>> you've mentioned your relationship to the south several times during the interview. do you feel that there's more of an awareness between man and hi environment in the south than in other parts of the united states? this.tw >>e not particularly. i think certainly more than the mid atlantic and states in new england or even the midwest, but not with the far west. but the, the close attention that many southerners give to f the outdoors tends to be a little much on fishing and hunting which is okay. but now i want to help encourage a broader interest in the wonderful environment they've inherited. >> we're here with author e.o.t wilson and his first novel, "anthill." virginia

>> this is about an hour. >> thank you. thank you. it's a pleasure to be here. as always. when republican john mccain wanted to insult his opponent in the 2008 election, he warned that barack obama's presidency

would be like a jimmy carter second term. the joke didn't need any explanations. democrats responded by pointing to the differences between obama and president carter, not by defending the former president. even as carter became known for having one of the most active postpresidential careers in american history, his time in the house remained a failed leadership. over the past few months, there have been many that compared obama to carter rather than rfd or lyndon johnson or ronald reagan. the point is clear, in most textbooks, carter is remembered as a president who failed to articulate a compelling political vision and who was unable to hold his party

together. the image of a warned down carter, trying to resolve the iran hostage crisis into the final hours of his term became almost as iconic as the images of president john f. kennedy huddled with his brother robert, trying to avert a nuclear war during the cuban missile crisis. with all of the praise given to ronald reagan and what he achieved in 1980, there's the sense that carter's political implosion offered an opportunity that conservatives needed in 1980. the story that best captured the position of jimmy carter towards the end of his presidency took place in the summer of 1979. the story is not the imfamous malay speech which he delivered in july, but rather a story

about at rabbit. press secretary jodi powell in august told brooks jackson a story that carter had told him. the president had been on vacation in spring in georgia. while he was fishing on a canoe, a hissing swamp rabbit tried to make it's way on to carter's boat. the president batted the rabbit away with his paddle. jackson liked the story and published a humorous piece which he sent out on the wire. some of the networks picked up on the story and "the washington post" published it on the front page. the title was bunny goes bug. rabbit attacks president. what started as an innocent stories turned into another political headache for president carter. he was in such bad shape by that time, but the story mattered.

republican senator robert dole from kansas was planning to run in 1980, he joked that the president should quote apologize for bashing a bunny in a head with a a little. i'm sure the rabbit intended no harm. he was doing something unusual, trying to get aboard of president's boat. everyone else seems to be jumping ship. in the book, i wanted to try to understand what went wrong. i wanted to move beyond the standard historical account that carter was just inevitably doomed to failure. many argue that carter was incompetent, he was weak, he was unable to lead. the conventional portrait depicts carter as a tone deaf moralist, who didn't display the skills, a man that was fortunate

to find myself in the right place at the right time after the shock and trauma of watergate and who's weaknesses as a leader became painfully evident as soon as he was given the responsibility of governing. but these interpretations ignore powerful factors that could have made carter a success. his was, in fact, a presidency with considerable potential. he was an exceptionally smart man who had a very good grasp on the major public policy challenges of the day. he could be very engaging, and few failed to be dazzled by his memorably wide smile. at least early on he sometimed demonstrated a real capacity to understand the mood of the electorate and what voters wanted. whether it was the desire for some kind of anti-establishment

politics or the need for new moral framework, such as human rights for debating foreign policy. he could be a shrewd political operator with a very good feel for electropolitics both when he was in georgia and nationally. as he successfully defeated many powerfully and more well known figures in the 1976 primaries. on many issues such as race relations and welfare reform, carter had the ability to see the potential compromise at a time when more liberals and conservatives were moving farther and farther apart. whereas senator george mcgovern failed in his effort to run a maverick campaign in 1972. losing in a devastateing landslide defeat to richard nixon, carter pulled it off. carter was also politically

