What do you think?
Rate this book
The Right Path: From Ike to Reagan, How Republicans Once Mastered Politics--and Can Again
Joe Scarborough—former Republican congressman and the always insightful host of MSNBC’s Morning Joe —takes a nuanced and surprising look at the unexpected rise and self-inflicted fall of the Republican Party. Dominant in national politics for forty years under the influence of the conservative but pragmatic leadership of Dwight Eisenhower and Ronald Reagan, the GOP, Scarborough argues, is in a self-inflicted eclipse. The only way forward? Recover the principled realism of the giants who led the party to greatness.
In the aftermath of Lyndon Johnson’s 1964 landslide, the Republican Party appeared to be on the verge of permanent irrelevance. LBJ’s Great Society was institutionalizing sweeping liberal reforms, and the United States had a thriving, prosperous economy. Yet in an instant everything changed, and the next four decades would witness an unprecedented era of Republican ascendancy. What happened?
In The Right Path, Joe Scarborough looks back in time to discern how Republicans once dominated American public life. From Eisenhower’s refusal to let “the perfect be the enemy of the good” to Reagan’s charismatic but resolutely practical genius, Scarborough shows how principled pragmatism, combined with a commitment to core conservative values, led to victory after victory.
Now, however, political incalcitrance is threatening to turn a once-mighty party into a permanent minority.
Opening with the passage of the Voting Rights Act in 1965—the high-water moment for liberalism—and ending with the national disillusionment that set in after Hurricane Katrina ravaged New Orleans, The Right Path effortlessly blends American political history with astute analysis and pithy, no-holds-barred commentary. Both a bracing call to arms and a commonsense history, The Right Path provides an illuminating look at conservatism and its discontents—and why the GOP must regain its former tone and tradition if it hopes to survive.
Praise for The Right Path
“This concise history of modern Republican politics might just leave you optimistic about the chances that conservatives can govern again. . . . In the world of commentary, we tend to obsess over the quotidian ebbs and flows—assuming that every little bump in the road is a disaster. . . . But there’s something about reading the history that allows one to take a longer view and put things in context. And that’s precisely what this book does very well.” — The Daily Caller
“ The Right Path is the right book at the right time to spark a much-needed conversation about the future of the Republican Party.” —Doris Kearns Goodwin
“If you’re interested in the Republican future, you need to read The Right Path . I don’t agree with all of it, but Joe Scarborough has written a book that’s both thought-provoking and fun.” —William Kristol
“Joe Scarborough’s lively, provocative, and instructive history of the modern Republican Party will stir up the GOP—which is exactly what he has in mind. As the Grand Old Party searches for a path to victory, Joe offers some important lessons to be learned.” —Tom Brokaw
“Joe Scarborough’s incisive, original, provocative, and well-argued book, deploying American political history both distant and recent, deserves to be widely read, carefully considered, and energetically debated.” —Michael Beschloss
From the Hardcover edition.
In the aftermath of Lyndon Johnson’s 1964 landslide, the Republican Party appeared to be on the verge of permanent irrelevance. LBJ’s Great Society was institutionalizing sweeping liberal reforms, and the United States had a thriving, prosperous economy. Yet in an instant everything changed, and the next four decades would witness an unprecedented era of Republican ascendancy. What happened?
In The Right Path, Joe Scarborough looks back in time to discern how Republicans once dominated American public life. From Eisenhower’s refusal to let “the perfect be the enemy of the good” to Reagan’s charismatic but resolutely practical genius, Scarborough shows how principled pragmatism, combined with a commitment to core conservative values, led to victory after victory.
Now, however, political incalcitrance is threatening to turn a once-mighty party into a permanent minority.
Opening with the passage of the Voting Rights Act in 1965—the high-water moment for liberalism—and ending with the national disillusionment that set in after Hurricane Katrina ravaged New Orleans, The Right Path effortlessly blends American political history with astute analysis and pithy, no-holds-barred commentary. Both a bracing call to arms and a commonsense history, The Right Path provides an illuminating look at conservatism and its discontents—and why the GOP must regain its former tone and tradition if it hopes to survive.
