The Last Debate: A Novel of Politics and Journalism

by Jim Lehrer

sharp satire of the presidential debate that changes the course of electoral politics (and the news business) forever--by Jim Lehrer, who has been a moderator of past presidential debates. The targets of this satire--religious fundamentalists, political handlers, self-important journalists, feral network programming heads--could not be more timely.

Genres: Fiction, Politics, Literary Fiction

372 pages, Kindle Edition

First published January 1, 1995

About the author

James Charles Lehrer was an American journalist and the news anchor for The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer on PBS, known for his role as a frequent debate moderator during elections. Lehrer was an author of non-fiction and fiction, drawing from his experiences and interests in history and politics.

Reviews

[Barbara Nutting · Rating 5 out of 5]

I don't know how Lehrer does it unless he has access to a crystal ball, but this book written in 1995 is describing Trump to a tee! This hypothetical Republican running for president is racist, adamant about a wall, arrogant, rude, for isolationism, fanaticism and is referred to as a Buffon who will take us over the cliff to extremism - sound familiar?? I'm actually not quite finished with the book, but had to get this off my chest. It is so uncanny - wish I knew how to get in touch with Lehrer to discuss this!! Just finished and it got even better....the Power of the Press worked in this novel, unlike in reality where the vulgar, ranting clown was actually elected President!! Lehrer's look at his own profession is another prophecy that has come true - get the dirt and spread it around and around and around. David Muir and Anderson Cooper are the only "good guys"!!

[Ashevlin · Rating 4 out of 5]

Oh my god! How did Jim Lehrer know in 1995 that Trump would be running for president in 2016? The similarities had me laughing out loud. This was a very entertaining read.

[Ethan Michael · Rating 2 out of 5]

We were a PBS family when I was growing up, so I'm familiar with Jim Leher's brand of non-nonsense, just-the-facts brand of nonpartisan Gentlemen Journalism. Much of The Last Debate can be categorized as Leher's doleful lament to what he sees as the end of journalistic integrity. There's too much entertainment, too much personality, too much partisanship, too much arrogance, too much corporatism, too much profiteering, not enough dignity, not enough politeness. In the world of the novel, journalists of the 90s are dubbed "clownalists" by the cynical masses (witticisms do not come naturally to Leher it seems). All of this has an unfortunately fusty creakiness to it - especially when paired with novel's grumpy anti-computer (?) sentiment and strange obsession with Affirmative Action. I'm unsure whether those passages were a critique of the entrenched racism in the American political/journalistic machine or if it was just Jim airing more grandpa-like grievances. Very much old-man-yells-at-cloud vibes.

As much as the novel is Leher's disgruntled treatise on what's wrong with modern American journalism, it's also his fantasy of America. He imagines an America where a presidential debate ends up being the most watched television program in history, where people are literally stopping in the street and running into bars in order to watch the explosive actions of journalists. A presidential debate is regarded multiple times as having the significance of a military coup or an assassination. It's an America where a republican candidate getting accused of domestic violence and saying "fuck" on live television is enough for right-wing voters to completely abandon him (as if...). "History is being made," characters intone to one another with graveness and awe. This is definitely not Trump's America. In these ways, the read is rather quaint, almost wistfully utopian. Journalism itself is held in the highest of esteems: it's a fast-paced, intrigue-infused mystery game, all about finding clues and putting the story together; sometimes assuming other identities if that means getting the scoop! Wowsers! It made me think Leher probably considers Brenda Starr the journalistic ideal.

All in all, it's a breezy, almost cozy read. Minus a full star because any time Leher wrote a character of color or a young character, I was grinding my teeth. He constantly has a Mexican journalist interjecting "olé" and saying things like "Enough of this taco shit." A black journalist's inner monologue includes such unnecessities as"I'm just a black girl," or "What is this white lady talking about?" It's not that their respective races are integral to their characters, their races dominant any other characterization with one-note reminders that hey, you're reading the perspective of a person of color now lest you forget! Leher, who was in his early 60s when he wrote this, has his 34-year-old protagonist muse "Easy come easy go, especially for those of us who are sexually active." I'm turning 34 in two weeks...I wonder if I'll instantly start sounding like someone double my age.

[Rev. M. M. Walters · Rating 3 out of 5]

Tom Chapman is a writer for a monthly news/politics/lifestyle magazine called the New American Tatler. He's covering the presidential campaign between a lacklustre Democrat and a Republican media personality who has never been run for anything but who has solid conservative credentials (sounds an awful lot like Donald Trump). As the Republican pulls ahead in the polls, the one and only debate between the two is scheduled. Four reporters who will make up the panel decide that the Republican would be a disaster for the country resolve to torpedo his candidacy by getting him to reveal his true self. They get some information about his violent uncontrolled temper, his abuse of women and his general xenophobia and decide to use it. Chapman, present for the debate and its aftermath, wants to write an investigative report on what happened and why. He tells the story of his quest and conclusions in his own voice.

