Will Barack Obama be remembered as the Democrats' Nixon?

[Skill and Chance]

Hmmm... to me 2008-2016 feels like 1932-1940, but with the economic crisis delayed until fall 1932.  It also feels a bit like a Bryan win in 1896. 

I think there is a better case for Obama being in the Reagan/FDR/McKinley-T.R. role.  Universal heath care and the banking reforms+finally being able to raise taxes is probably on par with the Reagan and T. Roosevelt economic reforms (although it falls short of the New Deal).  Clinton fits the Nixon or especially the Wilson role better- an economically moderate Democrat breaks a long Republican streak with help from a split field and has a major 2nd term scandal.  W. Bush fits the 1920's Republican mold with lots of scandals and a speculative bubble.   

It all comes down to whether the economy is in a boom by 2016.  If it is, that sets Obama up as FDR.  If the stagnation continues, it points down the Nixon path, but it's going to be a lot harder to bring down a Republican incumbent in 2020 based on the economy, considering what Obama got away with last year.

[Skill and Chance]

If Obama is in the Nixon position in the cycle, the next Republican winner should be the last gasp of the Reagan-Bush SoCon coalition, not a Northeastern/Western moderate.  Maybe a McDonnell/Rubio or Jindal ticket?

[Skill and Chance]

So under this scenario could the next three presidents be:

45. Chris Christie 2017-2021
46. Elizabeth Warren 2021-2029
47. Michael Bennet 2029-2033

Hmmm, I want to try!

45. Marco Rubio 2017-2021
46. Cory Booker 2021-2029
47. Lisa Madigan 2029-2033

Or if Obama is in the Reagan position:

45. Hillary Clinton 2017-2021
46. Susana Martinez 2021-2029
47. Steve Bullock 2029-2037

Clinton as a one-termer might seem strange, but I could see her (or any D) being especially vulnerable come 2020.

[Skill and Chance]

If you're going to extend this metaphor to its logical conclusion, you have to posit that Obama is not only the Democratic Nixon, but he's the inverse Nixon as well.

Nixon governed largely by ceding domestic policy to the Democrats while pursuing a moderate Republican vision of foreign policy, and most of his major accomplishments were White House overseas initiatives, e.g. opening China, that were accomplished without major legislative assistance.

Obama has governed by basically ceding foreign policy to the GOP (and this includes domestic policies that are related to foreign policy, e.g. the surveillance State) which pursuing a moderate Democratic domestic policy without major legislative assistance, through the use of executive orders.

I agree with this.  It feels like Obama is governing as FDR/LBJ on domestic policy and a continuation of G.W. Bush on foreign policy.  Now, Obama hasn't been able to do as much as FDR or LBJ due to more opposition in congress, but it is clear that he would have wanted to.  If there were at least 60 Democrats in the senate and a Democratic house from 2009-2017, we would have some version of single payer, a carbon tax and a very liberal immigration reform by the end of Obama's time in office.