Praise for The Right Path
“This concise history of modern Republican politics might just leave you optimistic about the chances that conservatives can govern again. . . . In the world of commentary, we tend to obsess over the quotidian ebbs and flows—assuming that every little bump in the road is a disaster. . . . But there’s something about reading the history that allows one to take a longer view and put things in context. And that’s precisely what this book does very well.” — The Daily Caller
“ The Right Path is the right book at the right time to spark a much-needed conversation about the future of the Republican Party.” —Doris Kearns Goodwin
“If you’re interested in the Republican future, you need to read The Right Path . I don’t agree with all of it, but Joe Scarborough has written a book that’s both thought-provoking and fun.” —William Kristol
“Joe Scarborough’s lively, provocative, and instructive history of the modern Republican Party will stir up the GOP—which is exactly what he has in mind. As the Grand Old Party searches for a path to victory, Joe offers some important lessons to be learned.” —Tom Brokaw
“Joe Scarborough’s incisive, original, provocative, and well-argued book, deploying American political history both distant and recent, deserves to be widely read, carefully considered, and energetically debated.” —Michael Beschloss
From the Hardcover edition.
Audio CD
First published January 1, 2013
13 people are currently reading
128 people want to read
About the author
Joe Scarborough
17 books30 followersCharles Joseph "Joe" Scarborough (born April 9, 1963) is an American cable news and talk radio host, lawyer, author, and former politician. He is currently the host of Morning Joe on MSNBC, and previously hosted Scarborough Country on the same channel. Scarborough served in the United States House of Representatives from 1995 to 2001 as a Republican from the 1st district of Florida. He was named in the 2011 Time 100 as one of the most influential people in the world.
Born in Atlanta, Georgia, he is the son of George F. Scarborough, a businessman, and has two other siblings. When his father died in May 2011, his life story appeared in the Congressional Record and in Politico's Playbook. Scarborough even wrote a eulogy op-ed online.
Joe Scarborough graduated from Pensacola Catholic High School in Pensacola, Florida. He received a B.A. from the University of Alabama in 1985 and a J.D. from the University of Florida College of Law in 1990. During this time he wrote and produced CDs with his band, Dixon Mills, and taught high school. He was admitted to the The Florida Bar in 1991, and practiced law in Pensacola.
Scarborough's most famous case was representing Michael F. Griffin, the accused killer of abortion doctor David Gunn, in early to mid-1993. He made several court appearances for Griffin. "There was 'no way in hell I could sit in at a civil trial, let alone a capital trial,' he claims now, referring to the prospect of prosecutors seeking the death penalty against Griffin." Scarborough assisted Griffin in choosing a trial lawyer from the many who offered their services, and he also shielded the family from the media exposure, pro bono.
Scarborough also helped to raise his political profile and made numerous contacts by assisting with a petition drive in late 1993 to oppose a 65 percent increase in the City of Pensacola's property taxes.
In 1994, Scarborough won the Republican Party primary for Florida's 1st congressional district, which came open after eight-term Democratic incumbent Earl Hutto announced his retirement. In the general election he defeated the Democratic candidate, Pensacola attorney Vinnie Whibbs, with 61 percent of the vote. Whibbs was the son of well respected, former Pensacola mayor, Vince Whibbs. The win was not considered an upset, since the 1st was traditionally a conservative district. The district had not supported a Democratic candidate for U.S. president since 1960. While Democratic candidates continued to win most local offices well into the 1990s, they tended to be conservative even, by Southern Democratic standards. It had been widely believed that Hutto would be succeeded by a Republican once he retired.
Scarborough was reelected with 72 percent of the vote in 1996. In 1998 and 2000, he was opposed by only a write-in candidate.
Scarborough supported a number of pro-life positions while in Congress, including the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, that made it a crime to harm a fetus during the commission of other crimes, though he did not vote for the passage of the final bill.
Scarborough sponsored a bill to force the U.S. to withdraw from the United Nations after a four-year transition and voted to make the Corporation for Public Broadcasting "self-sufficient" by eliminating federal funding. He also voted for the "Medicare Preservation act of 1995," which cut the projected growth of Medicare by $270 billion over ten years, and against the "Small Business Job Protection Act of 1996," which raised the minimum wage to $5.15. Scarborough had a conservative voting record on economic, social, and foreign policy issues, but was seen as moderate on environmental issues and human rights causes, including closing the School of the Americas and Lori Berenson.