The novel is more than just a story. It is something of a meditation on the new journalism where the reporters become stars in their own right. Although the candidate the reporters take down reminds me of Donald Trump, the beek was written before Trump appeared on the national scene. If Lehrer had a particular person in mind, he does not say. The big question throughout the book is what is the proper role of the journalist. Is it simply to be an impartial observer of events? Is it to pursue public figures and go beyond their pblic statements? Is it to advocate for a cause? The reader is left to answer those questions for him/her self. Through Chapman, Lehrer certainly has a somewhat nuanced position, but he wisely leaves it to the reader's own decision.

[James · Rating 2 out of 5]

Is every American as obsessed with race as Jim Lehrer seems to think they are? I swear every page contained some sort of reference to race. At some point, I'm pretty sure people just kind of do their own thing without living every moment through a racial prism.

Wish the book had been less of a meta-narrative about journalism and more of the political novel I was looking for...

[Kathy Bartlett · Rating 4 out of 5]

It is amazing how relevant this book is neatly 30 years after it was written.

[Marty · Rating 2 out of 5]

The author, Jim Lehrer, is the long-time anchor of The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer on PBS. Although I have listened/seen Lehrer for years on PBS, I had no idea he also has written over a dozen novels and several plays. Certainly he should have a great background for a story of politics and journalism. –He almost has too much background. The novel is slow moving, and often contains too much detail about journalistic ethics. If I weren’t a bit of a politics junkie I don’t think I would have stuck with the novel.
The Last Debate centers on what happened in the last presidential debate. (The year is not given in the book.) The Republican nominee was a Bible-quoting conservative who, until that point, was a shoo-in to win the presidency. The moderators (journalists) questioned him about charges of violence against women (giving specific names and events) and other temper problems. Did the moderators totally misuse their position of journalists to swing the election? The “author” of the book, newsman Tom Chapman, does his best to find out the background to the debate, and when his editor tells him to stop, he refuses. The story is interesting if you really like politics and journalism and ethics….. but otherwise I would not recommend it.

[Chris · Rating 1 out of 5]

This could've been a good book and an interesting fictional treatment of the lines between citizenship, activism, and journalism. Instead, it's an embarrassment, especially coming from someone who actually covers politics. For this book to be even remotely plausible (SPOILER ALERT), you have to buy the premise that a presidential candidate from a major party could make it to eight days before an election without allegations of being a violent, abusive sack of shit coming out. It's not plausible now, and it wasn't plausible when the book was written. On top of that, the writing is hackneyed, and the affirmative action sub-plot is handled with such a tin-ear that the eye-rolling made it near impossible to read. This novel honestly made me re-evaluate my view of Lehrer as a journalist, and not for the better.

[Bobbie N · Rating 3 out of 5]

SUMMARY: The American people are faced with a poor choice in the upcoming presidential election. The Republican candidate is a handsome, charismatic figure who holds audiences spellbound with his speeches, but is also a racist, nationalist, fundamentalist demagogue. The Democratic candidate is liberal, earnest, and deeply committed to his beliefs, but has absolutely no personality and has all but given up his winning the race. Four reporters are chosen to be on the debate panel, and during their preparations, are given information that leads to their own debate about how to handle the debate, knowing that politics and journalism will be changed forever no matter what decision they make. COMMENTS: seemed a little far-fetched in parts

[Nancy · Rating 2 out of 5]

The author's stature as a journalist led me to expect more from this "political novel." It is a fairly interesting plot about four journalists changing the course of an election by their tactics at a presidential debate. The premise was interesting; the moral questions worth pondering; but the writing was less than compelling.

I have been closely following most of the debates (all of them!) this election cycle so I thought this book would be timely---but it disappointed me.

[Mary Frances · Rating 3 out of 5]

The news moves on, so some of the references in this book make it dated, but it is a fun read for those who enjoy political novels. In the end, the big surprise and result stretches credulity, as Incan't figure out why it was hidden so well, but I still enjoyed the book.

[Pam Foster · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a delicious book! I have never been disappointed with any of Jim Lehrer's novels and was just as delighted with this one as all the rest.
Thought provoking, at times preposterous, but just downright couldn't-put-it-down.

[Marvin · Rating 2 out of 5]

An interesting read but with more pretensions to significance than it really had. I enjoyed it while considering it a pretty mediocre, unmemorable book.