What do you think?
Rate this book
The Stranger: Barack Obama in the White House
Chuck Todd's gripping, fly-on-the-wall account of Barack Obama's tumultuous struggle to succeed in Washington.
Barack Obama won the presidency in 2008 partly because he was a Washington outsider. But if he'd come to the White House thinking he could change the political culture, he soon discovered just how difficult it was to swim against an upstream of insiders, partisans, and old guard networks allied to undermine his agenda---including members of his own party. He would pass some of the most significant legislation in American history, but his own weaknesses torpedoed some of his greatest hopes.
In The Stranger, Chuck Todd draws upon his unprecedented inner-circle sources to create a gripping account of Obama's White House tenure, from the early days of drift and helplessness to a final stand against the GOP in which an Obama, at last liberated from his political future, finally triumphs.
Barack Obama won the presidency in 2008 partly because he was a Washington outsider. But if he'd come to the White House thinking he could change the political culture, he soon discovered just how difficult it was to swim against an upstream of insiders, partisans, and old guard networks allied to undermine his agenda---including members of his own party. He would pass some of the most significant legislation in American history, but his own weaknesses torpedoed some of his greatest hopes.
In The Stranger, Chuck Todd draws upon his unprecedented inner-circle sources to create a gripping account of Obama's White House tenure, from the early days of drift and helplessness to a final stand against the GOP in which an Obama, at last liberated from his political future, finally triumphs.
528 pages, Hardcover
First published November 11, 2014
101 people are currently reading
651 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 77 reviews
March 4, 2016
For many of us who voted for him twice, Barack Obama has been, at any given time, a superb and disappointing chief executive. That he can sometimes be both simultaneously is a testament to the weirdness and confusion of the American political landscape.
As Obama enters into the eighth year of his presidency---a year in which literally anything could happen as Obama now faces the reality that he has absolutely nothing left to lose---the time for reflection has come; mostly for political pundits, who, for a variety of reasons, feel the need to weigh in on the Obama narrative. Praises and indictments abound, and with the election year heating up, fans and detractors of the president should expect a slew of new books to appear on bookstore shelves.
Chuck Todd, former NBC News Chief White House Correspondent and current moderator of Meet the Press, has written a, for the most part, fair and balanced historical overview of the Obama presidency in “The Stranger: Barack Obama in the White House”. At its best, Todd’s book is an immensely readable and fast-paced reportage of the major events of the Obama years. At its worst, “The Stranger” is a somewhat muddled and schizophrenic nicely-worded indictment of a president that Todd calls “one of the more decent people to serve in the Oval Office” (p. 488).
Todd, who looks less like a journalist than a 9th-grade English teacher with a nicely-trimmed goatee, is nevertheless an excellent reporter. He is, by almost all accounts, universally well-liked by Republicans and Democrats. While perhaps lacking in the charisma of his late predecessor Tim Russert and the over-the-top flamboyance of someone like Bill O’Reilly, Todd has been lauded as one of the best journalists covering American politics today.
Which is why it is odd that “The Stranger” can’t seem to make up its mind whether it is an objective examination of Obama, a harsh criticism of Obama’s faults, or a subtle uplifting of Obama’s hidden strengths, because I don’t think it can be all three.
This is, to be fair, probably not Todd’s fault. If anything, it is the fault of the ridiculousness of modern mainstream media itself, which has become just as polarized as the field of battle it is covering. There is a “conservative right-wing” media and there is a “liberal left-wing” media, and never the twain shall meet. Mainstream journalists like Todd are constantly facing the problem of being labelled partisan for picking on some politicians over others, asking the “wrong” questions, or having the perception that one is “too soft” on certain politicians. There was a time when journalists were supposed to be objective, ask questions, and simply report facts. That time has long since passed.
While Todd’s book is, in my opinion, an excellent attempt at objective journalism, Todd simply can’t help but be sucked into the weird bi-polar irrationality that is American politics. At least he acknowledges this. At several points in his book, he refers to this “irrationality” as a reason for why it is difficult to adequately criticize Obama: some on the Left will automatically scream racism if criticisms seem too harsh while some on the Right will scream “Obama-lover” if criticisms seem too light.
Legitimate concerns, complaints, and criticisms of the Obama presidency can, and have been, made. Unfortunately, just as many illegitimate ones have been levied against Obama, and it’s sometimes difficult to separate them.
Todd does an excellent job of trying to wade through the bullshit by demolishing the illegitimate criticisms while pointing out the legitimate ones. He hastily quashes the “birther” arguments and the ridiculous accusations that Obama is a radical Muslim. While he acknowledges that the Benghazi tragedy and the IRS scandal left many unanswered questions, he points out that, to date, there has been no evidence whatsoever to suggest that Obama was guilty of any wrongdoing in either cases. They are, and should remain, non-issues.
What should be looked at, according to Todd, in terms of legitimate complaints about Obama, is the fact that Obama was, on more than one occasion, his own worst enemy.
Todd rightly criticizes Obama for squandering the opportunity to take advantage of a Democratically-led Congress at the start of his first term. Much of the fault, according to Todd, lies with Obama’s inability to build much-needed political alliances with certain Republicans as well as those in his own party.
Todd writes, “One of the chief criticisms of Obama’s Washington is the president’s inability to get his way either by force or by compromise. He is also criticized for how he manages Washington: he seems unable to either make the old system work or to create a new system to work better. One of the misconceptions of Obama is that he’s not a good compromiser. That’s not true: he compromises all the time; he just seems to get more downsides from his compromises than upsides. (p. 78)”
From the beginning, Todd intimates that Obama’s presidency has been marred by a series of missteps due to backing down and giving in when he should have stuck to his guns. While some of Obama’s decisions to give in to pressures have resulted in good things (Todd singles out as an example Obama’s choice of Joe Biden as Vice-President, which has resulted in a strong albeit unlikely friendship between the two), many of them helped contribute to an undercutting of his original campaign promise of “hope and change”.
Todd notes that one of Obama’s first actions as President---signing the Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009, a bill that Obama adamantly opposed due to the number of earmarks in it---seriously eroded his promise to try and change the way politics are done in Washington by eradicating pork barrel legislation. By caving in to pressure to sign the bill, it sent the clear message that Obama can easily be rolled.
Of course, caving in when a bit more assertiveness was needed and putting one’s foot down when more time for discussion would have been beneficial has been an endemic trait of the Obama presidency, and nowhere was this more evident than in the passage of the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare.
Todd excoriates Obama---perhaps rightly---for the horrible railroading into law and mismanagement of the Affordable Care Act. Yet, at the same time, he lauds Obamacare as a worthy attempt to give millions of uninsured the opportunity to receive health care, which it is.
This is what I mean when I say that, at times, Todd’s book seems a bit schizophrenic. Or maybe it’s just the entire system that is schizophrenic and Todd is merely reflecting that in his assessment.
One of Todd’s major criticisms of Obama doesn’t really seem like a criticism at all. He seems to think that Obama’s inability to “play the game” of Washington politics is what has hindered him the most. Essentially, Todd---who acknowledges the irrationality of Washington---is saying that Obama’s greatest “fault” is his rationality. Sadly, that says more about Todd than it does about Obama, and it also says a lot about the fatalistic “things will never change” attitude which, in my opinion, is the biggest problem among Washington politicians.
Is Todd not-so-subtly saying that, in Washington, the inmates have taken over the asylum? If that’s the case, the title of Todd’s book is sadly rich with irony, as Obama---the stranger---is a failure because he has refused to join in on the insanity.
As Obama enters into the eighth year of his presidency---a year in which literally anything could happen as Obama now faces the reality that he has absolutely nothing left to lose---the time for reflection has come; mostly for political pundits, who, for a variety of reasons, feel the need to weigh in on the Obama narrative. Praises and indictments abound, and with the election year heating up, fans and detractors of the president should expect a slew of new books to appear on bookstore shelves.
Chuck Todd, former NBC News Chief White House Correspondent and current moderator of Meet the Press, has written a, for the most part, fair and balanced historical overview of the Obama presidency in “The Stranger: Barack Obama in the White House”. At its best, Todd’s book is an immensely readable and fast-paced reportage of the major events of the Obama years. At its worst, “The Stranger” is a somewhat muddled and schizophrenic nicely-worded indictment of a president that Todd calls “one of the more decent people to serve in the Oval Office” (p. 488).
Todd, who looks less like a journalist than a 9th-grade English teacher with a nicely-trimmed goatee, is nevertheless an excellent reporter. He is, by almost all accounts, universally well-liked by Republicans and Democrats. While perhaps lacking in the charisma of his late predecessor Tim Russert and the over-the-top flamboyance of someone like Bill O’Reilly, Todd has been lauded as one of the best journalists covering American politics today.
Which is why it is odd that “The Stranger” can’t seem to make up its mind whether it is an objective examination of Obama, a harsh criticism of Obama’s faults, or a subtle uplifting of Obama’s hidden strengths, because I don’t think it can be all three.
This is, to be fair, probably not Todd’s fault. If anything, it is the fault of the ridiculousness of modern mainstream media itself, which has become just as polarized as the field of battle it is covering. There is a “conservative right-wing” media and there is a “liberal left-wing” media, and never the twain shall meet. Mainstream journalists like Todd are constantly facing the problem of being labelled partisan for picking on some politicians over others, asking the “wrong” questions, or having the perception that one is “too soft” on certain politicians. There was a time when journalists were supposed to be objective, ask questions, and simply report facts. That time has long since passed.