While in Congress, Scarborough received a number of awards, including the "Friend of the Taxpayer Award" from Americans for Tax Reform; the "Guardian of Small Business Award" from the National Federation of Independent Busine
Born in Atlanta, Georgia, he is the son of George F. Scarborough, a businessman, and has two other siblings. When his father died in May 2011, his life story appeared in the Congressional Record and in Politico's Playbook. Scarborough even wrote a eulogy op-ed online.
Joe Scarborough graduated from Pensacola Catholic High School in Pensacola, Florida. He received a B.A. from the University of Alabama in 1985 and a J.D. from the University of Florida College of Law in 1990. During this time he wrote and produced CDs with his band, Dixon Mills, and taught high school. He was admitted to the The Florida Bar in 1991, and practiced law in Pensacola.
Scarborough's most famous case was representing Michael F. Griffin, the accused killer of abortion doctor David Gunn, in early to mid-1993. He made several court appearances for Griffin. "There was 'no way in hell I could sit in at a civil trial, let alone a capital trial,' he claims now, referring to the prospect of prosecutors seeking the death penalty against Griffin." Scarborough assisted Griffin in choosing a trial lawyer from the many who offered their services, and he also shielded the family from the media exposure, pro bono.
Scarborough also helped to raise his political profile and made numerous contacts by assisting with a petition drive in late 1993 to oppose a 65 percent increase in the City of Pensacola's property taxes.
In 1994, Scarborough won the Republican Party primary for Florida's 1st congressional district, which came open after eight-term Democratic incumbent Earl Hutto announced his retirement. In the general election he defeated the Democratic candidate, Pensacola attorney Vinnie Whibbs, with 61 percent of the vote. Whibbs was the son of well respected, former Pensacola mayor, Vince Whibbs. The win was not considered an upset, since the 1st was traditionally a conservative district. The district had not supported a Democratic candidate for U.S. president since 1960. While Democratic candidates continued to win most local offices well into the 1990s, they tended to be conservative even, by Southern Democratic standards. It had been widely believed that Hutto would be succeeded by a Republican once he retired.
Scarborough was reelected with 72 percent of the vote in 1996. In 1998 and 2000, he was opposed by only a write-in candidate.
Scarborough supported a number of pro-life positions while in Congress, including the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, that made it a crime to harm a fetus during the commission of other crimes, though he did not vote for the passage of the final bill.
Scarborough sponsored a bill to force the U.S. to withdraw from the United Nations after a four-year transition and voted to make the Corporation for Public Broadcasting "self-sufficient" by eliminating federal funding. He also voted for the "Medicare Preservation act of 1995," which cut the projected growth of Medicare by $270 billion over ten years, and against the "Small Business Job Protection Act of 1996," which raised the minimum wage to $5.15. Scarborough had a conservative voting record on economic, social, and foreign policy issues, but was seen as moderate on environmental issues and human rights causes, including closing the School of the Americas and Lori Berenson.
While in Congress, Scarborough received a number of awards, including the "Friend of the Taxpayer Award" from Americans for Tax Reform; the "Guardian of Small Business Award" from the National Federation of Independent Busine
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 25 of 25 reviews
May 17, 2014
Unsurprisingly, I walked away from this book without a clue as to how the Republicans can gain possession of power in this current political society. As a student of history, this book didn't tell me anything I didn't already know about 20th century presidential politics, and the last 5 pages of this book, his "plan," were worthless. Scarborough's last book wasn't this bad, but given this poor performance, if you will, I'll forgo purchasing anything he publishes in the future.
April 22, 2020
Interesting time to read this book, given that Trump seems to have defied the logic of it and that Scarborough has recently said he's leaving the GOP. As someone who would welcome a more moderate brand of politics in America, this book gives me some hope that things will head that way, despite what technology has indirectly done to polarize us.
March 10, 2019
Pragmatism over purposeful polarity is a political environment any moderate could hope for, unfortunately Joe Scarborough was wrong in his prediction that the middle of the road sentiment would win back the White House. A “Republican” may have won, but not on the “Right Path” of Eisenhower and Reagan principles as Scarborough predicts. :(
November 12, 2013
Unlike many books on the modern conservative movement, The Right Path starts not with Goldwater but Eisenhower. The point is obvious. Goldwater is not the gold standard. Rejecting the conventional wisdom in conservative circles that Goldwater’s ill-fated presidential campaign—as disastrous as it was at the time—planted the seeds of a conservative resurgence, Scarborough is more interested in the subsequent more conciliatory Goldwater. By starting with Eisenhower, Scarborough implicitly accepts as a baseline the New Deal and implicitly rejects Calvin Coolidgism (with an explicit dig or two, but notice it’s Coolidge not Harding or Hoover worthy of serving as foil). Scarborough sees the GOP’s strength as “principled realism, not ideological purity. We Republicans have been at our best when we are true to one of the deepest insights of conservatism: that politics, like mankind itself, isn’t perfectible in a fallen universe.” Moderate Republicans and deal-cutting are the heroes, not the villains.
