Book Review: The Year of Voting Dangerously
I have never read Maureen Dowd at length, but how could I resist this cover.
Most of us are probably not nostalgic for 2016 just yet, but at some point, politicos will want to examine how Trump got elected, and this will be a good reference point.
Seemingly better equipped candidates like Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio (and even Hillary Clinton) underestimated Trump's populist appeal and 'straight-talk' style.
In retrospect, they would surely not have misjudged him. While I don't think Trump has been able to fully transition those skills as President (I often wonder if Trump had pivoted to the Center, how his approval rating would have changed), one should look at Trump's strengths and how he exploited his opponents' weaknesses.
Whether you like the guy or not, his style brought in the crowds for sure, and the good news for the Democrats, is that no one hanging in the GOP wings looks to have Trump's charisma.
As far as Dowd, she is quite astute. She takes a lot of grief for not seemingly being a big fan of Obama or the Clintons. However, I appreciate a commentator that doesn't give a free pass to a politician that they might agree with. As someone who leans left, her ideas are valid to me. She is rightfully angry at Obama as someone whose attitude toward universal healthcare was 'we wil be happy with what we get."
I also can't help but think some of the shots taken at Dowd over the years are because she is a woman. If she was a man, I can't help but think she would be seen as a Christopher Hitchens type. A respected curmudgeon.
As far as the book itself, it's a mess, and whoever published this doesn't do the reader (or Dowd) any favors. It is not a story of the 2016 election as you might think, but a collection of Dowd pieces. Of course, it mostly includes pieces on Trump and Clinton, but there is no rhyme or reason to how it is collected. A 2012 piece on Obama might sit next to a piece from 2016 Clinton.
Sadly, there is no added commentary, so you could just about google Dowd's archive and have the same impact.
On the positive side, Dowd's relationship with the first President Bush is highlighted often here. It is essential reading on understanding the 41st President.
For that matter, it tells you what you need to know about the relationship between 41 and 43, and why 43 might have governed like he did- shunning his Fathers' advisors (and his Father), instead making bold news encouraged by people like Rumsfeld and Cheney.
The lengthy eulogy of George HW Bush is quite well done. He was a man who respected the office of President above all else (sometimes to his own detriment), and knew that government required real participation, not partisanship.
Recommended for that reason and some of the 'caught in time' aspect, but probably for political junkies only given the limitations I mention above.
Most of us are probably not nostalgic for 2016 just yet, but at some point, politicos will want to examine how Trump got elected, and this will be a good reference point.
Seemingly better equipped candidates like Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio (and even Hillary Clinton) underestimated Trump's populist appeal and 'straight-talk' style.
In retrospect, they would surely not have misjudged him. While I don't think Trump has been able to fully transition those skills as President (I often wonder if Trump had pivoted to the Center, how his approval rating would have changed), one should look at Trump's strengths and how he exploited his opponents' weaknesses.
Whether you like the guy or not, his style brought in the crowds for sure, and the good news for the Democrats, is that no one hanging in the GOP wings looks to have Trump's charisma.
As far as Dowd, she is quite astute. She takes a lot of grief for not seemingly being a big fan of Obama or the Clintons. However, I appreciate a commentator that doesn't give a free pass to a politician that they might agree with. As someone who leans left, her ideas are valid to me. She is rightfully angry at Obama as someone whose attitude toward universal healthcare was 'we wil be happy with what we get."
I also can't help but think some of the shots taken at Dowd over the years are because she is a woman. If she was a man, I can't help but think she would be seen as a Christopher Hitchens type. A respected curmudgeon.
As far as the book itself, it's a mess, and whoever published this doesn't do the reader (or Dowd) any favors. It is not a story of the 2016 election as you might think, but a collection of Dowd pieces. Of course, it mostly includes pieces on Trump and Clinton, but there is no rhyme or reason to how it is collected. A 2012 piece on Obama might sit next to a piece from 2016 Clinton.
Sadly, there is no added commentary, so you could just about google Dowd's archive and have the same impact.
On the positive side, Dowd's relationship with the first President Bush is highlighted often here. It is essential reading on understanding the 41st President.
For that matter, it tells you what you need to know about the relationship between 41 and 43, and why 43 might have governed like he did- shunning his Fathers' advisors (and his Father), instead making bold news encouraged by people like Rumsfeld and Cheney.
The lengthy eulogy of George HW Bush is quite well done. He was a man who respected the office of President above all else (sometimes to his own detriment), and knew that government required real participation, not partisanship.
Recommended for that reason and some of the 'caught in time' aspect, but probably for political junkies only given the limitations I mention above.
Comments
Post a Comment
Contact us