appealing as the face of the new sale. the increasingly, urban, cosmopolitan voices. he was a member such as john west and rueben escue of florida that allowed the democrats to regain the south in 1964, legislation that had convinced president lyndon johnson he had just handed away the region to the republican party finish many generations to come. we must also acknowledge that carter had to govern in a tumultuous political time. americans elected carter at a fraught moment for the democratic party. democrats had come out of the turmoil of the 1960s deeply divided without any clear sense

of direction, and with fundamental disagreements over the key issues that the party faced. ranging from foreign policy with regards to the soviet union, to issues like human rights. the struggles over vietnam and civil rights had opened up few reparable risks among the different factions in the party. which once had remained relatively united by it's member shared loyalty to policies and anti-communism. congressional reforms had greatly fragmented power and made it more difficult in terms of how congress worked to control the different factions. the nation also faced an enormous economic crisis in the late 1970s. as stagflation, unemployment and inflation combined devastated

americans. leaveing them anxious about where they would find their next paycheck and whether they would be able to afford the basic needs. the energy crisis bore down on the nation. leaveing americans feeling as if they were out of control of many of the basic goods and items that they needed on a weekly basis. the hostage crisis of iran, and the soviet invasion towards the end of his presidency generated similar anxieties about the united states to influence events abroad. carter would be skilled. he was able to break the corrupt democratic machine in georgia to win his way into the state legislate -- legislature and then governorship. the run for the state senate in 1962 when he took on the

politician machine who was very good and had people in voting booths warning voters the houses would get burned down if they voted for carter. carter contested the election, very risky move, and wins. during the 1976 democratic primaries, carter was the first candidate to really grasp how the nomination process had changed in the post george mcgovern reform area. he mastered the iowa caucus and the politics of the television media to bring down morris udall. he understood how to use his own biography and image to a very powerful effect. such as when he changed out of his suit before appearing in the media after he had won enough delegates to secure the

nomination, he took off of the suit and he put on his trademark jean jacket. to convey even though he was the victor, he was the front runner. this was the same jimmy carter who votered were longing for. his message was perfectly tailored for frustrated americans in the post watergate age and as i recount in the book, he played all of the different caucuses, not justize in a skillful manner. even dealing with people like mayor daily of chicago in very shrewd fashion to win over his support. one of my favorite moments in the general campaign against president ford came in the kick off week in the fall. gerald ford had chosen a rose garden strategy. whereby, he would stay in the white house to look presidential. his vice presidential pick, robert dole, thus became a

pivotal figure in the fall campaign, often standing in for ford at regional events. during the kick off week, carter scheduled an appearance at the darlington 500 stock car race. when they learned this dole had been invited as well, they negotiated during some very heated exchanges an agreement where carter would ride in the rear car twice and dole would ride in the front car once. when dole was introduced, there were some polite cheers. when they introduced carter, the 70 fans stood up, yelled, cheered, and waved their arms in support. dole took his lap around the track and walked up to the v. v.i.p. booth. carter finished his lap and walked into the pit to greet the people. then he went into the grand stand and just sat with the fans

despite very significant concerns from the secret service about his safety. with dole in the v.i.p. section and carter with the fans, the event turned into a pretty masterful opportunity to highlight the differences between the parties. within the context of difficult times, carter had many accomplishments during his presidency that i do think are often forgetten. although president carte e recently is reminding everyone of them with the publication of his diary and comments in the media. the president pushed some very comprehensive energy programs. some of the most comprehensive programs at that time, and through today. although some of the policies would not get through congress, the ones that did such as solar energy have been considered essential through today and the ideas themselves really triggered decades long debate over how the government could

help conserve the resources. he persuaded congress to pass a major ethics reform in 1978 that created some of the most stringent and independent investor mechanisms that have ever existed to monitor executive branch corruption. they launched a new era of opinion luck policy towards the economy that would be expanded into other areas. it was the first effort to rectify taxes and benefits to improve the fiscal health of the program. carter could succeed in politics with the best of them. there's another story about government reorganization that reveals how carter could operate when he was interested in doing so. in december of 1976, right after