Scarborough has Obamacare’s greatest enemy on his side: math. Although the American people broadly accept what Scarborough (correctly) labels as four key conservative principles—“greater liberty, a relatively restrained state, social order, and strength abroad”—they are not by any means what the rock-ribbed conservative grassroots activist considers true conservatives. The idea that the Republicans only failure is a failure to nominate a sufficiently died-in-the-wool conservative has always been a silly one. But the opposite is also true. Both parties face the same basic problem: nominating a candidate and platform that can spur the base to vote and volunteer while still swaying the center to their side. Republicans can’t expect to be any more successful nominating a candidate the best about whom can be said is that he is a Democrat in a tie and less comfortable shoes.
Scarborough’s defense of Eisenhower—a president who presented himself as a moderate and governed more conservatively than given credit for—is well deserved. Equally well taken is his promotion of Reagan—a president who presented himself as a conservative and governed more moderately than given credit for—as a conservative who understood the necessity of governing from the middle (our last three presidents have learned to their chagrin that an electoral mandate doesn’t go very far). His decision to laud Nixon is bizarre (price- and wage-fixing Nixon!?!), but the deconstruction of Nixon’s so-called “Southern strategy” is deserved (evidently what made it racist to the WASPs who ran the northeastern media establishment…is that it attacked Democratic policies). We also see a less provocative Goldwater post-presidential bid and a Speaker Gingrich mouthing his way out of power as quickly as he mouthed his way into it (that one isn’t that hard to recall).
That stuff is alright. It’s thin as tissue, but contractor-grade compared to pretty much everything else. If Eisenhower and Nixon are to be emulated as moderates, and Reagan as a moderate-in-conservative’s-clothing of sorts, then what about Gerald Ford? George H.W. Bush? Bob Dole? John McCain? Each is barely mentioned and Scarborough never bothers to explain why their moderation was insufficient for an electorate supposedly so starved for just that that they proved such dismal failures at the ballot box (excepting that Scarborough blames the activist base for abandoning Bush I after he reneged on his famous “read my lips” pledge of no new taxes; but as it turns out “regular” people also hate being lied to and having their taxes raised—as I suspect they hate being lied to and having their insurance canceled).
This book is thin. Scarborough rushes through 60 years of Republican history and tacks on a desultory epilogue calling for, I think, a return to moderation. For all of its historical perspective, however, The Right Path doesn’t seem to admit things have changed over the course of all that history. What does it mean for the Republican party that abortion is now an issue? That we’ve for all intents and purposes won the debate over gun rights (Scarborough inexplicably picks gun control as one of three areas in which Reagan deserves particular praise)? That the days when the Democrats (Kennedy) could nominate a more conservative candidate than the Republicans (Nixon) are over? That crime has drastically dropped over the past couple of decades? That support for marijuana legalization and gay marriage are skyrocketing? That the Cold War is over, and a War on Terror has begun? That the highest marginal tax rates are no longer punitive? That Hispanics are a sizeable and rapidly growing portion of the electorate? Does 24-hour cable news deserve the same opprobrium as talk radio? Has gerrymandering bought Republicans the House at the expense of the Whitehouse? What does a more conservative judiciary and the rise of Originalism mean for presidential politics? No book could answer all of these questions, but I’m not sure The Right Path could fairly be said to answer any of them.
There is a good message hidden in there. Most of all it’s that any politician who wants to change the world for the better, not just enrich his own power, had better, like a good salesman, always be closing. Or, as the National Review put it recently, there is no shortcut for persuasion. THAT was Reagan’s great strength—an eternal optimism and a gift and passion for selling conservatism to the masses.
Disclosure: I received a free, electronic copy of The Right Path in advance via NetGalley.