While Todd’s book is, in my opinion, an excellent attempt at objective journalism, Todd simply can’t help but be sucked into the weird bi-polar irrationality that is American politics. At least he acknowledges this. At several points in his book, he refers to this “irrationality” as a reason for why it is difficult to adequately criticize Obama: some on the Left will automatically scream racism if criticisms seem too harsh while some on the Right will scream “Obama-lover” if criticisms seem too light.
Legitimate concerns, complaints, and criticisms of the Obama presidency can, and have been, made. Unfortunately, just as many illegitimate ones have been levied against Obama, and it’s sometimes difficult to separate them.
Todd does an excellent job of trying to wade through the bullshit by demolishing the illegitimate criticisms while pointing out the legitimate ones. He hastily quashes the “birther” arguments and the ridiculous accusations that Obama is a radical Muslim. While he acknowledges that the Benghazi tragedy and the IRS scandal left many unanswered questions, he points out that, to date, there has been no evidence whatsoever to suggest that Obama was guilty of any wrongdoing in either cases. They are, and should remain, non-issues.
What should be looked at, according to Todd, in terms of legitimate complaints about Obama, is the fact that Obama was, on more than one occasion, his own worst enemy.
Todd rightly criticizes Obama for squandering the opportunity to take advantage of a Democratically-led Congress at the start of his first term. Much of the fault, according to Todd, lies with Obama’s inability to build much-needed political alliances with certain Republicans as well as those in his own party.
Todd writes, “One of the chief criticisms of Obama’s Washington is the president’s inability to get his way either by force or by compromise. He is also criticized for how he manages Washington: he seems unable to either make the old system work or to create a new system to work better. One of the misconceptions of Obama is that he’s not a good compromiser. That’s not true: he compromises all the time; he just seems to get more downsides from his compromises than upsides. (p. 78)”
From the beginning, Todd intimates that Obama’s presidency has been marred by a series of missteps due to backing down and giving in when he should have stuck to his guns. While some of Obama’s decisions to give in to pressures have resulted in good things (Todd singles out as an example Obama’s choice of Joe Biden as Vice-President, which has resulted in a strong albeit unlikely friendship between the two), many of them helped contribute to an undercutting of his original campaign promise of “hope and change”.
Todd notes that one of Obama’s first actions as President---signing the Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009, a bill that Obama adamantly opposed due to the number of earmarks in it---seriously eroded his promise to try and change the way politics are done in Washington by eradicating pork barrel legislation. By caving in to pressure to sign the bill, it sent the clear message that Obama can easily be rolled.
Of course, caving in when a bit more assertiveness was needed and putting one’s foot down when more time for discussion would have been beneficial has been an endemic trait of the Obama presidency, and nowhere was this more evident than in the passage of the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare.
Todd excoriates Obama---perhaps rightly---for the horrible railroading into law and mismanagement of the Affordable Care Act. Yet, at the same time, he lauds Obamacare as a worthy attempt to give millions of uninsured the opportunity to receive health care, which it is.
This is what I mean when I say that, at times, Todd’s book seems a bit schizophrenic. Or maybe it’s just the entire system that is schizophrenic and Todd is merely reflecting that in his assessment.
One of Todd’s major criticisms of Obama doesn’t really seem like a criticism at all. He seems to think that Obama’s inability to “play the game” of Washington politics is what has hindered him the most. Essentially, Todd---who acknowledges the irrationality of Washington---is saying that Obama’s greatest “fault” is his rationality. Sadly, that says more about Todd than it does about Obama, and it also says a lot about the fatalistic “things will never change” attitude which, in my opinion, is the biggest problem among Washington politicians.
Is Todd not-so-subtly saying that, in Washington, the inmates have taken over the asylum? If that’s the case, the title of Todd’s book is sadly rich with irony, as Obama---the stranger---is a failure because he has refused to join in on the insanity.
April 4, 2015
Yeah...it was okay, but not much more. I'm not sure what I expected, but what I got was a "fly on the wall" look at most everything that made the news about President Obama's run-up to and taking the highest office in the land. Mr. Todd did not trash Mr. Obama and I think his book was fair and neutral. In many places it was boring.
Mr. Todd painted the President as frustrated and impatient not only with his Republican enemies, but many of his staff as well. The thing I learned from this book, if it is accurate, is that Mr. Obama, dispite his obvious intellect, had no experience or skill at basic management.
I consider myself a liberal independent with libertarian leanings. I voted for Mr. Obama twice, without regret. What I HATE, and I seldom use that word, is those people who make it their business to make our President fail. I didn't agree with much that President Bush did, but I did not trash him in public or private. I support the office of President no matter who sits in that oval office chair. Our's is supposed to be a democracy that elects by our votes. If a person can endure all the crap that goes with running for the office and wins, I believe he or she deserves all our support. I am truly saddened that this nation is not what it professes to be. It has evolved into a system controlled by MONEY.
I think the most serious problem in America is the general lack of accountability. Too many knowingly break the laws because they know they can bully or buy their way out of trouble. The system is broken. The bad guys are winning. In my opinion, Mr. Obama ran for president with the naive idea that he could change the system for the better for all of us. Sadly, I think he now knows that cannot happen because too much MONEY is against him. The 1% rules. The 1% care not for the poor and underserved. They would rather build ships and planes and bombs rather than spend money trying to educate the children of the 99%. I'm kind of glad I'm 64. Maybe I won't have to see what is in store for our children and the phucked up world they are being born into.
Having all that out of my system, for now, I'll just say that this book is worth reading, even if you just skim over some of it......Michael
Mr. Todd painted the President as frustrated and impatient not only with his Republican enemies, but many of his staff as well. The thing I learned from this book, if it is accurate, is that Mr. Obama, dispite his obvious intellect, had no experience or skill at basic management.
I consider myself a liberal independent with libertarian leanings. I voted for Mr. Obama twice, without regret. What I HATE, and I seldom use that word, is those people who make it their business to make our President fail. I didn't agree with much that President Bush did, but I did not trash him in public or private. I support the office of President no matter who sits in that oval office chair. Our's is supposed to be a democracy that elects by our votes. If a person can endure all the crap that goes with running for the office and wins, I believe he or she deserves all our support. I am truly saddened that this nation is not what it professes to be. It has evolved into a system controlled by MONEY.
I think the most serious problem in America is the general lack of accountability. Too many knowingly break the laws because they know they can bully or buy their way out of trouble. The system is broken. The bad guys are winning. In my opinion, Mr. Obama ran for president with the naive idea that he could change the system for the better for all of us. Sadly, I think he now knows that cannot happen because too much MONEY is against him. The 1% rules. The 1% care not for the poor and underserved. They would rather build ships and planes and bombs rather than spend money trying to educate the children of the 99%. I'm kind of glad I'm 64. Maybe I won't have to see what is in store for our children and the phucked up world they are being born into.
Having all that out of my system, for now, I'll just say that this book is worth reading, even if you just skim over some of it......Michael
March 8, 2015
This is now quite dated and a slog in parts. But he picks up a star in pre-Presidency years and another for seeing the preconceived concepts held by Obama instead of just his words, and quite early in his first term too. It's too long and at points redundant- loses a star for minutia detail of certain issues like the Zimmerman case in Florida.
He is not anti-Obama at all as most Obama fans score him. If anything, he gives Barack Obama a positive benefit of the doubt repeatedly.
He also notes (most redundant issue) that Presidential success in many cases is almost completely structured on cooperation with and ability to convince legislators. And especially those approaches (attitude, address to define terms) to the opposite political party or blocks of action.
I read this because I viewed very early days of Barack Obama in Chicago, connected to the Regenstein (special library U.of Chicago)and because I have sat in the crowd at Rev. Wright's church (you could feel the hate roll off of you, it wasn't easy to sit there- we were assigned to do so for a MS program project). And still cannot believe the associations that were hidden or strong connections nullified in the long years of first processes in "grooming". That was the word that was always used around him then.
Most of what Chuck Todd foresaw has gone closely to what he noticed were the inclinations.
It's just as much about marketing a façade, product of intention etc. to the electorate in a "feeling" or "empathetic" picture than it is about past or future realities. Appeal to the masses in other ways than substance to practical application experience and record. Those are covered a bit here but other than that it is more a blow by blow of what issues and time response Pres. Obama has given to various issues during his earliest Presidential years. And despite what his approval rating becomes, how he keeps on his own tract or definition of concepts without answering the majority proposed or desired direction.
This is the best analysis of Pres. Obama's terms that I have read to this date. Foreign policy will be, IMHO, much more of a focus in future Obama analysis by historians than this book encompasses.
He is not anti-Obama at all as most Obama fans score him. If anything, he gives Barack Obama a positive benefit of the doubt repeatedly.
He also notes (most redundant issue) that Presidential success in many cases is almost completely structured on cooperation with and ability to convince legislators. And especially those approaches (attitude, address to define terms) to the opposite political party or blocks of action.
I read this because I viewed very early days of Barack Obama in Chicago, connected to the Regenstein (special library U.of Chicago)and because I have sat in the crowd at Rev. Wright's church (you could feel the hate roll off of you, it wasn't easy to sit there- we were assigned to do so for a MS program project). And still cannot believe the associations that were hidden or strong connections nullified in the long years of first processes in "grooming". That was the word that was always used around him then.
Most of what Chuck Todd foresaw has gone closely to what he noticed were the inclinations.
It's just as much about marketing a façade, product of intention etc. to the electorate in a "feeling" or "empathetic" picture than it is about past or future realities. Appeal to the masses in other ways than substance to practical application experience and record. Those are covered a bit here but other than that it is more a blow by blow of what issues and time response Pres. Obama has given to various issues during his earliest Presidential years. And despite what his approval rating becomes, how he keeps on his own tract or definition of concepts without answering the majority proposed or desired direction.
