Customer Reviews

One Party Country: The Republican Plan for Dominance in the 21st Century

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

 

 

Doesn't it seem that Republicans always win the really close elections? This book tells us why. Republicans might not be better at governing, but they are certainly better at campaigning, and this book reveals their secrets in a dispassionate but entertaining style. Just as An Inconvenient Truth should be required viewing for everyone who doubts global warming, this book should be required reading for anyone who believes that Democrats will return to power simply by waiting for the dominant party to self-destruct. The inconvenient political truth is that Republicans are decades ahead in terms of electoral strategery. Just as we must understand the causes of global warming before we can effectively address it, so too must Democrats understand the causes of Republican successes so that we do not truly become a one-party country.

Other books have put to rest the fallacious notion of an "accidental president" stumbling haplessly onto the pages of history and then all but delegating his presidency to his advisors, Vice President and Cabinet. Wallsten and Hamburger, in their book, go further than that, laying out in well-researched detail how the Republicans--the politically nimble Bush siblings in particular--mined the losses of the White House in 1992 and the House majority in 1996 in order to discover and apply the lessons learned rigorously, methodically, and ruthlessly in their campaigns, platforms and policies. (When was the last time, readers will ask themselves, that the Democrats made a systematic effort to identify, and incorporate into their repertoire, lessons learned from their failed campaigns?) Although Bush's victory in 2000 might now seem to have been foreordained, it was no small undertaking to marshal the republican ranks during the late 1990s in the wake of tumultuous upheavals that left the conservative movement riven. The authors remind us of the discipline and resolve required in order to reassemble the fractured and dispirited party during this period--discipline brought to bear by the conservative activists and tacticians that comprised the Bush inner circle. In their crusade to forge and maintain a winning coalition, George W. and his advisors faced a seemingly insurmountable challenge: navigating a course between the moderation roundly rejected by the electorate in 1992 and the extremism repudiated with equal force in 1995. The course they chose was innovative, reviving first principles (e.g., hostility to taxation) while simultaneously bucking convention and past party practices (for instance, the divisive use of race that characterized earlier campaigns, rejected by the prescient Bush brothers in a nod to black voters and the increasingly valuable Latino constituency). The authors argue convincingly that, despite the heavy reliance of these refashioned conservatives on the successful motifs of the Reagan presidency, their project was not merely to rehabilitate, but to fundamentally transform the Republican party in ways that would ensure a permanent governing majority. In their opening vignette and throughout this smartly written book, the authors contrast the innovation and enterprise of the conservative movement with the complacency of the Democrats, whose inability to adapt or to discipline themselves in similar fashion causes them ineluctably to fail, time and again, to translate widespread discontent among voters into victory at the polls. Democrats fail to read this book at their peril.

This book must stand as a masterpiece of bad timing. It came out right before the 2006 elections - where the Republicans received their first drubbing. Prior to the election, Hamburger and Wallsten had been on the Book Puff circuit, including an interview for Harper's Magazine where they expressed the view that Republican losses would be limited and the GOP had a shot at maintaining control of both the Senate and the House. On CNN, they stated that their analysis would remain sound even if the Republicans suffered a temporary setback in '06. Then along came '08 - and an even bigger whipping than the last one. Suddenly the buzz is about Obama's hyper-sophisticated used of the Internet. Presumably it is time for Hamburger and Wallsten to write a sequel entitled: How Did We Get It So Wrong?

One Party Country" is one of, if not the best of books on contemporary American politics. It explains how Republicans manage to win elections despite an inability to manage (eg. the Iraq quagmire, the continuing Katrina debacle, non-stop mid-East crises, ballooning federal and trade deficits, and declining inflation-adjusted family incomes). Their "secrets" - managing regulations, hiring, and government programs to aid their supporters and undermine Democrat bastions of power (eg. collaring lawsuits against business was largely aimed at undermining trial lawyer support for Democrats), and mining niches of potential support. (Then if all else fails, they can still draw on election dirty tricks - detailed elsewhere.)

The Democrats' 1964 Voting Rights Act was intended to strengthen minorities' representation in Congress and state legislatures. Unfortunately for Democrats, Lee Atwater saw the required redistricting as a means of lumping minorities together (giving them more seats, but little power) while minimizing their ability to provide wide-spread support to white Democrats (reducing Democrat congressmen and increasing Republican numbers).

Both George and Jeb Bush recognize the growing power of minorities and have worked to develop their support, WITHOUT alienating their conservative base. (Both learned the importance of the latter from Bush I's defeat - largely attributed to his backing away from "no new taxes" due to fear of ballooning deficits.) Both have done relatively well in attracting Hispanic votes and have used education reform to attract minorities and win governorships. (Jeb lost a close '94 governor's race after appearing insufficiently interested in helping blacks; while awaiting the next election he co-founded a charter school in an inner-city area and worked to make it succeed.)

