What is your argument that the Carter presidency was or was not a failed presidency?

Answer 1

It was a complete disaster. The only bright aspect were the Camp David accords- which, considering that both Egypt and Israel were already agreed, makes Carter's contribution minimal.
Carter managed to undermine the position of the US all over the world. By trying to be perceived as "humanitarian" he undermined the allies of the US and handed over their lands over to the enemy- mainly the USSR. The most visible disasters were Nicaragua, Angola and Iran. Especially Iran was important, as Carter's sabotaging of the Shah's government changed the most loyal ally of the US into it's wors enemy- and the source of problems leading to three Gulf wars and the Islamofascist phenomenon.

Answer 2

I believe that in many ways he failed, but it wasn't necessarily his fault. He was too idealistic, focusing more on human rights than national defense. He came into office during the period of time known as the "Vietnam Hangover". Americans would not support an international military adventure. In the interest of promoting anti-communism, we supported leaders of nations who were horrible despots while opposing communist leadership that was comparatively benign. His greatest and only real achievement was bringing Begin of Israel and Sadat of Egypt together for the Camp David Peace Accords and helping them reach an agreement. However, during his presidency, inflation reached double digits, gas prices were higher than they are now in many areas, the U.S.S.R. invaded Afghanistan, and the Iran hostage crisis occurred. To add insult to injury, Carter ordered a botched rescue attempt and Iran eventually released the hostages-the very day he left office. He could have done great things if the situation had been different and he was more realistic about the times.