This is the best analysis of Pres. Obama's terms that I have read to this date. Foreign policy will be, IMHO, much more of a focus in future Obama analysis by historians than this book encompasses.
January 23, 2018
It's impossible for anyone who watched the Democratic National Convention in 2004, as I did, to have overlooked Barack Obama's deliberate positioning into the future of his party. I don't know how many of those observers imagined he'd be elected president in another four years, but that's what happened. Ten years after the convention, Chuck Todd produced a book attempting to make sense of the ascension and analyze the resulting legacy. I wish he'd done a better job.
I've been a registered independent throughout my adult life. My family leans Republican, and so in the interests of full disclosure my voting instincts tend to drift that way. But I've never subscribed to the bitter partisanship that fosters the radically paranoid views typical of both parties. (And yes, it's important to emphasize: both parties.) Yet for all his idealism that powered the historic 2008 election, Obama actually rose to political power almost entirely on the back of such partisanship. Conveniently, Todd begins his chronicle after the election, ostensibly to focus on Obama's years in the White House itself. He flashes back at times, but emblematic of his inability at a truly comprehensive vision, Todd continually obscures the finer points when it suits him.
What results is a partisan look at Obama. Well, of course it is. I became interested in reading the book because I thought I finally owed Obama a closer look, a critical look, and the dust jacket made it seem like that was Todd's intention. His introduction made it seem like that was Todd's intention. His frequent criticisms throughout the book made it seem like that was Todd's intention. But, that was not Todd's intention.
Actually, it ends up seeming like a thinly veiled early campaign push for Joe Biden, who didn't run in 2016, and Hillary Clinton, who did (and we all know the results, loud and clear, thank you). He paints a glowing portrait of Biden. He paints an evasive, almost nonexistent one of Clinton. He instead suggests, implies, that Clinton (or Biden) would've been able to fill any gaps in Obama's legacy.
No doubt that's the assessment of many liberals. Wait, I mean Democrats. Because this is a book that takes politics at the party line first, and labels second, as a political tool those labels seldom realize exists. Because this is a partisan book, at one point Todd even admitting that MSNBC is an insanely partisan news organization, part of the company he works for. (One of the more fascinating developments of the news media in recent years has been the struggle to reconcile the partisan MSNBC with the nonpartisan NBC News, which one might argue, has been brutally addressed since the last election, results still developing.) So one has to ask, what business does Todd have, claiming to write an unbiased look at Obama?
The more I read of the book, the more I wondered this. In the early going, it really does follow a track of examining Obama himself, pointing out where the reality stands apart from the myth, as Todd originally posits. But then, increasingly, Todd paints the true villains as mustache-twirling obstructionist Republicans, whom he talks of holding a secret meeting soon after Obama's election where they pledge to work against him at all costs. Where he gets such insight from, maybe it's in endnotes, I don't know. Because all he does is allude to this event. Otherwise, he spends a great deal of time explaining the intricacies of staff movements, additions and subtractions. And counting how and where votes come from on key legislation. He seems positively obsessed with that sort of thing. Of course he is. He's paid to watch these guys in action every day. He gives campaigning the same scrutiny. He's obsessed with politics. He's one of those people who follow it the way other people follow sports. It's a game to him. And like a fan of any given team, he often betrays his lack of perspective.
And what again was supposed to be the point of this book? Right, perspective. And yet, Chuck Todd is just too heavily invested in the minutiae to have even a glimmer of an idea of what that looks like. He becomes heavily partisan, at times, the more he drifts from the inner workings of the administration.
Part of the problem is that he attempts to project a straightforward timeline and themed chapters outlining key moments, at the same time. In the middle of some of these chapters, he forgets his point and just starts harping on the mustache-twirlers again. He glosses over things, again, when it's convenient, and then just starts reiterating his points. In fact, far too much of this book is reiterating points. It becomes nauseating.
But, if he'd taken the time to, with his editors, go over the manuscript more closely, might he have been tempted to...reevaluate his conclusions? He talks in an afterward of the pressure of writing this book and maintaining his day job at the same time. It never seems to occur to him that he's part of the problem, that the obsessive need for content, undigested content, is at the heart of the problem of hyperpartisan politics. Of course, partisan politics have actually defined America all along, and are somewhat obviously the reason the country exists at all. But, c'mon. At some point enough is enough.
Like Obama himself, Todd gives the hype of Barack Obama too much credit, even while he constantly suggests it's arrogance that is Obama's biggest failing. Todd seems unaware that there exists a level of politics beyond the style he covers, a level that explains better than he ever could how Obama became president in the first place. What Todd inadvertently helps demonstrate is Obama's incompetence as president, his inability and in fact disinterest to do much more than make big announcements, get elected, and then grow visibly annoyed whenever something doesn't go his way. This level of petulance, demonstrably in Todd's book, is more harmful in a president than any other character failing, if only Todd, or anyone else, would admit it. Obama wasn't elected to affect change, but to give a party back its power. And in further arrogance, that party believed despite repeated incompetence, that it would be rewarded power once he was gone. Because, as Todd keeps mentioning, history is on its side; the electorate, as Todd inadvertently admits, keeps shifting in a way Democrats are happy to align themselves with, at least nominally. Otherwise, it's business as usual.
And business as usual is the greatest illustrated poison in this book, where politicians base every decision on whether or not it'll keep them in office, where they have no mandate to work for the people who are supposed to vote for them. If Obama is to be judged on any basis, it's on his ability to function within the office he chose to run for, and at the level he pledged to operate. Todd himself says that the immediate legacy of Barack Obama is based on the party of the next president. Two years after this book was written, a Republican was elected. And everyone's still playing the same "shitty options," a phrase Todd likes to point out was apparently a favorite of Obama's.
So I read a book like this and I don't like what I find. Sometimes I elevate the star rating to four, as a kind of acknowledgment that the results are best viewed as a cautionary tale. And yet Chuck Todd clearly intended for his book to be part of the Democratic hubris machine that believed its party had in effect won permanent favor under Barack Obama, regardless of what he did or didn't accomplish in office. So I don't see a good reason to outright recommend such a flawed exercise.
I've been a registered independent throughout my adult life. My family leans Republican, and so in the interests of full disclosure my voting instincts tend to drift that way. But I've never subscribed to the bitter partisanship that fosters the radically paranoid views typical of both parties. (And yes, it's important to emphasize: both parties.) Yet for all his idealism that powered the historic 2008 election, Obama actually rose to political power almost entirely on the back of such partisanship. Conveniently, Todd begins his chronicle after the election, ostensibly to focus on Obama's years in the White House itself. He flashes back at times, but emblematic of his inability at a truly comprehensive vision, Todd continually obscures the finer points when it suits him.
What results is a partisan look at Obama. Well, of course it is. I became interested in reading the book because I thought I finally owed Obama a closer look, a critical look, and the dust jacket made it seem like that was Todd's intention. His introduction made it seem like that was Todd's intention. His frequent criticisms throughout the book made it seem like that was Todd's intention. But, that was not Todd's intention.
Actually, it ends up seeming like a thinly veiled early campaign push for Joe Biden, who didn't run in 2016, and Hillary Clinton, who did (and we all know the results, loud and clear, thank you). He paints a glowing portrait of Biden. He paints an evasive, almost nonexistent one of Clinton. He instead suggests, implies, that Clinton (or Biden) would've been able to fill any gaps in Obama's legacy.
No doubt that's the assessment of many liberals. Wait, I mean Democrats. Because this is a book that takes politics at the party line first, and labels second, as a political tool those labels seldom realize exists. Because this is a partisan book, at one point Todd even admitting that MSNBC is an insanely partisan news organization, part of the company he works for. (One of the more fascinating developments of the news media in recent years has been the struggle to reconcile the partisan MSNBC with the nonpartisan NBC News, which one might argue, has been brutally addressed since the last election, results still developing.) So one has to ask, what business does Todd have, claiming to write an unbiased look at Obama?
The more I read of the book, the more I wondered this. In the early going, it really does follow a track of examining Obama himself, pointing out where the reality stands apart from the myth, as Todd originally posits. But then, increasingly, Todd paints the true villains as mustache-twirling obstructionist Republicans, whom he talks of holding a secret meeting soon after Obama's election where they pledge to work against him at all costs. Where he gets such insight from, maybe it's in endnotes, I don't know. Because all he does is allude to this event. Otherwise, he spends a great deal of time explaining the intricacies of staff movements, additions and subtractions. And counting how and where votes come from on key legislation. He seems positively obsessed with that sort of thing. Of course he is. He's paid to watch these guys in action every day. He gives campaigning the same scrutiny. He's obsessed with politics. He's one of those people who follow it the way other people follow sports. It's a game to him. And like a fan of any given team, he often betrays his lack of perspective.
And what again was supposed to be the point of this book? Right, perspective. And yet, Chuck Todd is just too heavily invested in the minutiae to have even a glimmer of an idea of what that looks like. He becomes heavily partisan, at times, the more he drifts from the inner workings of the administration.
Part of the problem is that he attempts to project a straightforward timeline and themed chapters outlining key moments, at the same time. In the middle of some of these chapters, he forgets his point and just starts harping on the mustache-twirlers again. He glosses over things, again, when it's convenient, and then just starts reiterating his points. In fact, far too much of this book is reiterating points. It becomes nauseating.
But, if he'd taken the time to, with his editors, go over the manuscript more closely, might he have been tempted to...reevaluate his conclusions? He talks in an afterward of the pressure of writing this book and maintaining his day job at the same time. It never seems to occur to him that he's part of the problem, that the obsessive need for content, undigested content, is at the heart of the problem of hyperpartisan politics. Of course, partisan politics have actually defined America all along, and are somewhat obviously the reason the country exists at all. But, c'mon. At some point enough is enough.
