I'm sure that is true. Carter was a move to the right compared to past Democrats, but not nearly as far to the right as Democrats today. However I think the last year of the Carter Presidency represented something new - his support for Volcker, his support for the contras. He tried a more "dovish" approach to imperialism, and saw imperialism weakened in every major foreign policy area. So he listened to hard liners. (I'm probably oversimplifying by just attributing this Carter. But there was a real policy change in his last year. I think his faction hoped to preserved the Shahs regime without the Shah, Somozisima without Somoza. When that fail, this faction moved back to supporting the most reactionary elements. Domestically, the Carter administration was reactionary on economic issues from the beginning. He ran on renewable energy, but governed with proposals for crumbs for renewables and hundreds of billions for shale oil. He was a tax cutter, a deregulator. I won't deny the good he did, establishing a path where draft resistors could obtain pardons. But I won't forget he also restablished Selective Service registration. The U.S. at the end of the Carter Presidency was more reactionary than at its beginning. And executive actions had a lot to do with that. Again not denying the good things he did, CAFE, funding for education, a human rights policy that genuinely saved lives. The Democratic party is fundametally a party of business that pretends to be something else and throws crumbs to the working class. But I think Carter was unusually successful in moving the country to right - further than I think was usual up to that time under a Democratic administration. Though Clinton, and now Obama managed to easily beat his record.
^^^ CB: A key thing about Carter moving to the left from all Democratic Presidents was that he didn't take America to war. From Wilson through LBJ, the last Democratic President before Carter, all Democratic Presidents entered America in big wars. And only Democrats entered America in wars; no Rep Presidents entered America in wars. That didn't change until Bush I. Republicans "entered" us in all the Depression/recessions in 20th Century I believe. Carter basically acted out the "Viet Nam syndrome", acted as if he was chastened about US imperialism by the failure of the Viet Nam war, quite left relative to other US Presidents. In sum, a big left move for a Democrat by Carter was no imperialist war. And he could have invaded Nicaragua. Contras on the border is not invading.
Carter also was generous to the inner cities with HUD monies , etc. , continuing a left move of LBJ. Politically symbolically this was important and left because it represented a Southerner in alliance with big city Black mayors, an anti-racist policy by a Southerner. Very left, not right.Carter also formulated and signed a treaty to turn the Panama Canal to Panama. Quite a left move that Reagan and Bush tried to reverse, with Bush invading Panama. Carter carried out the second round of Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT II), extremely important and very left ( the leftness of this lost on people today because we don't have the Cold War nuclear confrontation anymore today. Superfund law was passed during his tenure.
In the "bully pulpit" vein, Carter continued the themes of self-criticism of America that had been developed by the American New Left in the 60's and '70's. He expressed and confessed often in his speeches to the nation anxiety at many of America's shortcomings. Reagan , coming from the right with imperial and chauvinist hubris, used this in a big way against Carter and it was important in defeating Carter. But in this Carter was left of LBJ and JFK and Truman, the last US Dem Presidents.