Scarborough has Obamacare’s greatest enemy on his side: math. Although the American people broadly accept what Scarborough (correctly) labels as four key conservative principles—“greater liberty, a relatively restrained state, social order, and strength abroad”—they are not by any means what the rock-ribbed conservative grassroots activist considers true conservatives. The idea that the Republicans only failure is a failure to nominate a sufficiently died-in-the-wool conservative has always been a silly one. But the opposite is also true. Both parties face the same basic problem: nominating a candidate and platform that can spur the base to vote and volunteer while still swaying the center to their side. Republicans can’t expect to be any more successful nominating a candidate the best about whom can be said is that he is a Democrat in a tie and less comfortable shoes.
Scarborough’s defense of Eisenhower—a president who presented himself as a moderate and governed more conservatively than given credit for—is well deserved. Equally well taken is his promotion of Reagan—a president who presented himself as a conservative and governed more moderately than given credit for—as a conservative who understood the necessity of governing from the middle (our last three presidents have learned to their chagrin that an electoral mandate doesn’t go very far). His decision to laud Nixon is bizarre (price- and wage-fixing Nixon!?!), but the deconstruction of Nixon’s so-called “Southern strategy” is deserved (evidently what made it racist to the WASPs who ran the northeastern media establishment…is that it attacked Democratic policies). We also see a less provocative Goldwater post-presidential bid and a Speaker Gingrich mouthing his way out of power as quickly as he mouthed his way into it (that one isn’t that hard to recall).
That stuff is alright. It’s thin as tissue, but contractor-grade compared to pretty much everything else. If Eisenhower and Nixon are to be emulated as moderates, and Reagan as a moderate-in-conservative’s-clothing of sorts, then what about Gerald Ford? George H.W. Bush? Bob Dole? John McCain? Each is barely mentioned and Scarborough never bothers to explain why their moderation was insufficient for an electorate supposedly so starved for just that that they proved such dismal failures at the ballot box (excepting that Scarborough blames the activist base for abandoning Bush I after he reneged on his famous “read my lips” pledge of no new taxes; but as it turns out “regular” people also hate being lied to and having their taxes raised—as I suspect they hate being lied to and having their insurance canceled).
This book is thin. Scarborough rushes through 60 years of Republican history and tacks on a desultory epilogue calling for, I think, a return to moderation. For all of its historical perspective, however, The Right Path doesn’t seem to admit things have changed over the course of all that history. What does it mean for the Republican party that abortion is now an issue? That we’ve for all intents and purposes won the debate over gun rights (Scarborough inexplicably picks gun control as one of three areas in which Reagan deserves particular praise)? That the days when the Democrats (Kennedy) could nominate a more conservative candidate than the Republicans (Nixon) are over? That crime has drastically dropped over the past couple of decades? That support for marijuana legalization and gay marriage are skyrocketing? That the Cold War is over, and a War on Terror has begun? That the highest marginal tax rates are no longer punitive? That Hispanics are a sizeable and rapidly growing portion of the electorate? Does 24-hour cable news deserve the same opprobrium as talk radio? Has gerrymandering bought Republicans the House at the expense of the Whitehouse? What does a more conservative judiciary and the rise of Originalism mean for presidential politics? No book could answer all of these questions, but I’m not sure The Right Path could fairly be said to answer any of them.
There is a good message hidden in there. Most of all it’s that any politician who wants to change the world for the better, not just enrich his own power, had better, like a good salesman, always be closing. Or, as the National Review put it recently, there is no shortcut for persuasion. THAT was Reagan’s great strength—an eternal optimism and a gift and passion for selling conservatism to the masses.
Disclosure: I received a free, electronic copy of The Right Path in advance via NetGalley.
October 30, 2019
The book provides good historical insights and extrapolations showing a path to Republican Party dominance rooted in pragmatism, centrism and broad based coalitions. Emphasizing the rise of polarized base has historically led to defeat, the elections from 1952 to 2012 are explored - particularly Reagan and Nixon campaigns. A good and interesting read.
December 1, 2020
A better title would be "The will to remain a sheep". After all it is not about the ideas, it is not about the Society at large. It is about these leeches getting power over you, for your good, of course.
April 30, 2018
I found his timeline hard to follow. He switched from one president to another in a way that did not always make sense to me.
November 12, 2023
Good, easy read. Not terribly insightful but I did learn a few things from the book which for me is a WIN.