Like Obama himself, Todd gives the hype of Barack Obama too much credit, even while he constantly suggests it's arrogance that is Obama's biggest failing. Todd seems unaware that there exists a level of politics beyond the style he covers, a level that explains better than he ever could how Obama became president in the first place. What Todd inadvertently helps demonstrate is Obama's incompetence as president, his inability and in fact disinterest to do much more than make big announcements, get elected, and then grow visibly annoyed whenever something doesn't go his way. This level of petulance, demonstrably in Todd's book, is more harmful in a president than any other character failing, if only Todd, or anyone else, would admit it. Obama wasn't elected to affect change, but to give a party back its power. And in further arrogance, that party believed despite repeated incompetence, that it would be rewarded power once he was gone. Because, as Todd keeps mentioning, history is on its side; the electorate, as Todd inadvertently admits, keeps shifting in a way Democrats are happy to align themselves with, at least nominally. Otherwise, it's business as usual.
And business as usual is the greatest illustrated poison in this book, where politicians base every decision on whether or not it'll keep them in office, where they have no mandate to work for the people who are supposed to vote for them. If Obama is to be judged on any basis, it's on his ability to function within the office he chose to run for, and at the level he pledged to operate. Todd himself says that the immediate legacy of Barack Obama is based on the party of the next president. Two years after this book was written, a Republican was elected. And everyone's still playing the same "shitty options," a phrase Todd likes to point out was apparently a favorite of Obama's.
So I read a book like this and I don't like what I find. Sometimes I elevate the star rating to four, as a kind of acknowledgment that the results are best viewed as a cautionary tale. And yet Chuck Todd clearly intended for his book to be part of the Democratic hubris machine that believed its party had in effect won permanent favor under Barack Obama, regardless of what he did or didn't accomplish in office. So I don't see a good reason to outright recommend such a flawed exercise.
March 7, 2017
While this is a detailed record of some inside information about President Obama's service, Todd reverts to the Beltway journalist's need to find criticism whether merited or not. As informed as Mr Todd claims to be he fundamentally understates the depth of the opposition President Obama has had to contend. Concluding that arrogance is a prevailing problem of this President is not supported by the facts. What the author assumes as his premise in many instances he ignores in the President's opponents or turns against as a basis for criticizing the President. I cannot tell if Mr Todd was personally insulted by the President, insulted as a media insider, is offended by what Barrack Obama stands for or just thought he could sell more books. Books about history written by journalists always mischaracterize the media role in governance or are in denial about it. I wished for so much more from Chuck Todd.
August 3, 2015
This book is about 16 and a half hours in audio format. I made it through about six before I gave up. It takes a lot for me to give up on a book and I really tried to stick this one out. I just couldn't do it anymore. The following is my review of the first third-ish of the book
The problem is that the book reads like a high school text book or a literature review of events. I assumed from the description of the book (a behind the scenes look at Obama's White House) that Chuck Todd would reveal something unknown and gripping about Obama's life as president. The narrative started out by discussing how few people really know him and how tightly managed he has kept his public image. Is it silly to think I would get some inside information to would give me an idea of the real man behind the image? If the first several hours of the book are any indication, yes, it was silly. Todd moves away from this premise immediately and begins describing his campaigns and presidency from the perspective of who he worked with and whether or not Obama got along with those people. It was maddening. I kept waiting for the book to be something other than a list of policies, events, and committees and what the superficial dynamics were between the people involved.
I gave this book two stars because it was obviously well researched, but it was terribly executed.
The problem is that the book reads like a high school text book or a literature review of events. I assumed from the description of the book (a behind the scenes look at Obama's White House) that Chuck Todd would reveal something unknown and gripping about Obama's life as president. The narrative started out by discussing how few people really know him and how tightly managed he has kept his public image. Is it silly to think I would get some inside information to would give me an idea of the real man behind the image? If the first several hours of the book are any indication, yes, it was silly. Todd moves away from this premise immediately and begins describing his campaigns and presidency from the perspective of who he worked with and whether or not Obama got along with those people. It was maddening. I kept waiting for the book to be something other than a list of policies, events, and committees and what the superficial dynamics were between the people involved.
I gave this book two stars because it was obviously well researched, but it was terribly executed.
February 3, 2016
This book tells a sad story. Personalities trump the advancement of policies. And the polices themselves are based on political advancement not a principals. President Obama is both naive and arrogant. An orator that has skillfully manipulated "identity" electoral politics to achieve great success. But as a governing executive he is an amateur.
It is true that Obama's politicial opponents are hard cases, illogical, and at times unreasonable, but nonetheless the President was elected to lead all the people not just his own party. The promise and potential of a transformative Obama administration is now an unfulfilled and broken promise. The author tells an accurate, sad and disturbing story of modern Washington gridlock. And Obama is a President with a magnificent future behind him.
It is true that Obama's politicial opponents are hard cases, illogical, and at times unreasonable, but nonetheless the President was elected to lead all the people not just his own party. The promise and potential of a transformative Obama administration is now an unfulfilled and broken promise. The author tells an accurate, sad and disturbing story of modern Washington gridlock. And Obama is a President with a magnificent future behind him.
May 14, 2015
This is not a particularly revelatory look at the Obama presidency. It by no means will serve as a definitive appraisal of his time in the White House. This book reads like a Washington insider account of his presidency rather than a dispassionate analysis of financial, military and historical trends the United States faced during the first 6 years of the Obama presidency. Todd seems to blame Obama for not cultivating personal relationships and yet castigates him for not fulfilling a campaign promise of changing Washington. His armchair psychological analysis of Obama seems to preoccupy the entire narrative of the book; wondering how someone who doesn't like stroking massive egos and practicing retail politics like other legislators could have risen to be president of the United States. It's really not that hard to understand if Obama's personality is, in fact, similar to what Todd writes--cool, analytical, removed. Think of the difference between a CEO who sets strategy and vision and a COO who runs operations. Perhaps his cabinet was designed to complement the aspects of his management skills that weren't as strong. Instead of not groveling to a party that was set on destroying his presidency from the outset, perhaps he astutely concluded that he would develop other tactics to accomplish his goals.
In conclusion, this book is more of a reflection about the personality and horse race mentality of the Washington press corps then it is a sober rendering of the Obama presidency. There is very little international analysis, particularly how does the United States decide on military intervention versus economic sanctions and the philosophy of the Pentagon, the Department of Defense and the White House as it considers taking the lead in interventionist activities versus more of a policing and multi-lateral approach. There is a very rudimentary rendering of economic policy that influenced the decisions around the financial crisis; very little framing of major demographic and economic trends in the United States and how that may impact governing going forward, etc. Todd's book is analogous to a Sunday morning television talk show episode--superficial infotainment that is easily forgotten once the show (book) is finished.
In conclusion, this book is more of a reflection about the personality and horse race mentality of the Washington press corps then it is a sober rendering of the Obama presidency. There is very little international analysis, particularly how does the United States decide on military intervention versus economic sanctions and the philosophy of the Pentagon, the Department of Defense and the White House as it considers taking the lead in interventionist activities versus more of a policing and multi-lateral approach. There is a very rudimentary rendering of economic policy that influenced the decisions around the financial crisis; very little framing of major demographic and economic trends in the United States and how that may impact governing going forward, etc. Todd's book is analogous to a Sunday morning television talk show episode--superficial infotainment that is easily forgotten once the show (book) is finished.
February 1, 2015
This book is both maddening and depressing. Chuck Todd does an unfortunately fantastic job of laying out all of the failures of the Obama administration. Todd sets out to answer the question of how it is that Obama could be such a brilliant campaigner and such a poorly performing president. Todd's answer is reflected in the title of the book: "One could win an election running as an outsider, someone uncorrupted by the Washington swamp, but once there, the outsider finds there is no way into the rooms where decisions are made. Before you can teach the town to speak a foreign language you have to be fluent in its native tongue." He claims that Obama simply has never mastered the ins and outs of Washington politics, and is too impatient and condescending to do so. As Todd observes, "More than a few of his advisors, even those closest to him, have wondered how someone who disdains retail politics could have risen so high up in the ranks."
Nothing really earth-shattering in this book, and most of it is a chronological re-hash of Obama's years in office. Sadly, the book almost seems to dwell on all the low points, but really, it's because Obama has had so few wins. Even his signature win, the Affordable Care Act, was won so sloppily, that it seems like a loss.
That said, Todd does end the book on a positive note: "Despite it all, Barack Obama believes he has left the country in a position to become a better place, should his vision work. And framed that way, the future is brighter for Obama’s place in the history books. Whether it’s the energy advancements the stimulus bill funded (simply the aggressive fuel mileage standards might do the trick), the health care benefits that, no matter their birthing pains, will be available to future generations, or the engagement with an emerging China, the administration has put in place building blocks that can become a lasting legacy."
A well-written and engaging chronicle, but ultimately, quite disturbing.
Nothing really earth-shattering in this book, and most of it is a chronological re-hash of Obama's years in office. Sadly, the book almost seems to dwell on all the low points, but really, it's because Obama has had so few wins. Even his signature win, the Affordable Care Act, was won so sloppily, that it seems like a loss.
That said, Todd does end the book on a positive note: "Despite it all, Barack Obama believes he has left the country in a position to become a better place, should his vision work. And framed that way, the future is brighter for Obama’s place in the history books. Whether it’s the energy advancements the stimulus bill funded (simply the aggressive fuel mileage standards might do the trick), the health care benefits that, no matter their birthing pains, will be available to future generations, or the engagement with an emerging China, the administration has put in place building blocks that can become a lasting legacy."