the election, he met with john brooks, chairman of the house committee on government operations and told the congressman he intended to seek authority to reorganization the federal government with greater efficiency. the legislation that carter wanted that would give him that authority was not new. in fact, president since harry truman had received this authority from congress. but in 1973, congress had for the first time refused to extend this measure because capital hill was tired of richard nixon 's continual efforts to circumvent the process and was thus opposed to any extension of the power. president-elect carter wanted the authority back. justified the request in the post watergate rhetoric of the time. he wanted to cut federal agencies, combine federal agencies, reduce the number of

civil servants, and deregulate certain areas policy, because he said, most people found the bureaucracy too row mote, too complex, and too intrusive. congressman brooks was not pleased with what he heard from carter. the chairman repeatedly interpreted carter during the conversation to say the government would reorganization according to the interests and vision of congress not the president. pulling out records, governor, lyndon johnson was the greatest arm twisting washington has ever seen. he didn't like too get beat on capital hill. look at this list, he was never successful in getting more than 1/3 of his proposed reorganization plans through congress even with this special procedure. if you win this argument, mr. president, on the legislation, you still won't have anything to

show for it in the end. carter looked at brooks with that steale face and said he promised the american people he would do this and he would not put this aside. the conversation became so intense that carter's advisor stepped in and moved them to a different topic. carter didn't forget the encounter though. on january 7th, he met with the new speaker of the house, tip o'neil and the majority leader of texas. to tell him if they stalled his proposals, he would use every ounce of the power to move bills around them. he singled out congressman brooks. without hesitation speaker o'neil looked at the president and said this would be the worst thing you can do, mr. president. particularly with a fellow like mr. brooks. jack doesn't get mad. you get even.

you don't know your throat is cut until you turn your head. [laughter] >> that didn't scare carter. after his encounter with brooks, carter just reached out who were more disposed to the plan because it promised to reduce big government. carter then used the republican votes he had to win enough democratic votes and obtain a coalition to pass the measure. democrats were scared by that point of looking like opponents of government efficiency, so moore moved closer to carter's position. just one month after the election, congress passed the measure that carter wanted. even brooks went along with the bill with one minor concession that the administration gave him. the institutionalization of human rights in human rights in foreign policies also generated excitement on the americans that had the disillusion of the

richard henry kissinger. no other president has been able to replicate carter. when push came to shove, carter could play well on politics both foreign and domestic. in the panama canal, carter would fly senators there to be lobbied on the importance of the treaty. he addressed audiences in key states and local communities to build pressure on senators using state-of-the-art town hall meeting technology. he exploited conservatives on this issue. it's easy to forget that carter scored big victories in the first two years. after the first 100 days, he had

approval ratings approached 69%. joseph craft noticed republicans and independents like him as well as democrats do. the biggest problem for carter, he didn't enjoy being a party leader. this is a major theme that i explore in the book. like it or not, presidents are the leaders not only of their country, but of their party. if they are unable to build strong political coalitions and through the timing of their decisions, they risk finding themselves isolated and alone when crisis strikes and when opposition mounts. one the problems carter faced was that he picked policies based on his own presidential agenda and policy ideas without giving that much attention to what it would mean for the party and what the political implications would be. again, in 1968, the president

used an enormous amount of political capital to push unpopular panama canal treaties through the senate. the treaties were crucial in carter's mind if the u.s. wanted to rebuild trust among latin americans. but these were never very popular. the only people who give a damn are the ones who oppose it, one white house staffer said. the first lady had warned her husband that he shouldn't touch this until his second term. but she realized her warning fell on deaf ears. the senate did ratified the treaties by one vote. conservatives were able to use that victory despite their loss to rally support, both financial support and membership support in conservative groups. the battle over the ratification energized conservative organizations such as the american conservative union, the conservative caucus, and the committee for the survival of a

free congress who used the panama canal treaties where they lost to raise money. it's not the issue itself we're fighting for, one conservative activist said. this is an excellent opportunity to seize control of the republican party. it's patriotism, one conservative said about the battle. that's the issue that we do best with. the domestic policy, carter won passage on the legislation, but it divided the party along regional lines. congress did enact the ethics and reform act which created the independent council, they did deregulate the social security which generated much excitement among middle and working class americans who were struggling to make ends meet. carter never really recovered from the 1978 midterm elections.