November 27, 2018
Joe Scarborough is a Republican to the core, and a former hard-line conservative by his own telling. His thesis in The Right Path: From Ike to Reagan, How Republicans Once Mastered Politics—And Can Again is that Republicans can win the presidency if they don't try to please the far right ideological purists in their choice of candidates, but instead choose candidates like Dwight Eisenhower, who was a moderate centrist, and Ronald Reagan, who had strong conservative convictions, but was wise enough to give way in certain areas and affable enough to win supporters across the board.
He uses Barry Goldwater to show how a far-right candidate could fail to win general support, and laments the fact that he joined in rejecting Colin Powell as the Republican candidate in 1996, when he now believes that the centrist Powell could well have beaten Bill Clinton, while Bob Dole, the chosen candidate, was trounced.
He wrote the book in 2013, and it proved to be unexpectedly prescient in the 2016 election of Donald Trump, who could be considered a centrist in his appeal to Republicans, some Democrats, and some Independents.
Despite recounting too many political speeches, which he seems to regard with almost religious reverence whereas I found most of them boring, clichéd, and riddled with lies, the book is worth reading.
He uses Barry Goldwater to show how a far-right candidate could fail to win general support, and laments the fact that he joined in rejecting Colin Powell as the Republican candidate in 1996, when he now believes that the centrist Powell could well have beaten Bill Clinton, while Bob Dole, the chosen candidate, was trounced.
He wrote the book in 2013, and it proved to be unexpectedly prescient in the 2016 election of Donald Trump, who could be considered a centrist in his appeal to Republicans, some Democrats, and some Independents.
Despite recounting too many political speeches, which he seems to regard with almost religious reverence whereas I found most of them boring, clichéd, and riddled with lies, the book is worth reading.
November 23, 2013
"The Right Path", by Joe Scarborough, provides a brief review of the Presidents from Eisenhower through Obama, emphasizing the best aspects of the Republican presidents who led best.
The point he makes is that the GOP of the moment bears little resemblance of the Party of Reagan, and given that the Republican party failed to win the popular vote in five of the past six Presidential elections, that negative trend needs to be examined and reversed. Scarborough's states that he's tired of the Republican Party losing the White House, and suggests a movement back to the paths set by Reagan and Eisenhower, i.e., principled pragmatism over ideology, is needed in order to win future presidential elections.
Scarborough recommends that the Party adapt to the changing times, and reach out to leaders who would govern from the middle rather than the fringes. Conservatism must take reality into account. There are voices in the Republican Party, Tea Party activists, who preach that the reason the Republican Party candidates have failed to gain the most votes in recent presidential elections is because they weren't conservative enough. That push further to the right is the wrong path, per Scarborough.
If more electable candidates were supported in 2010 instead of ideological favorites like Christine O'Donnell in Delaware, Sharron Angle in Nevada, Richard Mourdock in Indiana, and Todd Akin in Missouri, Congress would be in Republican control today, and Harry Reed would be retired. Scarborough warns that primary voters who indulge in Republican resentments in picking candidates instead of choosing a candidate who could win in the fall is a losing choice.
General Colin Powell is one of Scarborough's examples. He was not supported by the conservative wing of the party because he was considered too moderate. But listening to the retired general made it clear why he was drafted as a key player in previous administrations. Powell is free market believer, supporter of educational reform, innovation and competition, and supports a realistic foreign policy vs. foreign adventurism. In spite of right-wing, profit-driven talk show radio hosts who unleash their fury against anyone who disagree with them, the Party needs to reach out and include realists, moderates, and conservatives. If the Party is big enough to reach out to disaffected moderates like Colin Powell, the Party will be big enough to win back the White House.
Scarborough's theme is that if the Republican Party only represents the far right spectrum of the Party, the G.O.P is in trouble. There's a need to pull in moderates, independents and swing voters who have been driven into the Democrats camp due to Republicans narrowing vision. The message I took from the book is that moderation is essential given today's trends and shrinking base, and that is "The Right Path" for the Republican Party.
The point he makes is that the GOP of the moment bears little resemblance of the Party of Reagan, and given that the Republican party failed to win the popular vote in five of the past six Presidential elections, that negative trend needs to be examined and reversed. Scarborough's states that he's tired of the Republican Party losing the White House, and suggests a movement back to the paths set by Reagan and Eisenhower, i.e., principled pragmatism over ideology, is needed in order to win future presidential elections.
