Customer Reviews

Deadlock: The Inside Story of America's Closest Election

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(5)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

Deadlock: The Inside Story of America's Closest Election is a workmanlike and emotionless recollection of the events surrounding the most controversial election of the past 100 years. It is a well organized, easy to follow and not visibly biased view of the relevant events leading up to and following the November 7 Presidential election. Seemingly accurate and double checked to a fault, reading this book left me with the impression that I had just read an excellent 275 page newspaper article and not much more. With almost no humor, lacking any sidebar comments, it is a book Joe Friday would be proud to call his own. While I am a Texan and Bush supporter, I much preferred Jake Tapper's Down & Dirty: The Plot to Steal the Presidency. I guess this means that like most people, when push comes to shove, I'd rather be entertained than informed. I do regret this intellectual weakness and like some of the votes in Florida I may change. But probably not in the next 36 days.

This is a clear and factual account of what happened in Florida. Though the final chapters of that episode are still being written as we discover more about what the ballots were really like, this is about as balanced an account as one can get this soon after the events. Some will (one reader obviously already does) find the facts inconvenient, but this is a necessary first step in building the historical record under which both Mr. Gore and Mr. Bush will be judged.

Even though the reader knows the outcome of this book, it reads like a political novel. What makes it even better is that there are reporters and interviewers with established reputations who have helped put the facts together. I suppose whether or not one likes this book depends on one's political views, but in my opinion it cannot be criticized for being slanted - the facts are the facts!

This book recounts the nation's closest election with fascinating detail. The authors' genuine style of storyweaving lends the impression that the fly on the wall must have had a Washington Post tape-recorder implanted in it's wing. Deadlock was not at all like re-reading the same old newspaper articles again; this book casts a fresh look at the dramatic strategy game that took place in Florida. I enjoyed it as a self-professed political junkie and my husband found it equally readable as a historical account of remarkable events.

I don't care what Repubs say, there was no liberal media bias apparent in this book. They showed both campaigns, warts and all, and let the public form its own opinion. The book was a fantastic behind-the-scenes re-telling of America's most recent Constitutional crisis, one that could have disrupted government for years to come. Of course, recent events have taken peoples' minds off of this contentious election, but this book should be pushed as much as possible so people will never forget that every vote actually does count sometimes.

I followed the 2000 election with academic interest during the confusing aftermath. This book (along with "Supreme Injustice") is one of the best on the subject. It reads like a mystery novel and paints the most complex legal arguments very articulately.

A true insiders view of the 2000 election, I strongly recommend this book to anyone wanting to get a good picture of the events that led to George Bush winning the whitehouse, despite getting half a million votes less than his opponent.

I personally think the Washington Post and NY Times are liberal rags that are generally not worth the paper they are printed on. However, in fairness, when they do well I think they should be commended. I read the NY Times "36 Days" and still think that book was not worth the paper it was printed on. It was nothing more than a reprint of their articles.

Conversely, though, Deadlock was a well-written book. Two passages are worth noting. The first is about the book itself. About one-third of the way into the first chapter the book says: "These are the ... decisions, alliances, power plays, snap judgments and personality flaws revealed when a flukishly close election is played out for staggering high stakes. Both sides were nimble and brilliant and occasionally shady; both sides were also capable of miscalculations, divisions and blame. The best and worst of politics were on displayed in those 36 days, and both sides trafficked in each. This is how it happened." Although the Post endorsed Al Gore (no surprise) they tried to be equal in their appraisal of how the two campaigns sought resolution in their favor.

As for the two sides' strategy one only has to look within the first three pages of Chapter 2 where the Post records that the Democrats enlisted the services of three authors who wrote "The Recount Primer". The book reads: "Anyone who read and heeded the booklet could predict how the two sides would play America's closest president election -- at least in the broad outlines. Gore would gamble; Bush would stall. Gore would preach a doctrine of uncounted ballots; Bush would extol the dependability of machines. Gore needed more: more counting, more examination, more weighing and pondering of more ballots. Bush needed it over while he was still ahead." The only trouble for the Gore forces with this gospel was that the Republicans knew the same gospel. The book attempted to show how the two sides played out the roles assigned them.

For a behind the scenes objective look at the two sides, I think the Post did a very decent job. This could have been a... job on the Republicans and conservatives, but generally it was not (though I expected it). It could have been a... job on the Democrats and liberals, but it was not (nor did I expect it). I am not accustomed to this degree of fairness from the liberal Washington Post nor do I expect to see it very often in the future.

Two things struck me while reading this book, the first is that I doubt there is a book out there that is truly balanced and not somewhat biased. The second thing was that Gore really got the shaft, not so much by the recount wars, but by the election official that came up with the Butterfly Ballot. In the history of the USA this decision ranks up there with new Coke and the XFL, what a mistake. As far as the reporting in the book it was not bad for a review of all the articles they had in the paper, but it did not really dig into the particular issues very deeply. I wanted more detail and behind the scenes with both the candidates. I also wanted more details on the court cases; I felt like the sky-high overview of the issues of the cases did not do such an important issue justice.

In reading the book I think a little bit of a democratic bias comes out, just a little, but enough to notice. I also thought it interesting that they had far more details of the Gore group then the Bush camp, it follows the perception that the Post is somewhat liberal in its views. The book is an overview that came out almost 10 minutes after Gore hung up the phone on the second concession call so there are a few more details out now that they did not get in the book. Overall it is a good effort and a readable book, but not the end all be all on the subject.

If I could have given DEADLOCK another half-star, I would have. It's a fine, straight-ahead account of the disputed Florida election, and I've got only a couple of negative things to say. For one thing, there are a great number of characters who pop in and out of the book, and I wish the editor would have inserted a Cast of Characters page. And for another thing -- and this is not anybody's fault -- we know, almost four years later, more than the authors did when they wrote this book, almost immediately after the election. As I finished, I wanted to know the results of all those after-the-fact recounts that were conducted by various news organizations. But I'll have to find another source for those (though it's pretty silly to even care, at this point). Overall, a quick and informative read.

DEADLOCK BY THE WASHINGTON POST IS ONE OF THE BEST BOOKS ON THE BUSH/GORE 2000 ELECTION RECOUNT VOTE.