A well-written and engaging chronicle, but ultimately, quite disturbing.
February 15, 2015
This book is very well-written from a prose-style perspective, clear and economical. It also gives as much and more detail as any political junkie could want. That is where it begins to break down - I'm not that big of a junkie. Where the book fails the most in my eyes is in balance. Todd identifies the weaknesses of Barack Obama, an inexperienced Washington outsider, as a president, but mainly on Obama's own terms. Yes, according to Todd, Obama is too rational and coolly intellectual to partake in the rough and tumble of Washington politics. And yes, Republicans made it hard for him. That's like saying, in a job interview, that your weakness is you work too hard. So the balance isn't really there. But as in previous political books I've read, mainly Woodward's, I came away with more respect for Joe Biden. Too bad he's missed his time to run for president.
February 24, 2015
"The Stranger", by Chuck Todd is a nice review of the political events from 2008 through 2014. While ostensibly about President Obama, the book highlights the problems Obama had with Republican Congressional leaders, and also insights on his top advisors. It's not too in depth regarding Obama, but there's enough background to gain an understanding of his personality and leadership style.
There have been many questions as to whether Obama's leadership style, or planned obstruction by the Republican leadership, were most responsible for a disappointing presidency. This book provides supporters of either side of that argument a little something to support their position.
On the Obama leadership style, the author discusses Obama's light resume for highest executive office, and his relative inexperience in terms of how things get done in Washington. His heart may have been in the right place, but he was naive to expect that his hope, expectation, and wishes for better cooperation between Democrats and Republicans was actually going to happen. And Obama seemed to sense that continued outreach to the GOP leadership would not produce results, and made decisions to go it alone.
On Republican obstruction, one supporting example provided was the well known quote of Senator Mitch McConnell stating that his goal as Senate Minority Leader was to make Obama a one-term President. That makes sense from a partisian political perspective, but may not be the best way to get things done in Congress. Another interesting example given was that on the very day Obama was inaugurated in January, 2009, Republic Party leaders were meeting in Washington D.C. to plan their response to their election defeat. Leaders included a number of GOP Senators, along with Newt Gingrich, Minority Whip Eric Cantor and his assistant Kevin McCarthy, Wisconsin Rep. and later GOP Vice-President Candidate Paul Ryan, and GOP pollster Frank Luntz. What came out of that meeting, as Obama was just taking office, was an agreement that if the Republicans acted like a minority party under Obama, they'd remain a party in the minority. To reverse that, they determined that they needed to show strength, and they'd do that by opposing every Obama and Democratic initiative at every turn. Congressional leaders McConnell, Boehner, and minority Whip Cantor were effective in keeping party members in-line, essentially opposing every Obama initiative. Perhaps the worst example of this, as detailed in Thomas E. Mann's book, "It's Even Worse Than it Looks", was the vote on an amendment intended to improve federal fiscal health. The proposal, a "Bipartisan Task Force for Responsible Fiscal Action", was co-sponsored by the top Democrat and the top Republican on the Senate Budget Committee, Kent Conrad, D-N.D., and Judd Gregg, R-N.H. It would have established an 18-member bipartisan commission to study the current and future fiscal condition of the federal government and make recommendations about how revenues and expenses can be brought into line. Those recommendations would be fast-tracked to the House and Senate floors under a special procedure. This approach was supported by Senator Mitch McConnell on May 12, 2009 in a Senate floor session to discuss the Medicare Trustee's Report, in which he said, "We must address the issue of entitlement spending now, before it is too late...", and that "... the best way to address the crisis is the Conrad-Gregg proposal, which would provide an expedited pathway for fixing these profound long-term challenges". McConnell also advocated the Conrad-Gregg approach in comments at a Feb. 23, 2009, White House summit on fiscal responsibility.
However, in January, 2010, when the Conrad-Gregg bill came for a vote in the Senate, it fell seven votes shy of the Senate's 60-vote threshold for passage. McConnell and six other GOP senators who had co-sponsored the bill all voted AGAINST the bill, even though they had co-sponsored the bill, once Obama came out in favor of it. In a scathing Washington Post op-ed column on Feb. 1, 2010, Fred Hiatt, referring to McConnell's "NO" vote on the commission, wrote that "no single vote by any single senator could possibly illustrate everything that is wrong with Washington today. No single vote could embody the full cynicism and cowardice of our political elite at its worst, or explain by itself why problems do not get solved. But here's one that comes close." Hiatt continued that "it's impossible to avoid the conclusion that the only thing that changed since May is the political usefulness of the proposal to McConnell's partisan goals. He was happy to claim fiscal responsibility while beating up Obama for fiscal recklessness. But when Obama endorsed the idea, as he did on the Saturday before the vote -- and when the commission actually, against all odds, had the wisp of a chance of winning the needed 60 Senate votes -- McConnell bailed."
That decision may have been been sound politically, but is hardly the way to run a Country. It appears that this is the new way of Congress, and a good indication of why the Country as a whole hates politics and give Congress such a low approval rating year after year.
There have been many questions as to whether Obama's leadership style, or planned obstruction by the Republican leadership, were most responsible for a disappointing presidency. This book provides supporters of either side of that argument a little something to support their position.
On the Obama leadership style, the author discusses Obama's light resume for highest executive office, and his relative inexperience in terms of how things get done in Washington. His heart may have been in the right place, but he was naive to expect that his hope, expectation, and wishes for better cooperation between Democrats and Republicans was actually going to happen. And Obama seemed to sense that continued outreach to the GOP leadership would not produce results, and made decisions to go it alone.
On Republican obstruction, one supporting example provided was the well known quote of Senator Mitch McConnell stating that his goal as Senate Minority Leader was to make Obama a one-term President. That makes sense from a partisian political perspective, but may not be the best way to get things done in Congress. Another interesting example given was that on the very day Obama was inaugurated in January, 2009, Republic Party leaders were meeting in Washington D.C. to plan their response to their election defeat. Leaders included a number of GOP Senators, along with Newt Gingrich, Minority Whip Eric Cantor and his assistant Kevin McCarthy, Wisconsin Rep. and later GOP Vice-President Candidate Paul Ryan, and GOP pollster Frank Luntz. What came out of that meeting, as Obama was just taking office, was an agreement that if the Republicans acted like a minority party under Obama, they'd remain a party in the minority. To reverse that, they determined that they needed to show strength, and they'd do that by opposing every Obama and Democratic initiative at every turn. Congressional leaders McConnell, Boehner, and minority Whip Cantor were effective in keeping party members in-line, essentially opposing every Obama initiative. Perhaps the worst example of this, as detailed in Thomas E. Mann's book, "It's Even Worse Than it Looks", was the vote on an amendment intended to improve federal fiscal health. The proposal, a "Bipartisan Task Force for Responsible Fiscal Action", was co-sponsored by the top Democrat and the top Republican on the Senate Budget Committee, Kent Conrad, D-N.D., and Judd Gregg, R-N.H. It would have established an 18-member bipartisan commission to study the current and future fiscal condition of the federal government and make recommendations about how revenues and expenses can be brought into line. Those recommendations would be fast-tracked to the House and Senate floors under a special procedure. This approach was supported by Senator Mitch McConnell on May 12, 2009 in a Senate floor session to discuss the Medicare Trustee's Report, in which he said, "We must address the issue of entitlement spending now, before it is too late...", and that "... the best way to address the crisis is the Conrad-Gregg proposal, which would provide an expedited pathway for fixing these profound long-term challenges". McConnell also advocated the Conrad-Gregg approach in comments at a Feb. 23, 2009, White House summit on fiscal responsibility.
However, in January, 2010, when the Conrad-Gregg bill came for a vote in the Senate, it fell seven votes shy of the Senate's 60-vote threshold for passage. McConnell and six other GOP senators who had co-sponsored the bill all voted AGAINST the bill, even though they had co-sponsored the bill, once Obama came out in favor of it. In a scathing Washington Post op-ed column on Feb. 1, 2010, Fred Hiatt, referring to McConnell's "NO" vote on the commission, wrote that "no single vote by any single senator could possibly illustrate everything that is wrong with Washington today. No single vote could embody the full cynicism and cowardice of our political elite at its worst, or explain by itself why problems do not get solved. But here's one that comes close." Hiatt continued that "it's impossible to avoid the conclusion that the only thing that changed since May is the political usefulness of the proposal to McConnell's partisan goals. He was happy to claim fiscal responsibility while beating up Obama for fiscal recklessness. But when Obama endorsed the idea, as he did on the Saturday before the vote -- and when the commission actually, against all odds, had the wisp of a chance of winning the needed 60 Senate votes -- McConnell bailed."
That decision may have been been sound politically, but is hardly the way to run a Country. It appears that this is the new way of Congress, and a good indication of why the Country as a whole hates politics and give Congress such a low approval rating year after year.
March 12, 2015
The Stranger: Barak Obama in the White House by Chuck Todd
Chuck Todd’s book describing the ups and downs of the Obama administration is a good overview of what have been troublesome years in America. A better subtitle would have been “Profiles in Scourge.” OK, so let’s be honest. The Obama Administration has not gone the way a lot of us thought it would. Despite all the Hope, there really has not been much Change. For those who promoted the highly publicized opposition to this president, they probably think that is a good thing, and wish there was even less change. Full disclosure: I consider myself liberal. The morning after the 2008 election, I emailed a very disappointed conservative friend of mine that I wasn’t just Liberal, I was “libby libby libby liberal.” More importantly, I try to be honest. I believe The Stranger by well-known campaign advisor, political journalist, and Meet the Press jockey, Chuck Todd, is also honest in its appraisal of the Obama Administration. Judging by the well documented footnotes, he is also truthful.