Scarborough recommends that the Party adapt to the changing times, and reach out to leaders who would govern from the middle rather than the fringes. Conservatism must take reality into account. There are voices in the Republican Party, Tea Party activists, who preach that the reason the Republican Party candidates have failed to gain the most votes in recent presidential elections is because they weren't conservative enough. That push further to the right is the wrong path, per Scarborough.
If more electable candidates were supported in 2010 instead of ideological favorites like Christine O'Donnell in Delaware, Sharron Angle in Nevada, Richard Mourdock in Indiana, and Todd Akin in Missouri, Congress would be in Republican control today, and Harry Reed would be retired. Scarborough warns that primary voters who indulge in Republican resentments in picking candidates instead of choosing a candidate who could win in the fall is a losing choice.
General Colin Powell is one of Scarborough's examples. He was not supported by the conservative wing of the party because he was considered too moderate. But listening to the retired general made it clear why he was drafted as a key player in previous administrations. Powell is free market believer, supporter of educational reform, innovation and competition, and supports a realistic foreign policy vs. foreign adventurism. In spite of right-wing, profit-driven talk show radio hosts who unleash their fury against anyone who disagree with them, the Party needs to reach out and include realists, moderates, and conservatives. If the Party is big enough to reach out to disaffected moderates like Colin Powell, the Party will be big enough to win back the White House.
Scarborough's theme is that if the Republican Party only represents the far right spectrum of the Party, the G.O.P is in trouble. There's a need to pull in moderates, independents and swing voters who have been driven into the Democrats camp due to Republicans narrowing vision. The message I took from the book is that moderation is essential given today's trends and shrinking base, and that is "The Right Path" for the Republican Party.
January 10, 2014
This is a political book and a history book as well. Maybe a little of both. He starts off by saying that the republican party has lost their way and peoples votes because of a lack of guidance and thinking that or by actions of a Republican President of not caring, not caring for the people of the country. When Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans, there massive destruction. But for what seemed liked days there was no response by the federal government and he compared this to the watts riots in L.A. when Gov. Pat Brown was in France and felt that he did not need to come back to California right away. For me that was a good point to make because after the riots and the governor coming back and having to deal with a new republican in the upcoming elections. What people forgot is Pat Browns campaign worked to make election against him and then he lost to a no name Reagan, who later would be President and who people compare new republicans to. He also compared that after Johnson was elected saying he would not increase our involvement in Vietnam we actually increased the amount of troops sent there. This was compared to Bush and our fighting in Afghanistan which everyone for the most part was for, supported. Then invaded Iraq this lead to disillusionment, lack of trust in the office and of the Republican Party. Combined with the massive fool up with Katrina the people of the United States were tired and felt that the party had lost touch with them. By him making all of these correlations and going back to the sixties and what happened during that it made sense to me. I could to see what the author was trying to get me to see. For after Johnson we had Nixon who no one thought would be there after two defeats, President, and Governor of California. Now he is elected even after he resigns you only had a Democrat for four years then Reagan for 8 and Bush for four. If you go back a little farther you had Eisenhower throughout the fifties. Even though I could agree with him on the way the party went down or has severed. Who knows if they can make it back any time soon because for me they need young blood and ideas that are more for everyone. Who knows? I liked the book for the most part. I got this book from net galley.
May 22, 2014
This is a book tailor-made for politics junkies. Mr. Scarborough basically outlines a history of the Republican party since World War II, and then concludes by recommending that the party use Colin Powell as its spokesman in order to regain the trust of the American people and thus regain power.
Since the target audience of the book is Republicans, the bottom-line theme is that we (Republicans) need to be the ones in power. We've done it before, and we can do it again. Despite some vague allusions to a basic philosophy of the Republican Party, it's never made clear why this would be good for the country; or for that matter why having Democrats in power is bad. It was made clear, though perhaps not consciously by the author, that Republicans do "Democrat" things to be popular, and Democrats do "Republican" things to be popular. Image seems to be the main object.
When Machiavelli wrote The Prince he described the actions of the successful ruler based on his observations of the politics of his day. It is not a moral statement of what should be done, but rather a statement of what is. This is what makes it an interesting, but sad book.
This book, by Joe Scarborough, strikes me the same way.