After Bush II's election, Karl Rove visited Republican base groups and requested that each pledge loyalty to Bush and his agenda, in return for which "they would be rewarded." Post Inauguration, he has been diligent in reminding government officials and lawmakers that they need to be rewarding Republican supporters. Clearly this created a priority for political decision-making, and a divisive environment. ("Faith-based" initiatives was part of this political calculus - the intent to to build support among black preachers (opinion leaders in their communities), Christian fundamentalists, undermine traditional Democratic programs, while boosting the private sector philosophy.

Another Rove etc. innovation was to use micro-marketing - eg. Russian Jew enclaves within Ohio, exurbanites, Hispanic surnames), sometimes aided by various business marketing lists. Still another was getting businesses to increase Republican support (eg. DeLay ranked lobbyists according to this criterion, and reminding businesses of where they stood) - sometimes through providing Republican candidates access to their on-site workers.

The most obvious Bush agenda failure has been privatizing Social Security. Hamburger attributes this to opposition from union pension funds dissuading brokerage houses from supporting the initiative, and Bush's loss of stature via Iraq, Katrina, and federal deficits.

Finally, "One Party Country" concludes that because of these actions (and also Republican court appointments) Republican strength will continue after 2008, even if a Democrat wins the White House.

The above title of chapter 5 just about says it all. The Republicans are well organized and the Democrats are behaving like a bunch of amateurs. Ironically, the constitutionally dubious McCain-Feingold campaign finance legislation has severely damaged the Democratic Party. The vast majority of the Republican donations go directly to the party and this allows the GOP to develop top notch databases for its national and local contests. It can also share the information as it deems appropriate. Much of the Democrat contributions, however, are split between the official organization and the independent 527 political groups. The latter are legally prohibited from providing the Democratic leadership with the results of their research. It is, for all practical purposes, thrown into the garbage dumpster after the campaign is over.

Tom Hamburger and Peter Wallsten are obviously left-wing journalists. Their opinions concerning Tom DeLay's legal troubles, the Valerie Plame fiasco, and the Katrina Hurricane tragedy, will irritate the typical Republican voter. These guys even more than hint that conservatives are nothing less then outright racists. I often had to personally control my temper while reading One Party Country. Nonetheless, the good far outweighs the bad. The authors are forced to concede that the GOP, under the direction of Karl Rove and Ken Mehlman, is kicking the rear ends of its Democratic Party opposites. The Republicans are also incrementally persuading more Afro-Americans, Jews, Hispanics, and women to vote for Republican candidates. The Democrats can ill afford to lose even a handful of their previously loyal voters. In tight elections, they could make the difference between victory and defeat. One Party Country is suppose to be something of a wake up call for the Democrats. In this regards, Hamburger and Wallsten are probably wasting their time. The die is set and the United States is likely to become a more politically conservative country. Why am I so optimistic? An unavoidable factor never mentioned by the authors is that liberal Americans are not having enough children! "Alarmingly for the Democrats, the gap is widening at a bit more than half a percentage point per year, meaning that today's problem is nothing compared to what the future will most likely hold. Consider future presidential elections in a swing state (like Ohio), and assume that the current patterns in fertility continue. A state that was split 50-50 between left and right in 2004 will tilt right by 2012, 54% to 46%. By 2020, it will be certifiably right-wing, 59% to 41%. A state that is currently 55-45 in favor of liberals (like California) will be 54-46 in favor of conservatives by 2020--and all for no other reason than babies," claims scholar Arthur C. Brooks. Perhaps the authors might wish to deal with this crisis in their next book.

David Thomson
Flares into Darkness

This book is obviously written by one of the most bitter Republican one can ever encounter in the literary garbage world.

Two reporters for the LA Times have written an analysis of strategies adopted by Karl Rove and others to assure long-term dominance for the Republican Party in the US. Strategies include drawing Congressional districts in favor of Republicans, tipping the government regulatory bureaucracy in favor of business, and appealing to minority voters via the No Child Left Behind Act. It was published before the election of 20006, but is still current.

This book has an interesting spin on the future of the Republican party, however it was written before the last midterm elections so their are part that are a little outdated. I do recomend it.

Interesting premise, not presented in a very comprehensive manner by a mediocre writer, so all I can say I can take from this is that the Republicans don't like the two party system and no longer have a need to pretend they do. So the republicans desire to end American democracy - the Bush administration has already started for them, 1984ish - and willing admit that a plutocracy is their intention, you know, "government for, of and by the wealthy." Big surprise!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

All sarcasm aside this is truly a disturbing book, but it doesn't add a single new piece of relevant information, just a dull rehash - don't bother reading it if you have another book to read instead.