We get insights into what has been a very opaque White House. Todd explains with significant detail, West Wing events and personalities contributing to the disconnect between Democrats and Republicans, as well as between Democrats and Democrats on either end of Pennsylvania Avenue. Much of this the result of a President who not only has the reputation, but also the reality of being intellectually reserved and isolated. Despite his constant effort to deal with the established order on his own terms, time after time the President retrenches in the face of daunting circumstances, and base ad hominem attacks. The “end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn-out dogmas” proclaimed in the 2009 Inauguration speech never came to pass. With precision, Todd explains where the White House has faltered with setbacks such as the NSA disclosures by Edward Snowden, Benghazi, and Obama's overconfidence in his first debate with Mitt Romney.
Yet, some significant (albeit controversial) victories for Obama’s Administration remain and are detailed in The Stranger – overhauling health care, ending the war in Iraq, the 2009 economic stimulus bill, etc. Ultimately, as Todd frequently illustrates in The Stranger, the greatest changes may have come from Obama, himself, or his close advisors. Naturally, much of what Todd reviews is about that recently popular catchphrase, “optics.”
Then there are the occasionally noble moments in this presidency when Obama took positions that he knew would not be popular either conservatives or liberals – gun control after the Newtown, Connecticut murders, gay marriage, or acknowledging obstinate prejudice in America.
Occasionally, Todd will skim over an explanatory detail – the effective result of the IRS targeting non-profit political action committees – or go off on extremely long tangents about political motivations in the chapter about the mistaken arrest of a black Harvard professor, and the killing of Treyvon Martin.
I sometimes wonder at the level of rancor, and malicious intentions of a group of legislators and interest groups that seem hell bent on preventing any successes with this particular president, this particular man. There is a question there that many of us hesitate to ask, with an answer many of us do not want to hear.
All of which begs the question: can anyone change how things are done in Washington? Perhaps the grand machine that has been built on the Potomac, runs the country, and influences much of the world cannot be changed, cannot be saved from itself. Has the Military-Industrial-Financial Complex become a Cyborg reality on auto-pilot that is “Too big to change?” Perhaps much more outside of the Capital Beltway has to change before anything within Washington changes its ways.
Chuck Todd’s book describing the ups and downs of the Obama administration is a good overview of what have been troublesome years in America. A better subtitle would have been “Profiles in Scourge.” OK, so let’s be honest. The Obama Administration has not gone the way a lot of us thought it would. Despite all the Hope, there really has not been much Change. For those who promoted the highly publicized opposition to this president, they probably think that is a good thing, and wish there was even less change. Full disclosure: I consider myself liberal. The morning after the 2008 election, I emailed a very disappointed conservative friend of mine that I wasn’t just Liberal, I was “libby libby libby liberal.” More importantly, I try to be honest. I believe The Stranger by well-known campaign advisor, political journalist, and Meet the Press jockey, Chuck Todd, is also honest in its appraisal of the Obama Administration. Judging by the well documented footnotes, he is also truthful.
We get insights into what has been a very opaque White House. Todd explains with significant detail, West Wing events and personalities contributing to the disconnect between Democrats and Republicans, as well as between Democrats and Democrats on either end of Pennsylvania Avenue. Much of this the result of a President who not only has the reputation, but also the reality of being intellectually reserved and isolated. Despite his constant effort to deal with the established order on his own terms, time after time the President retrenches in the face of daunting circumstances, and base ad hominem attacks. The “end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn-out dogmas” proclaimed in the 2009 Inauguration speech never came to pass. With precision, Todd explains where the White House has faltered with setbacks such as the NSA disclosures by Edward Snowden, Benghazi, and Obama's overconfidence in his first debate with Mitt Romney.
Yet, some significant (albeit controversial) victories for Obama’s Administration remain and are detailed in The Stranger – overhauling health care, ending the war in Iraq, the 2009 economic stimulus bill, etc. Ultimately, as Todd frequently illustrates in The Stranger, the greatest changes may have come from Obama, himself, or his close advisors. Naturally, much of what Todd reviews is about that recently popular catchphrase, “optics.”
Then there are the occasionally noble moments in this presidency when Obama took positions that he knew would not be popular either conservatives or liberals – gun control after the Newtown, Connecticut murders, gay marriage, or acknowledging obstinate prejudice in America.
Occasionally, Todd will skim over an explanatory detail – the effective result of the IRS targeting non-profit political action committees – or go off on extremely long tangents about political motivations in the chapter about the mistaken arrest of a black Harvard professor, and the killing of Treyvon Martin.
I sometimes wonder at the level of rancor, and malicious intentions of a group of legislators and interest groups that seem hell bent on preventing any successes with this particular president, this particular man. There is a question there that many of us hesitate to ask, with an answer many of us do not want to hear.
All of which begs the question: can anyone change how things are done in Washington? Perhaps the grand machine that has been built on the Potomac, runs the country, and influences much of the world cannot be changed, cannot be saved from itself. Has the Military-Industrial-Financial Complex become a Cyborg reality on auto-pilot that is “Too big to change?” Perhaps much more outside of the Capital Beltway has to change before anything within Washington changes its ways.
February 23, 2015
I was wondering what current journalists thought of the current occupier of the White House. This book tells you (I think) what Chuck Todd's opinion is.
I put in "I think" because it is not always clear from his book. The main reason is that the prose plods along in so many places that my attention wandered. Maybe it was because Todd could not write or tell the story straight. For example, he makes a point of saying how Obama wanted to reach out to Republicans early in both terms, but then he relates only those anecdotes where Obama quickly rejected some overtures from the opposing party and quickly stopped his efforts.
Still some interesting reading. Todd relates that Obama was so sure of victory in 2012 and so down on Mitt Romney that he did not make more than the slightest effort to prep for their first debate, where Romney trounced the President. Also, Obama was a late comer to health care reform, and mentioned it for the first time in a speech only because it was a required element of the Democratic spiel, the issue which will be his legacy. Biden got the nod for Veep a lot for the fact that he is a baby-kissing, hugging, pat on the back pol while the more staid Obama is uncomfortable with more than a handshake. Finally, Obama gets credit for killing Osama bin Laden, but he is a hands-off foreign policy president--he made the decision to go based on his subordinates much more than his own thinking.
Todd's Obama comes across in most of the book as being too inexperienced and too one-minded to be a good president, one who will be remembered as a transformative executive and more as the "first black president" than as a real game changer.
In the final chapters, though, it is as if Todd suddenly remembers he needs administration officials, if not Obama himself, as possible interviewees for his Meet The Press TV show. In the final analysis, Obama is seen in a much better light. Todd just doesn't (or can't) say why.
That is the book review. Here are a few thoughts (from a Republican): If Obama was a hands off foreign policy president, he made good choices in Hillary and Gates, and his was the final voice on going in to kill ObL. If health care reform was not a big issue, once Obama got into it, he made it an important issue. If he was not a good compromiser (and he is not) the Repubs who vowed to just obstruct and not offer their own plans in response are equally guilty.
I put in "I think" because it is not always clear from his book. The main reason is that the prose plods along in so many places that my attention wandered. Maybe it was because Todd could not write or tell the story straight. For example, he makes a point of saying how Obama wanted to reach out to Republicans early in both terms, but then he relates only those anecdotes where Obama quickly rejected some overtures from the opposing party and quickly stopped his efforts.
Still some interesting reading. Todd relates that Obama was so sure of victory in 2012 and so down on Mitt Romney that he did not make more than the slightest effort to prep for their first debate, where Romney trounced the President. Also, Obama was a late comer to health care reform, and mentioned it for the first time in a speech only because it was a required element of the Democratic spiel, the issue which will be his legacy. Biden got the nod for Veep a lot for the fact that he is a baby-kissing, hugging, pat on the back pol while the more staid Obama is uncomfortable with more than a handshake. Finally, Obama gets credit for killing Osama bin Laden, but he is a hands-off foreign policy president--he made the decision to go based on his subordinates much more than his own thinking.
Todd's Obama comes across in most of the book as being too inexperienced and too one-minded to be a good president, one who will be remembered as a transformative executive and more as the "first black president" than as a real game changer.
In the final chapters, though, it is as if Todd suddenly remembers he needs administration officials, if not Obama himself, as possible interviewees for his Meet The Press TV show. In the final analysis, Obama is seen in a much better light. Todd just doesn't (or can't) say why.
That is the book review. Here are a few thoughts (from a Republican): If Obama was a hands off foreign policy president, he made good choices in Hillary and Gates, and his was the final voice on going in to kill ObL. If health care reform was not a big issue, once Obama got into it, he made it an important issue. If he was not a good compromiser (and he is not) the Repubs who vowed to just obstruct and not offer their own plans in response are equally guilty.
August 2, 2016
The Stranger tells the story of the Obama presidency from his campaign until 2014 through the lens of journalist and author Chuck Todd. He starts by describing Obama as an outsider, someone who doesn't know or care to play the Washington game.
The first chapters start slow and can get a little bullet-list-y, with all those names of people close to the administration that are thrown around at the reader. But they pick up steam later on and can get gripping (the chapter about the Affordable Healthcare Act, for example, is hard to put down).
Each chapter describes a particular event on the administration and while there's no easy way to organize a book like this, it still makes for some timeline zigzagging that I felt could have been avoided. Chuck also has the tendency to repeat the same ideas a lot - this reinforces something he thinks but also makes for a sluggish read sometimes.
While it's fun to read and interesting to know the inside scoop on what happened in the White House during this period, at times it can be a bit obvious who's sourcing Chuck from the way events are retold. Sure, this is to be expected to some degree; but it can create the impression of bias on the reader and a craving for a different viewpoint at times during the reading. If this was fiction I would have a hard time suspending my disbelief when this occurs.