Since the target audience of the book is Republicans, the bottom-line theme is that we (Republicans) need to be the ones in power. We've done it before, and we can do it again. Despite some vague allusions to a basic philosophy of the Republican Party, it's never made clear why this would be good for the country; or for that matter why having Democrats in power is bad. It was made clear, though perhaps not consciously by the author, that Republicans do "Democrat" things to be popular, and Democrats do "Republican" things to be popular. Image seems to be the main object.
When Machiavelli wrote The Prince he described the actions of the successful ruler based on his observations of the politics of his day. It is not a moral statement of what should be done, but rather a statement of what is. This is what makes it an interesting, but sad book.
This book, by Joe Scarborough, strikes me the same way.
December 3, 2013
I would give this book 3.5 stars if given the opportunity. It provides a perspective on forty years of Republican politics over the course of 150-some pages. The author's overarching thesis, so much as one exists, is that batshit crazy extremism does not win national elections which to be fair is about as much of a conclusion as one can draw without resorting to more extreme speculation. The book would appear to be written for someone who is looking for a elementary description of Republican history. (AKA not me) Good if you have a 200 page attention span, lacking if you want something more informative or insightful, but an overall enjoyable if brief read.
December 20, 2013
My interest fell off at the end while the author navigated through the last twenty years. But I liked the beginning of the book and, although his bias is obviously toward the GOP winning elections, he's right when he talks about the problems with the GOP and the alienation they are causing. It's bizarre how the rabid voters sometimes prefer to nominate someone with no chance of winning over someone who may lean moderate on a couple of issues but win. Or they force a candidate to flip-flop over to appease their conservative base during the primaries and then are running on a platform that doesn't match up with their record.
January 1, 2014
I never felt like I greatly disagreed with Scarborough on his overall premise in this book: the GOP has stepped too far to the right and is in danger of continuing its losing streak in national elections. I might say I would be fine with this, but not entirely. The moderate voices in our society are being drowned out by the noise machine that is the news media. Moderation doesn't draw viewers...but it can win elections. I hope leaders in both parties can learn from this book. I wouldn't call this book a revelation of historical writing, but I wouldn't label it a terrible book. I enjoyed the read very much - especially as it touched on presidents that I haven't read much about before.
March 1, 2015
Whatever else one may think of Joe Scarborough, he is one smart cookie. And the main thesis of this book is surely correct: "[P]arties win the White House by nominating candidates who win the most votes– not feeding endlessly on base resentments that offend crossover voters and shrink the GOP's voter rolls." However, in recounting history, especially from the Reagan Presidency through the Clinton Presidency, Scarborough, a hard right Republican, has trouble following his own advice. He can't seem to speak the word "liberal" without pairing it with "lying" or "maniacal".
January 7, 2014
A very concise, thoughtful and practical guide for steering the Republican Party away from the Becks, Limbaughs, Coultors, Palins and Ted Cruz. Either the party wakes up and embraces the growing Latino population and the swing voters, or else it consigns itself to be a permanent House of Rep political force with no chance at the Presidency or at future constitutional legal decisions via Supreme Court appointments.
July 7, 2016
What a great book - it inspires to the next level of Conservative Politics - showing that the road to the Whitehouse is not "Scorched Earth" but a safe middle ground drawing the strength of a Conservative Base plus that of "Swing Voters" to a centrist conservative position. The Republic and the Republican Party need to find leaders that can lead and not just spout rhetoric if we are to survive the current crisis in America...
February 22, 2014
Agree with some principals but a bit left of center for my tastes. The book though is a fairly quick and easy red. I enjoyed the book but don't know if I would go out of my way to read any of his other books.
November 13, 2016
Great insight into how political parties lose touch with voters. While it focuses on the Republican Party its message applies equally to the Democrats, and it explains part of what just happened in the recent election.
December 12, 2013
Great reference for my campaign in the 2030s.
December 2, 2013
This was an interesting book from the Republican viewpoint, with all of its pre-conceived bias.
January 17, 2014
The GOP could make a comeback sooner with some of the strategies listed by Mr. Scarborough, but it will fall on deaf ears.
July 18, 2015
Nice survey of GOP candidates since Ike.
December 23, 2013
Lots of Reagan worshiping, but a very interesting read.
Displaying 1 - 25 of 25 reviews