although they retained control and had sizable margin, they only lost three seats in the senate and 15 in the house. a new cohort of republicans closely tied to the conservative movement. several memories who had supported the panama canal treaty were defeated, and they were defeated by the candidates that were bankrolled. we have changed from their ground to our ground, boasted new york representative jack kemp. we have shifted from the defensive to the offensive. as kemp predicted, carter shifts to the right starting in december 1978. he announces that inflation and deficit reduction, rather than unemployment would be his top domestic concern, and the administration calls for sizable

increases in defense spending and a more aggressive posture towards the soviet union. carter also had trouble dealing with congress at the personal level. he didn't like the give and take of legislative politics. the presidents congressional staff famously didn't help the situation. frank moore, the congressional liaison had limited experience on capital hill and constantly made embarrassing blunders. one member was not told that the president would be appearing in their district until they learned about it on the radio. and was quite infuriated with the administration for having this happen. at one breakfast hosted by the president, only sweet rolls were served instead of a full breakfast. the symbol of carter that he was toning down the office. speaker tip o'neil who had a rather large physique yelled i

didn't get this way eating sweet rolls. i want a breakfast. i'm not coming back unless i get a meal. o'neil didn't trust the southern politician. he once said a southern politician was a sweet talker who can skin you alive with his charm. one of carte's most controversial dei guess sos early on was to oppose only proposals for over 300 water projects across the country that president ford had included in his final budget. carter dismissed the proposals as congressional pork and said they were not good projects for the environment. he said 19 of the projects could be cut. congress was furious. these funds were essential to their constituents and one of the people affected was senator

russell long, the powerful chair of the financial committee. the senate would over turn many of carter's proposals. finally, carter had trouble keeping liberal democrats. this is an essential story, i think, of much of his presidency and a president who really wanted to position himself as a centrist and try to go beyond some of the orthodoxes that the party had offered up until the '60s. we see the trouble he had maintaining peace through the democrat with senator ted kennedy. a relationship par -- parenthetically that still bothers following the release of his few "white house diaries." again, carter represented the center of the party. almost an early version of what president clinton would try to do during the 1990s.

he was very conscious and deliberate about saying he wanted to avoid traditional left/right divisions. as soon as he started his presidency, he showed a willingness to challenge like organized labor. he brought that maverick into the white house. he proposed energy conservation which many liberal democrats at the time did not like because of their effect on key constituencies. on foreign policy, again, carter refused to be pinned down by some of the cold war orthodoxes. while he sometimes pleased the left on issues like improving america, standing in central america, and human rights, he could also cause tensions by making tough remarks towards the soviet union. in contrast, senator kennedy of massachusetts represented the liberal wing of the democratic party. he remained committed to most of the policies and the ideas that had come out of the great

society. at a time when some members of the party were backing away from lyndon johnson's legacy, kennedy defended issues like racial equality, voting rights, and antipoverty programs. yet kennedy was particularly dangerous to republicans because he was also a shrewd politician who knew how to round up the vote. he had seen some of the damage caused by the left wing during the 1960s. and he was determined to working within the political process rather outside of it. he also was open to new ideas like deregulation and the economy that didn't fit into traditional patterns of democratic thinking. if kennedy and carter had worked together, the results would have been explosive. but the relationship didn't work. carter was unable to nuture the alliance. in the end, it became a huge liability for the administration. the first clash comes on health care. both liberal democrats in this

period led by organized labor thought that national health care had to be a top priority for the administration in 1977. a single payer system that would cover everything in the country. at first, he decided to postpone health care action saying inflation had to come first. kennedy and carter had a series of very poor conversations ultimately leaveing kennedy to say that carter loved to give the appearance of listening, but nothing more. when carter finally told kennedy in 1978 health care reform for the time being, they had displayed a failure of leadership on this issue. he became very frustrated with the administration's decision to

