Over the past eight years, many have suggested that President George W. Bush’s arrogance lies at the root of his failed policies. His resolve that we simply “stay the course,” without adjustment or alteration -- as Iraq descended into a brutal civil war -- being the most noteworthy example. Ironically, I wonder whether that same unrelenting confidence -- stripped of the stubbornness -- is exactly what is required to keep America from economic collapse.

Presidents clearly possess an unusual hue of character. John Kennedy once remarked the presidency is not a normal ambition. And confidence is surely a prerequisite. But evenhandedness and boundless self-assurance are not.

I’ve been reading an excellent new biography of Franklin Roosevelt by H.W. Brands, “Traitor to His Class.” Over the past few weeks I’ve resisted the temptation to draw comparisons between Barack Obama and FDR -- but this book suggests striking similarities between the two. Perhaps most interesting: the sense of calm exuded -- a “sturdy, confident tenor.”

Brands weaves the story of Roosevelt as a president who managed to form a unique bond with the American people, a leader whose confidence and steadiness righted a nation by understanding the presidency as “above all, a moral office.”

The economic collapse, it seems to me, is deeply entwined with questions of confidence. Last week, three-month Treasury bills briefly sold at a rate below zero. That’s to say investors bought bonds -- with further demand that could have allowed for an additional $30 billion to be sold --  with the expectation of losing about 1 percent. They did it to have the T-bills on their books for the close of the year, alongside troubling investments that have been deemed “toxic,” to instill confidence in their portfolios. We face a liquidity crisis not because banks are insolvent, but rather because they lack the confidence to lend. We face a volatile market because investors lack confidence in corporations to weather the instability, and lack confidence in commodity prices remaining stable.

After watching Obama carefully for a couple of years now, I’d say he has a bashful swagger, an attitude that swelled after defeating Hillary Clinton in the primaries, but then seemed to retreat in the first days of November -- possibly as the weight of his spoils became clear.

Upon being either celebrated or lovingly jeered, he takes a bashful smile, looking off toward the ground. When confronted harshly in debates, he stared back with a steely poise rather than shaking his head or squirming with frustration.

I’m not so much confident in Obama as convinced that it will require unbridled executive action to return the bedrock of confidence to the financial system -- the same kind of authoritarian management of Congress and self-confidence that led Roosevelt to attempt to stack the Supreme Court. It was an act that required a level of tenacity that even the Bush administration hasn’t shown.

Dick Cheney told reporters Monday he expects President Obama to enjoy the expansion of executive power he and Bush hollowed out over the past eight years. “I think the Obama administration is not likely to cede that authority back to the Congress. I think they’ll find that given a challenge they face, they’ll need all the authority they can muster.”

Brands points out Roosevelt took heed of a previous president’s failure to form a working relationship with Congress. Woodrow Wilson’s failure to advance the League of Nations through Senate approval was the defining aspect of his presidency, in Roosevelt’s eyes, and a defeat he tied to Wilson’s failure to enlist members of Congress as stakeholders in the concept of the league.

Obama will be well served to continue Bush’s mantle as a strong executive; he’d also be well served to take note of the Wilsonian-like failures incurred by abandoning the Congress. Bush’s impotence to push a long promised free-trade arrangement with Colombia through the Senate has been a major force bolstering adversaries in Latin America. Failed immigration reform and a stalled auto industry bailout are two more significant examples.

I worry that the public’s attention span is shorter now than the last time we faced such collapse. That improvisation of bold reforms and restructuring will be curtailed when some measures inevitably fall short. “The country needs -- and, unless I mistake its temper, the country demands -- bold, persistent experimentation ... above all, try something,” Roosevelt said.

Try something, Mr. President-elect. And if it fails, have the confidence to try something else. And something else.