All in all though, The Stranger succeeds in making the case for the exceptionality of a president who transcended race and tried to transcend politics. It describes the thought process of his decisions and the political evolution of Obama and its administration well.
Having just finished reading the book I confess I'm feeling nostalgic already.
The first chapters start slow and can get a little bullet-list-y, with all those names of people close to the administration that are thrown around at the reader. But they pick up steam later on and can get gripping (the chapter about the Affordable Healthcare Act, for example, is hard to put down).
Each chapter describes a particular event on the administration and while there's no easy way to organize a book like this, it still makes for some timeline zigzagging that I felt could have been avoided. Chuck also has the tendency to repeat the same ideas a lot - this reinforces something he thinks but also makes for a sluggish read sometimes.
While it's fun to read and interesting to know the inside scoop on what happened in the White House during this period, at times it can be a bit obvious who's sourcing Chuck from the way events are retold. Sure, this is to be expected to some degree; but it can create the impression of bias on the reader and a craving for a different viewpoint at times during the reading. If this was fiction I would have a hard time suspending my disbelief when this occurs.
All in all though, The Stranger succeeds in making the case for the exceptionality of a president who transcended race and tried to transcend politics. It describes the thought process of his decisions and the political evolution of Obama and its administration well.
Having just finished reading the book I confess I'm feeling nostalgic already.
September 22, 2018
What I found interesting about the book as much as the information about Obama was Todd's insights into how the government does and does not work. And how the process has been changing over the last 10-20 years. It gave me an appreciation that pork which seems like a bad thing might actually be a good thing, allowing small projects to be traded off to make legislation work and get compromise. He didn't state it exactly, but this seems to be one of the things making compromise more difficult now and things more polarized.
A lot of reviewers have said there was too much detail and it dragged in places. I agree to a point but found it interesting to understand the forces shaping the things that happened over Obama's presidency. It was also interesting hearing his take on how Obama was a great campaigner but because of his nature had trouble being as effective an executive as he could have been and could have done a better job interacting with the Republicans to achieve his goals. It didn't help that the right wing media and the Tea Party dug in their heels and made things more difficult, but Obama wasn't blameless based on this book
It was also fascinating because this was written part way through Obama's second term. No one knew what would happen in the 2016 election. It was very interesting to see the comments about Trump and others and how things were viewed a couple of years before 2016 given what we know now.
A lot of reviewers have said there was too much detail and it dragged in places. I agree to a point but found it interesting to understand the forces shaping the things that happened over Obama's presidency. It was also interesting hearing his take on how Obama was a great campaigner but because of his nature had trouble being as effective an executive as he could have been and could have done a better job interacting with the Republicans to achieve his goals. It didn't help that the right wing media and the Tea Party dug in their heels and made things more difficult, but Obama wasn't blameless based on this book
It was also fascinating because this was written part way through Obama's second term. No one knew what would happen in the 2016 election. It was very interesting to see the comments about Trump and others and how things were viewed a couple of years before 2016 given what we know now.
January 25, 2015
Chuck Todd is a smart guy. He's currently the Political Director for NBC News, and the moderator of Meet The Press, and the host of MSNBC's The Daily Rundown. And of course from 2008 to 2014, pretty much Barack Obama's time as president so far, he was NBC News Chief White House Correspondent. So if you've got a question on Beltway politics, Chuck would be the one to ask. If you had to pick him out of a crowd, he'd be that kind of rumpled-looking guy with a goatee sitting in one of the front rows during a briefing at the White House Press Room. And The Stranger is a remarkable achievement. Mr. Todd has had many question-and-answer sessions with Barack Obama, a number of one-on-one interviews, and quite a few conversations. And what comes out of all this interaction is a very complete portrait of a sitting president; his personality, his moods, what "sets him off", what his priorities were when he took office and what they were in 2014. Barack Obama had a white mother and a Kenyan father, and he just happened to grow up in the one state in the US where whites are not in the majority (Hawaii). Mr. Todd uses this upbringing to explain why Obama is the person he is, why he is fundamentally different from other African American leaders, and of course why he is the leader he is. I found this to be a fascinating character study of the current president.
March 20, 2015
It's a good overview of the Obama presidency. However its majorly dry language covers very well rule making policies, and internal game of politics, not that much of international relations. I learned that different governmental groups fight for power and lobby their interests, in disregard of what U.S. nation in whole actually needs or wants.
"Obama and his team decided to work with the system rather than blowing it up, he nudged the political spectrum to the left without changing it.[...] He began a recovery, without completing it. He passed major legislative initiatives by compromising some of the values he held dear." This means big hopes people had around the globe during his first presidential elections were not justified. Obama claimed he is for the world peace, promised to end the war in Iraq. Instead, Iraq now is bigger mess than before the war, Obama initiated war in Afghanistan, responsible for civil wars in Egypt, Livia, Ukraine, where he is sending weapon and soldiers now. Syria nearly escaped bombing and the fate of Serbia, where USA dropped radioactive and toxic bombs, and children are dying from leukemia today. These days he is provoking Russia for open military conflict. Probably Obama played the rules of internal U.S. lawmakers well, but he betrayed the world. Obama-pacifist is a joke and a big lie. And mister Todd didn't say a word about it.
"Obama and his team decided to work with the system rather than blowing it up, he nudged the political spectrum to the left without changing it.[...] He began a recovery, without completing it. He passed major legislative initiatives by compromising some of the values he held dear." This means big hopes people had around the globe during his first presidential elections were not justified. Obama claimed he is for the world peace, promised to end the war in Iraq. Instead, Iraq now is bigger mess than before the war, Obama initiated war in Afghanistan, responsible for civil wars in Egypt, Livia, Ukraine, where he is sending weapon and soldiers now. Syria nearly escaped bombing and the fate of Serbia, where USA dropped radioactive and toxic bombs, and children are dying from leukemia today. These days he is provoking Russia for open military conflict. Probably Obama played the rules of internal U.S. lawmakers well, but he betrayed the world. Obama-pacifist is a joke and a big lie. And mister Todd didn't say a word about it.
May 13, 2018
Todd’s book certainly isn’t the most insightful diagnosis of the Obama White House years, but the portion he covers (2008 – 2014) is fairly complete and shared in a coherent narrative. Diehard Republicans and Democrats alike will find much to protest. The host of “Meet the Press” hits Obama hard for the ACA’s disastrous roll-out. And his criticism of our former President as sometimes seeming too arrogant to delve into the process realities of Washington are a fair shot. “You can’t simply hope things change, you have to make change happen, and in order to create a new set of rules, you have to succeed by the old ones.” Valid point.
But the Republican party comes in for its own share of scathing rebuke, especially for their craven “simply oppose everything” mantra. And Mr. Todd does end up acknowledging that despite the many setbacks, President Obama has successfully recast the healthcare debate to the point where it is now an accepted American right that all citizens must be covered.
Other books offer a much deeper analysis of both Obama landslide election victories and also his reign in Washington. But Chuck Todd has scored his own decent collection of sources, and while this book doesn’t offer any earthshattering revelations, it is an informative addition to the library of any student of American politics in our oh-so-divided 21st century.
But the Republican party comes in for its own share of scathing rebuke, especially for their craven “simply oppose everything” mantra. And Mr. Todd does end up acknowledging that despite the many setbacks, President Obama has successfully recast the healthcare debate to the point where it is now an accepted American right that all citizens must be covered.
Other books offer a much deeper analysis of both Obama landslide election victories and also his reign in Washington. But Chuck Todd has scored his own decent collection of sources, and while this book doesn’t offer any earthshattering revelations, it is an informative addition to the library of any student of American politics in our oh-so-divided 21st century.
December 8, 2014
From the title, supposed subject, and author of this book, I was actually intrigued to read "The Stranger" (despite the fact that I've read enough political non-fiction this year to last me a lifetime). Unfortunately, from the beginning until the end, this book was a slog. Todd focuses pretty much solely on the election/campaign slant of every issue in the Obama years, which I don't think anyone besides political staffers would find interesting. In fact, it actually made me a bit angry and disheartened, as I think most Americans share in my frustration over the hyper-partisanship and corporate control of our government these days. Todd's writing also tends to be very summarizing, instead of analytical, and "The Stranger" reads like a dry, over-detailed account of the last 6 years. He starts out strong in his defense of his title, but Todd quickly loses track of making any kind of new points on the president. Ultimately, the only thing I needed to read was the last chapter of the book about Obama's legacy, and even then I'm a little wary to read something like that when there are still 2 years left before this POTUS even leaves office. Check out the full review at www.iwantmichikosjob.com.
November 2, 2015
The book was about what I expected. Spoiler Alert: Osama Bin Laden dies. The AFCA is passed, but implementing the law is a snafu.
Todd works for a TV network so he knows how to speak and it is his book: either he wrote it himself or worked closely with the ghostwriter. But I noticed a difference in quoting dialogue between how it comes across on the written page and how it comes across orally. At one point, he quoted a Mitt Romney speech. This isn’t the speech itself, but this illustrates the passage:
The GOP candidate addressed a rally in front of the Sepinwall. “The American people deserve the prestige dramas shown on HBO and A&E. And thanks to American ingenuity, smart comedies such as Arrested Development were being created. The network cancelled it, but thanks to the free market, it has found a home on Netflix and Americans were able to stream it or get the DVDs.” said Romney
On the page, it is easy to tell that Todd is quoting Romney. Listening to it, you could probably figure it out from context, but it is more difficult. I’m not sure if writers should write their words as if they were to be heard instead of read, but that might not be a bad idea.