focus in 1978. they argued they needed to focus on jobs. because they were suffering from staggering challenges. in 1978, he made a speech in which he called for spending cuts, wage and price guidelines, and other measures to control inflation. and the anger from the left was pal paable. kennedy told members sometimes the party must fail against the wind, rather than giving into conservative pressure, as he paid carter had done. after the '78 midterm elections, again, kennedy criticized the administration for becoming too hawkish with the soviet union and for failing to articulate a clear vision on foreign policy. after the soviet union invades

afghanistan in december 1979 and carter takes a tough posture calling for a build up of military pressure in the persian gulf and vowing to combat soviet aggression, kennedy delivers a speech in georgetown where he chastised carter and he warns that exaggeration and hyperbole are the enemies of foreign policy. as carter was forced to confront the movement during the final year of president, and faced the oil embargo and iranian hostage crisis, carter lack support and organizational energy that liberal democrats would have provided. kennedy challenged carter in the democratic primaries in 1980. in march, 1980, kennedy won the new york primary.

which energized his campaign. the primary took place a few weeks after the u.n. security council had voted on a resolution stated that israel should dismantle settle and occupy territories which included jerusalem. when they voted in favor, many jewish organizations were furious. carter apologized, but then secretary of state defended the decision. many jewish voters in new york expressed their anger by voting for kennedy. and they were an important constituency in the new york primaries. of course, there were many other factors at work. because this just reflected the general anger among democrats towards the administration. the primary also reflected a broader problem that by 1980, carter had alienated himself from much of his own party. as "washington post" columnist

david brodeur noted, he sounds like the 1960s voice for liberalism. he called economic democracy and social justice that found expression in ambitious, interventionist, actist, government programs. in the end, carter does defeat kennedy and shows he remains a formidable campaigner. they took a toll on many democrats as they were less comfortable or enthused with this president. in a final jab, he delivered a rousing speech that called on them to renew to the founding principals of economic justice. he reminded the audience that our cause has been since the days of thomas jefferson. the cause of the common man and the common woman. the crowds gave him a standing occasion. madison square garden in new

york city was filled with chants of teddy, teddy. carter's speech pailed in comparison. it started off on the wrong note when the teleprompter broke. the president couldn't see the text and his delivery was mechanical and choppy. the nervous president worried that the audience was not with him. when the speech ended, the machine that was supposed to drop down balloons on to the convention floor malfunctioned and nothing came down. as the convention ended, a large number of democrats appeared on stage alongside carter to show their support and the crowd waited for kennedy. and they waited. it took over 15 minutes for kennedy to finally appear. and reporters took this opportunity as one last time to discuss the tensions that have merged in the democratic party. when kennedy finally talked on to the stage, he raised his fist to the massachusetts delegates. he quickly shook carter's hand

and walked away after a few minutes. kennedy had actually practiced the more enthusiastic embrace, but decided not to do it. nor did he lift carter's arm for the traditional sign of unity. after kennedy walked off, the crowd started to shout again. and at that point, it looked like carter was chasing kennedy down only to have kennedy merely put his hand on the president's shoulder in a very cold sign. carter would never forgive kennedy for failing to heal the divisions that had emerged in the party. i think the comments that carter made reflect how bitter those intentions were. ronald reagan, the republican nominee took close notice. if that's the best they can do in unity, he said, they have a long way to go. when carter conceded, unusually

early in the evening before the voting had ended in california where there were some important democratic congressional races, speaker tip o'neil exploded at white house official frank moore. you guys came in like a bunch of jerks, he said. and i sigh you are going to go out the same way. the story of carter is a story about the continued centrality of party leadership to the person in the white house. especially democrats in a conservative age. more than anything else, it was his failures on that front that put carter into such a deep hole. one that made an otherwise harmless story about a swamp rabbit seem like a symbol for a presidency. as carter himself recently admitted in this spate of interviews, one the things i could have done better, i could have been a better leader of the democratic party. i just didn't feel comfortable. thank you. [applause] [applause]

