obama is no Ronald Reagan. Reagan came across as a warm, likable father-figure. There was argument about his economic theories but no one could say that he was ignoring the economy. In contrast, Obama comes across as a cool, aloof professor. Obama spent most of his first 18 months concentrating on health care with the economy a distant third or fourth on his priorities.

Reagan was also elected because President Carter seemed impotent after the government of Iran seized the American embassy staff and held them hostage. Reagan made America feel strong again. Obama was supposed to have made us feel loved but has failed to deliver.

Presidents live and die by the economy. A president who runs during an economic boom tends to win by a landslide. A downturn means defeat.

In order to believe that the economy will rebound as it did in 1983, you have to believe that the president's economic policies have no effect. Reagan cut taxes and spending. Obama has a mixed record on taxes, he raised some and lowered others. There is no question about his spending - he raised spending across the board. The success of Reaganomics makes Obamanomics look risky.

In fact, the current debate is not when the recovery will begin, it is if the recovery will fail. There is no chance of the economy suddenly picking up. The current problems are rooted in years of binge spending and bubble real estate values. What recovery we have had to date has produced few jobs. Reagan's policies encouraged investment and spending. Obama's policies cause anxiety.

At this point in his term, Obama looks more like Jimmy Carter or even Gerald Ford - a president who came into office with a great deal of public good will but who seems overwhelmed by the economic problems that he faces. Obama's prospects are closer to 1978 than 1982.

Obama could hope to repeat 1994 when Clinton lost control of both houses of Congress but went on to reelection after moving to the right of his party. This will be difficult for Obama. Both he and his party have moved significantly to the left since 1994. Also, Clinton had a better economy to run on. The country came out of a mild recession as he took office and the beginnings of the dot-com bubble gave him a good economy to run on in 1996. Moreover, members of his party are anticipating a shift to the right and will resist it.

None of this guarantees a Republican win in 2012. They will still have to run a good candidate. I doubt if any of the top-tier candidates from 2008 qualify and I have real doubts about the electability of Sarah Palin. That leaves a big hole for the Republicans to fill in the next 16 months.