Carter has been compared to Herbert Hoover, another pr

that's a fair comparison? Why or why not?

over, another president who failed to solve an economic crisis. Do you think

It is not. It is unfair comparison

Explanation:

Though, the two presidents both served in a single term, and failed to boost economic, the situations surrounding them were different.

Hoover was elected at the onset of great depression. The stock market crashed shortly after Hoover took office, and the Great Depression became the central issue of his presidency. Hoover pursued a variety of policies in an attempt to lift the economy, but opposed directly involving the federal government in relief efforts. In the midst of an ongoing economic crisis, Hoover was defeated by Democratic nominee Franklin D. Roosevelt in the 1932 presidential election.

On the other hand, Jimmy Carter was elected during economic stability, but was unable to solve most of the problems plaguing the country during his administration, including an ailing economy and a continuing energy crisis. Carter failed to solve the ailing economy or confront a growing crisis in the Middle East during his one-term presidency because of nepotism. He was unwilling to work with Washington to achieve results. He surrounded himself with advisers from his native Georgia and refused to delegate any authority whatsoever.

The economy continued to slump and Inflation soared to a staggering 13% and gas shortages once again plagued the country after violence erupted in the Middle East. After cloistering himself with advisers for days in summer 1979 in order to determine a solution to these woes, Carter emerged offering nothing more than a highly-critical speech that blamed Americans for causing the present 'malaise' through a loss of moral virtue.