>> doctor zelizer has degreed to answer questions in the remaining time. will all of those of you who would like to ask questions cue up in the back of the room. we will take a number of them. julian, i'd like to kick off the questions by asking you about carter's post presidency. in your book, you seem to place special emphasis on his work on election observers in the ortaga defeat in his relationship that redeveloped with the george h.w. bush in the white house as kind of a turning point in the -- in his march to become sort of the central player in the post presidency. could you talk about his involvement as a man of peace

and his post presidency generally? >> yeah, carter meetly goes back to georgia and he'll establish the carter center. which is tied to his library in emory university, which he uses as basically a base for diplomatic negotiations. and one the things that i think about carter is that he felt a bit liberated once he left the presidency. given this was a man that didn't like the political part of his job in terms of dealing with his party. he felt freer. once he could actually just deal with policy, say whatever he wanted to say, and not worry about his accountability to democrats or to voters. the work he does in 1989, 1990 is very important. and ironically, it's his work with george h.w. bush which puts him on the scene. not just someone who has a lot

to say about foreign policy, but who could be quite effective particularly in convincing ortaga to accept the results of the election. interestingly, a lot of his, i think, his concern over voting and the election process really dates back to the time in georgia. the story that i told you about 1962, the first run he is exposed to the enormous corruption of the local political system and contests it, i think extends into his post presidential career. he's obviously continued with the middle east with career -- korea and has redefined what a president does. his tendency towards controversy and towards angering many of his supporters have continued, you know, particularly with his statements on the middle east. i think most the policies are really an extension what he wanted to do as a president, freed from the political

apparatus that he was never great at dealing with. >> one of the things that i was interested to hear you talk about is his born again faith and christianity of this over the time. maybe it was a strength but the voters ultimately end up going for reagan. >> that was very important. in 1976 when carter runs, he's very open and very forthcoming on his faith. again, carter used his biography very effectively. a lot of his ads, if you look at a lot of the ads on the web site called living room candidate. they have old ads from every campaign, i think, dating back to '52 or '54. a lot of carter's ads are about him. faith was one the things he told. he saw an opportunity and, you know, hamilton and pat cadel his advisers to attract the voters

who were becoming more political at the time and who weren't yet in either of the political parties. and his willingness to talk about his faith, which sometimes backfired in his playboy interview, but at other times were a very successful, i think, attracted new constituents into the party. evangelicals do go to carter. and it's an important part of his '76 victory. most of the '76 victory was still the old democratic coalition, organized labor, african-americans, but that's pivotal. but 1980 what you have is not that the evangelicals have mobilized. by 1979 and 1980 and the majority. they take many of carter's issue such as the tax treatment of private schools in the south as like the panama canal treaties

ways to rally support for a much more conservative version of evangelical christian politics. by the end, that asset that carter brought with him in 1976 is less important. not because of the people who voted for him had left. but it had spawned in my ways a new population that saw ronald reagan. despite a personal background that's probably not as hospitable as jimmy carter as the candidate of choice. it was very important. you see religion in the political sphere very clearly during that '76 campaign. >> early on you mentioned that obama's contractors will use the jiminy carter analogy. to what extent is comparison to the problems that faced carter

and then obama. >> yeah, the comparison has only accelerated in 2008. i think in the last few months, it's been front and center again. i know the president will be here today. during the midterm which i think bears some resemblance. look in general whenever someone says this president b like president a, it's tricky. obviously the time was very different. obama has a much closer relationship with the democrats, his ratings were higher with them. and i think obama has played a record that she's accomplished. carter did not have health care. that said, i think there are fair comparisons in terms of some of the problems that he faces. the first is the difficulty of communication as president.

