Associated Press

I suppose it's inevitable that election analysts will look for historical parallels, comparing one national campaign to another. Is 2012 going to be 1996, featuring a Democratic incumbent cruising to re-election after brutal midterm defeats? Or maybe 2004, featuring an incumbent eking out a narrow win against a socially-awkward rich guy from Massachusetts?

For the Romney campaign, the only model that matters is 1980 -- a struggling Democratic incumbent, burdened by widespread public discontent, loses badly to a Republican who then takes on mythical, iconic qualities. Bryon York noted yesterday that Team Romney "strongly" believes the next eight weeks "will play out like the 1980 campaign, in which President Jimmy Carter led Ronald Reagan for much of the race until Reagan broke through just before the election."

We'll find out soon enough whether Romney can turn things around, but it's worth appreciating just how flawed the '80 comparison really is. For one thing, Carter didn't lead Reagan for much of the race (Obama has led Romney for nearly all of 2012). For another, Reagan's breakthrough came after his convention (Romney received no meaningful bounce).

Greg Sargent took this even further yesterday with a good piece on why the parallels break down.

There are plenty of other key differences. The economy was in worse shape in 1980 than it is today. Jimmy Carter could easily be criticized for mismanaging the economy and foreign affairs, given the Iranian hostage crisis. Obama, by contrast, consistently polls better than Romney on national security. What's more, as Reagan biographer Craig Shirley has explained, the electorate of 1980 is vastly different than it is today. Far more states were in play, and Dem swing voters -- the so-called "Reagan Democrats" -- formed a much bigger chunk of the Democratic Party, making a late break of such a significant magnitude much more feasible than today. The electorate is far more polarized and the map far narrower this time around.

Ed Rollins, who worked on the Reagan campaign in 1980, notes yet another key difference: Romney is not Reagan, and Obama is not Carter. As Rollins says of Romney: "On his best day, he's not a Ronald Reagan." Carter was partly undone because of his debate performance; that's less likely to happen to Obama.

Team Romney seems to be operating from overly-simplified assumptions: the economy's in rough shape, the mainstream is unsatisfied with the status quo, ergo, the election outcome is practically pre-determined.

This may make the right feel better, but it misses all of the relevant details.

Reagan was far better liked than Romney; Obama is far better liked than Carter. Reagan had a broad appeal; Romney has a narrow appeal. Carter struggled with Democrats after a difficult primary challenge; Obama is overwhelmingly popular with his party. Carter had a limited record of accomplishments; Obama has an extensive record of accomplishments.

And perhaps most importantly, there are the surrounding circumstances, most notably on the economy.

Not to put too fine a point on this, but Obama inherited the worst crisis since the Great Depression, taking office after his Republican predecessor failed spectacularly in every area of public life. There is, in other words, a context that the Romney campaign fails to appreciate, and a recent history that most voters are not eager to re-embrace.

When candidate Jimmy Carter ran for the presidency in 1976, it was the age of zero-dollar politics. He and President Gerald Ford, the Republican, raised zero money, none at all, in their contest against each other. What money they had came from public financing, with a $2 checkoff on the annual income tax return.

That age of zero-dollar politics is long gone, of course. Now we're in the age of Citizens United, which means big-money politics and heavy influencing by outside groups. President Carter said he thought President Obama had fumbled health reform by not pushing his own ideas strongly enough. President Obama has got to find a way to deal with outsized corporate interests. His advice:

"The only way to do that, if there is a way, is to draft what the president thinks is the right proposal, and then completely override the Congress in taking that proposal to the people directly and use a powerful influence, a bully pulpit of the White House to prevail if you can prevail.

"And I think reluctantly and maybe not too late but quite late, President Obama has learned that for the first time with his jobs proposal that was drafted in the White House, and he made the proposal to Congress in a very effective speech -- one of his best ones -- and now, he's taken his case to the public to say, 'OK, this is what I propose, this is what the Congress is likely to do, choose between me and the Congress in the upcoming election in 2012.' "

Eventually, Mr. Carter said, Congress will come around on the economy. He thinks President Obama can win that one.

After the jump, the rest of Rachel's interview with President Carter.

We're putting together the interview with President Carter for tonight's show, and we keep coming back to this part:

RACHEL MADDOW: Among the Republican candidates this year is someone who volunteered for your presidential campaign -- Michele Bachmann.

PRESIDENT CARTER: I know, and I appreciate that she helped me out!

We'll see you at 9 P.M. Eastern.

Photo: Deborah Hakes/Carter Center

First, having seen the transcript from tonight's interview with President Carter, I'd say it's notable for Mr. Carter's utter candor. A former Democratic president himself, he talks about what President Barack Obama has gotten right and what he's gotten wrong -- where he's won in Washington, where he has lost, and where he's going to win next.

Second, Rachel wanted us to post these excerpts from Mr. Carter's White House Diary, now out in paperback from Picador. She's been reading it as she prepped for the interview, and she sent these over under the heading "Unexpected moments."

February 3, 1980

"One [CIA] agent whom we had sent into Iran with a false German passport was questioned by customs because instead of using a full middle name, we used the initial "H." Apparently the Germans never use a middle initial. When questioned about it, the agent very quickly said, 'I'm ashamed of my middle name, which is Hitler.' The Iranian said, 'Well, under those circumstances, I can understand why your passport is different from all the others in Germany."

And two:

September 8, 1977

"I met with Rex Scouten and superintendents from the General Services Administration to complain about the numerous mice in my office. For two or three months now I've been telling them to get rid of the mice. They still seem to be growing in numbers, and I am determined either to fire somebody or get the mice cleared out -- or both.

"In the afternoon I met with Prime Minister [Eric] Gairy of Grenada. Grenada is the smallest country in our hemisphere, and Gairy was primarily concerned with mysticism, the definition of God, and a resolution that he sponsored for years before the United Nations to investigate unidentified flying objects.

"I remember with particular clarity that when he opened the wrong briefcase to give me some papers, his dirty laundry fell out on the conference room table.

And three:

February 11, 1977

"The president of India died, and I called Mama to ask her to leave that afternoon for India to represent me there. Chip decided to go with her. When she answered the phone I asked her what she was doing. She said she was sitting around the house looking for something to do, and I said, 'How would you like to go to India?' She said, 'Love to go someday. Why?' And I said, 'How about this afternoon?' She said, 'Okay, I'll be ready.'"

Photo: Deborah Hakes/Carter Center

Rachel's in Atlanta this morning interviewing former President Jimmy Carter for the show tonight. I'm always glad when the TRMS crew sends a pic, because it means everything's on track. Thanks to producer Eelin Reily for this one. She says there are more on the way. I'll toss them on the blog.