Todd works for a TV network so he knows how to speak and it is his book: either he wrote it himself or worked closely with the ghostwriter. But I noticed a difference in quoting dialogue between how it comes across on the written page and how it comes across orally. At one point, he quoted a Mitt Romney speech. This isn’t the speech itself, but this illustrates the passage:
The GOP candidate addressed a rally in front of the Sepinwall. “The American people deserve the prestige dramas shown on HBO and A&E. And thanks to American ingenuity, smart comedies such as Arrested Development were being created. The network cancelled it, but thanks to the free market, it has found a home on Netflix and Americans were able to stream it or get the DVDs.” said Romney
On the page, it is easy to tell that Todd is quoting Romney. Listening to it, you could probably figure it out from context, but it is more difficult. I’m not sure if writers should write their words as if they were to be heard instead of read, but that might not be a bad idea.
January 7, 2020
The way Chuck Todd reads this book is a lot like the way people yell in your ear when you're at a loud concert. He doesn't just project his voice he uses it to punch your ear drums for 16 hours.
Cons: The book is basically a rehash of news headlines over Obama's presidency. If you've been paying attention, there is very little new information. It's not like a history book where you get to hear about his diary entries, or interesting secrets. It's certainly no inside story. If you forgot some stuff this is a good refresher, but probably longer than needed. On top of that, it tends to wander around quite a bit. He jumps from topic to topic, period to period, event to event, without really giving an explanation or context as to where the story is currently situated.
Pros: If you like presidents this book is about a president. And if you haven't really been paying attention, this is a pretty fair description. There's some exaggerated language, but it's mostly unbiased, and it was entertaining at parts. Chuck Todd also says "fuck" like he's a 4th grader who just discovered cursing, so it's worth getting up to that part at least.
Cons: The book is basically a rehash of news headlines over Obama's presidency. If you've been paying attention, there is very little new information. It's not like a history book where you get to hear about his diary entries, or interesting secrets. It's certainly no inside story. If you forgot some stuff this is a good refresher, but probably longer than needed. On top of that, it tends to wander around quite a bit. He jumps from topic to topic, period to period, event to event, without really giving an explanation or context as to where the story is currently situated.
Pros: If you like presidents this book is about a president. And if you haven't really been paying attention, this is a pretty fair description. There's some exaggerated language, but it's mostly unbiased, and it was entertaining at parts. Chuck Todd also says "fuck" like he's a 4th grader who just discovered cursing, so it's worth getting up to that part at least.
December 2, 2016
Now i know I'm a political junkie. Because a lot of this book to me was old news. I have followed the politics of the past two decades very closely but for someone who hasn't this is a good window into how Obama's personality encountered the culture of Washington (what we not so lovingly call the swamp). I think if anybody in this book stands out it is both Joe Biden & Robert Gates.
- Joe Biden in came out in front of the President on gay rights. But he did so because he went to the funeral of a friend and was confronted by of all people an 11 year old asking why the government hated his parents. That shook him fiercely.
- Robert Gates is hysterical. After Obama killed Bin Laden his aides wanted to get a together a communications strategy to publicize the event. Gate's response was the best, "How about we just shut the fuck up about it?". I laughed out loud at that.
- Obama is someone who by personality never really fit into Washington. He's not a schmoozer, he doesn't back slap. And ironically that's what I liked best about him.
This was a good primer for how the past 8 years have played out from inside the beltway...
- Joe Biden in came out in front of the President on gay rights. But he did so because he went to the funeral of a friend and was confronted by of all people an 11 year old asking why the government hated his parents. That shook him fiercely.
- Robert Gates is hysterical. After Obama killed Bin Laden his aides wanted to get a together a communications strategy to publicize the event. Gate's response was the best, "How about we just shut the fuck up about it?". I laughed out loud at that.
- Obama is someone who by personality never really fit into Washington. He's not a schmoozer, he doesn't back slap. And ironically that's what I liked best about him.
This was a good primer for how the past 8 years have played out from inside the beltway...
November 1, 2015
This is more a study of the Obama administration than a study of President Obama. Clearly the President did not give Mr. Todd any interviews. I found the author's failure to stick to chronology to be one of the failures of the book. I think Mr. Todd would have written a better book if he had restricted himself to the first term. His text ends about January 2014. At times the analysis is very simplistic. He looks at the campaign promises and then grades the administration on whether they were fulfilled or not. In the process he often neglects how events may have changed the situation between the candidate made the campaign promise and when the administration was able to address it. I don't think that the author fells very comfortable analyzing the economy. His analysis of the Great Recession of 2008 and the Obama administration's response to it was rather superficial and scattered among several chapters. On some issues the author is very perceptive, witness his discussion of the President's relation to Vice President Biden and Secretary Clinton.
May 8, 2015
Pretty good book by Todd. I thought there could have been more detail on the machinations of fiscal cliff, Obamacare/debt ceiling, DHS/immigration and the other GOP nonesense Obama had to deal with...but there has been enough written about that in detail elsewhere.
Todd makes legit criticisms of Obama without stooping to (again) the ridiculous charges Obama has had to put up with.
I wonder why Todd didn't wait a couple more years and write a complete history?
He does make a good premise in that Bush 43, Clinton, Bush 41, Reagan all came to office with a national network of supporters and connections. Obama didn't have any of that having just been a first term senator when he ran. Thus "The Stranger." And his personality is not the back-slapping, deal-maker ala Clinton. His observations of what Obama thinks of Clinton can be funny.
Looking for a partial history of his presidency? Pick this up.
Todd makes legit criticisms of Obama without stooping to (again) the ridiculous charges Obama has had to put up with.
I wonder why Todd didn't wait a couple more years and write a complete history?
He does make a good premise in that Bush 43, Clinton, Bush 41, Reagan all came to office with a national network of supporters and connections. Obama didn't have any of that having just been a first term senator when he ran. Thus "The Stranger." And his personality is not the back-slapping, deal-maker ala Clinton. His observations of what Obama thinks of Clinton can be funny.
Looking for a partial history of his presidency? Pick this up.
December 18, 2015
Chuck Todd did a great job tying events we all know about together to explain his topic...President Obama is a stranger to Washington. He's not a hand shaker, he's not a lets-sit-down-and-have-a-beer kind of guy and he's not someone who likes to be questioned. At the same time, he's a president that is vilified by the left wing Democrats for not doing enough and the right wing Republicans who want to block anything he does regardless how sensible it is. The biggest takeaway from this book is that a certain crowd cried out for change in Washington and wanted an outsider to lead the charge. Mission accomplished: very little is getting done except for fighting between parties and inter-party fighting. Be careful what you wish for. It should serve as a reminder to the current electoral outrage and the cry for an outsider to take the helm. Washington is an old bear that doesn't like to be poked.
January 5, 2015
Although I liked his objective presentation, I realized i've already lived all this + knew more than i thought, so most of this felt dry. I skimmed through the election stuff since again, already lived it. Journalists love the election stuff. Interesting how often he used the phrase "thread the needle" and he twice mentioned that Obama loves reading Op/Ed pieces + probably would have been a columnist if not a politician. I ended with the same opinions i had at the start, our political system is messed up & we're never going to get anywhere with the two parties constantly digging in their heels against the other. I also still like Obama + think he's doing the best he can. His biggest fault is not being a fan of schmoozing which i totally relate to. Although as President apparently that's not a good quality.
September 1, 2016
After 16.5 hours of listening, I can finally say that I've finished The Stranger in its audiobook form. It's hard to sustain attention for the time it took me to listen to this book, from beginning to end. That said, I'm really glad I hung in with it. This is the first biography I've read/heard of a presidency that has taken place entirely within my life time and my consciousness. In some moments, I felt like I was hearing a review of details that have been in the news. In other moments, I was appreciative of the background and context that better helped me understand particular aspects of President Obama's elections and presidency. The author was clear that it is premature to properly judge President Obama's place in history. He seemed clear about our president's strengths and limitations. Thanks to Chuck Todd for this look at President Barack Obama.
December 22, 2014
This was a historical perspective on the decisions and legacy of Obama's presidency as of 2014 told by a journalist who has extensively covered Obama, Chuck Todd. I was struck by the high quality of the writing from the very first chapter, as Todd begins outlining his premise of Obama as a president unable to connect with the politicians in Washington. Most of the book was a brief overview of situation after situation, including campaign vignettes before the presidency, a view into dealing with the economic crisis of 2008, and the battle between Obama and Republicans. I do not think very much new ground was covered here, but this is a compact history of the major events from Obama's presidency and the story is well-written.
October 13, 2016
I have had this book laying around for quite some time but I finally read. I love books on Politics, earlier this year I read David Axelrod's book. The book covers Obama in office through 2014. The highs and lows. A lot of interesting facts, it was never the prime goal to write a new Healthcare law, but Obamacare will be his signature legislation. He inherited a mess and only time will tell how history remembers him. Syria was just a bunch of "shitty options", Viewed Romney as a weak candidate, Republicans could never see beyond the next election and even though immigration reform is in there best interest they would rather oppose Obama and lose the Hispanic vote for 20 yrs etc..If you like Politics read, as Chuck Todd is a complete political junkie. I really enjoyed.
November 18, 2014
Just finished the unabridged audio book version. Overall I think it gives a fair and accurate account of President Obama and his administration up to early 2014. I didn't get the feeling the author was biased about what the president has done right and his short comings, he covered all of it. I would feel comfortable recommending this as an accurate historical reference that is well written and well edited. The only thing that is a concern is the fact that it is not a complete history of the Obama Administration since has been released in 2014 and there are still 2 years left so down the road this will end up being an incomplete history.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 77 reviews