there has been a certain failure that obama has suffered from in his first two years to communicate what his policies are about, to communicate a feeling of sympathy and connection on some of the economic issues. whether it's fair or not in the modern media environment is a different question. the problem has been there. carter had the same thing. he would say things and immediately people would see someone that's stiff and removed. there's that. and they are excellent. but they don't have that skill. a second comparison, it is -- again, i didn't write this. i wrote this preobama. post of it was developed. but there was -- i think -- obama has put his party in a difficult position as well. and there's a similarity. obama like carter, went for some of the issues he thought were most important for the country. i think he often put the concerns of the democratic party, the political concerns as

a secondary issue. so by choosing something like health care reform early on, you almost ensured a politically explosive atmosphere. you have to look at the history of health care. if you over load congress with very controversial policies, you don't solve baseline economic issues, you are going to end up in a situation like you faced today. both carte -- carter defeated him. i think those are two similarities. finally, sorry, on that last point, in both presidencies about mid way through the first term, you do see the emergence of a pretty vibrant and effective conservative opposition. carter did trigger this. there were many sources for

conservatism. they used his policies as a way to rally support. ultimately, they used carter himself as a figure to define what conservatism was about. i think you are seeing that through the tea party, people like palin. carter, finally, i'm, but carter's relationship with liberals in the democratic party. not the far left. i'm talking about kennedy here was very strained. and i think it become a problem for carter. he has dismissed it. he has said that liberals like kennedy were too far out. they didn't understand compromise, how to get bills through. but i think in his case, it became a huge political liability by 1980 not to have this support. you've seen the same thing with obama. enormous tensions, not with moveon.org but with speaker

pelosi, and the very people he's been depending on, a series of comments from the press secretary, but him as well, has left son straining on capitol hill. that's where i see some similarities as well. >> thanks for a great talk, julian. in the most recent issue of the nation, rich pearlstein as an interesting survey of political histories of the 1970s. one the common threads that he seems to find in all of the histories is the characterization of the decade as an age of diminished expectations. usually we hear that carter subscribed to that analysis. did you find that to be true? if so, what did you find to be the principal source of his belief in that kind of an analysis? >> yeah, i don't know if carter had diminished expectations. i read the article. and i was thinking about that.

there were certain areas of government that carter did have diminished expectations of what government could do to solve the social problems of what the u.s. could accomplish around the world. but carter was very ambitious as well. he believes, ultimately, that a kind of very complex set of government policies could fundamentally transform how america used energy and america's relationship with the middle east. he believed that human rights was not just some esoteric idea, but it would secure the political rights of people in all different sorts of countries. he kind of recrafts state department, creates new institutions in the state department to make this a reality. that was very high expectations about what the united states could achieve. the ethics reform, which is usually not treated --

historians don't write about this. i think we often forget. because ultimately, many people didn't like how the independent prosecutors turned out. they think of ken star. or lawrence walsh, depending on your political perspective. but it was a pretty ambitious idea in terms of trying to diminish, regulate, and contain executive branch corruption. in the after math of watergate, this was a serious problem. that's a grand expectation about what government could achieve. i'm not sure carter -- i mean i see the image of carter. it's the malay speech that people point to. he's lecturing americans on the need to deal with it and understand the limits of what they are going to have. that said, there's a lot in carter that isn't diminished at all. very bold. i think sometimes it caused some political problems. it was too much for many democrats. this is not what they wanted to

try to focus on. >> dr. zeller -- zelizer, pardon me, as part of the forums, let me congratulate you on a truly outstanding presentation today. could you talk about the strength and weakness with carter's cabinet, relations with the vice president and the cabinet? >> he has two sides of the team. the one side is the georgia mafia. the group of people who had really been with him since 1966 when he runs for congress unsuccessfully. ranges from people like hamilton gerden who is the political master mind, i guess david axelrod of the carter era who helps put together the plan for

1976. he's constantly thinking of the political implications and everything that happened. eisenstat who is his political advisor who he met in georgia. he brings them in. some will have problems adjusting to washington. some don't have a smooth transition for what politics is like in georgia, more familiar with the terrain, for used to the people who was interacting with to washington. they were blind sided by the kind of political attacks they were facing not just republicans as well as the media. that said, people like gerden were very skillful. they put together a good campaign. in the early years, they are guiding him pretty effectively. that's combined with a more establishment. we often think carter just had that team in.

that's often the attack. he just brought the georgians in. they had people like jordan vance. if you had to draw a cartoon, he would be the person. before involved in washington politics since the '60s. guiding him on international policy, brisinsky, the national security council advisor, harold brown, they did bring a wealth of experience. carter allowed them limited room. he was a president who centralized decision making. he ideas famously from everyone. he didn't even have a chief of staff until the very end of his presidency, because he wanted to make these decisions himself. so i think it was a kind of a mixed group he had. i think some the problems that i've talked about were not just his, but the kind of reflection of the people who worked for him. the other interesting figure, i can't get enough of patrick

cadel who is his pollster. the image of carter is the guy that's politically inept. they are tracking every crisis as it happens. there's the amazing thing that i have that i found on the middle east. you know, and we know that carter puts together the camp david meetings, and ultimately brokers the accord with the egyptians and the israelis. from the start, carter and cadel are very calculated about how they are going to sell it to the public, particularly the jewish community. they put together the sophisticated counterlobby within the united states to make sure by the time the treaties are signed or any peace agreement is reached, there would be political support here. it's an incredible outreach program, sending administration

officials to synagogues, constantly bringing in officials from the jewish community, extensive poll data which is not an unsophisticated president at all. it's that team around him, including gerden which is very conscious about working on this. >> given the political climate out of which jimmy carter was elected and parallelling that with obama's election. do you think carter has a chance to be considered a success? or would he had to do something truly amazing? the same way that obama probably won't be considered a success even though he's done a lot. >> he did. the expectations were high. we hear about obama. a campaign of change. that's what carter did. the enormity of watergate was greater than president bush. by the mid 1970s, you had a

period of disgust with the american political system that was as intense as anyone that we have gone through. tails of corruption that are kind of unequal, and carter ran a campaign which it's basic message was trust me, i'm different. that was the core. trust me. and the expectations were quite high that he would be a different kind of politician. from the start, after the inauguration. but a reflection that he understand voters didn't want the same old kind of politician. did this doom him to failure? i don't think so. when i -- i came to it that way. not just the expectations but i had the similar bias. i saw earlier, he had some successes. he had some pretty good poll

numbers earlier on. i think it's more miscalculations politically and a failure to counteract the opposition that was rising rather than a belief that it's impossible to live up to the expectations. rather than the expectations he put forth. >> you mention the iran hostage crisis and carter in the white house. you didn't say anything more about it in the talk. i'm wondering if you were to do some counterfactual history and say carter was able to bring them home diplomatically, was that a difference or a side show? >> he said that. i have the quote. i don't remember it offhand. he's flying home after reagan is inaugurated. those of you that don't remember, the hostages are held

throughout the final year of the presidency. most of the operation involved carter privacy trying to negotiation a deal. there's one failed military rescue effort. carter does negotiation a deal in the final days of his presidency. and it's actually completed before reagan is inaugurated. and in the end, the iranians literally have the hostages sit in the airplane to be released after reagan is inaugurated as a slap in the face to carter. carter after reagan is inaugurated, he's on the planet. i can't remember if it's with cheritin or someone else. carter said if that would have happened a few hours earlier, we would still be in washington. he believed that would have been a turning point. and it would have been. you know, some of the reagan -- we think of the reagan landslide

as unevidentable. we forget in september it was pretty even. where reagan and carter are. it's not until the final week after the famous debate between the two of them where reagan is, i think, pretty decisively the victor. the votes start swing to ronald reagan. and if you read the diaries, which i urge you to read, within the administration, they are still pretty confident in september they have a good face on their hands. i don't think it's not because they aren't sensing what's going on. i don't think the reagan landslide was as clear as inevitable as it later looks to be. had carter been able to broker this agreement months earlier, i think it could have been a big impact. this was the major foreign policy challenge of the day. and if carter had had them released early on, you know, it could h