Standoff: How America Became Ungovernable

by Bill Schneider

Bill Schneider, former CNN senior political analyst, takes us inside the voting booth to show how Americans vote and why their votes sometimes seem to make no practical sense.

In the 1960s, a rift developed between the Old America and the New America that resulted in a populist backlash that ultimately elected Donald Trump in 2016.

Schneider describes an American populism that is economically progressive and culturally conservative. Liberals are attacked as cultural elitists (“limousine liberals”), and conservatives as economic elitists (“country club conservatives”). Trump is the complete populist package. He embraces social populism (anti-immigrant), economic populism (anti-free trade), and isolationism (“America First”).

Standoff examines a number of hard-fought elections to show us how we got to Trump. He asserts the power of public opinion. He points to the public that draws the line on abortion and affirmative action. He shows why an intense minority cancels a majority on gun control, immigration, small government, and international interests.

Standoff tells us why fifty years of presidential contests have often been confounding. It takes us inside to watch how and why Americans pull the lever, how they choose their issues and select their leaders. It is usually values that trump economics. Standoff is required reading for an understanding of the 2016 election and the political future.

Genres: Politics, Nonfiction

336 pages, Hardcover

First published May 15, 2018

About the author

Bill Schneider is a novelist, screenwriter, and journalist.

Librarian Note: There is more than one author in the GoodReads database with this name. See this thread for more information.

Reviews

[Jeanette · Rating 2 out of 5]

This is theory that rambles all over the place. But the prime "problem" is that he has defined entire categories of "new" and "old" (as he has named his opposition sectors) not only incorrectly, but also within way too many "what ifs".

For instance, he posits all types of scenarios that never happened (if Al Gore won, then this would have been the response etc.) and uses them as theory "examples" for characteristics of each side's "divide".

It's written poorly as to subject matter continuity. Topic titles of chapters don't even jive with their sub-sections. Often. He uses far more historical that just isn't. It's his interpreted "historical".

But theory is theory and everyone has their choices to see "things" as they "are" for their own "eyes"? The problem is that he doesn't see the Republican side for anything of its core or actual behaviors for historical past record at all but only in a leftist "eyes" observation of what he thought they were then. And now too. Which at least 75% of the time is just plain wrong. So the end result is like a 18th century European nobleman with servants dressing him because he can't even reach or use the tool to connect the buttons trying to explain how a 20th century farmer fixes and prepares his combines.

He's accepted every leftist connotation and definition of populist, reaction, backlash. For instance, he states repeatedly that the Republican Party is the party of angry white men. Just plain incorrect and never more incorrect. It's one of the reasons his 2016 election section is just about a 1 star.

His theory's definitions in at least 50% of all the words used to describe Trump's Populist or past Populist movements (and Conservative trends too come to think of it) within their appeal, success, variances etc. are so wide of the mark to past historic reality and the present multi-continental trends that I wonder how this book did for sales. But then again, he has his audience- the choir which accepts all of his own "definitions". Still, I'm sure it didn't do well. It holds huge blind spots in past interpretations- even for those outside of the "political" about "the others'" cultural cores.

He has some measure of faith in the American citizen populous and of the pendulums. I do too, probably more. But he sees their "scales" of judgments quite differently. For instance he really believes that they don't see "low" and Alinsky techniques in the way that the people actually do. He gives them (voters) "good intent" credit, but he doesn't give them the intelligence that they truly own to observe the actions and the associations and not just "the words".

Overall, this book seems more like a "cheer lead" for hope written for those who have Trump Derangement Disorder more than it is anything else. Even then, it doesn't hit the right spots to show them any bright "light at the end of the tunnel" as far as I can see. He puts more "hope" into the structures of format and government (USA) than he does in its workers. The focus is always on the governmental in all of this- and the governing. It's not at all upon the "governed" unless for some judgmental disdaining or description focus.

And the most erring of all here are his interpretations of what just has happened in the last 10 years (America and other continents too). Categorizations and in actions- his is a distinct departure from the reality. See trailer for this book- "how they make no practical sense" quote. They make no sense TO THE AUTHOR AND THE PUBLISHER.

I know nothing about Bill Schneider at all. Zero. But if this author is old enough- his 1960's sure were vastly different than mine. And he gives way, way too much credit and cause for its legacy.

[Dan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Bill Schneider's book made for a great survey of the American federal political landscape over the last century.

As a younger voter, I find it difficult to be able to properly contextualize party politics given that my first "real" memory of federal politics is Al Gore's presidential bid. I found Bill Schneider's book to be incredibly helpful in furthering my understanding of the changing power dynamics and structure of presidential politics through a fairly non-partisan lens. Since the book chronicles campaigns, the content becomes slightly repetitive (as is to be expected) but is still presented with good context to show how different campaigns compare/contrast.

This book is well paired with David Daley's Ratf**ked (https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2...)

[Suzanne · Rating 4 out of 5]

Author Bill Schneider was always quick to provide cogent analysis on fast moving events when he worked with CNN as a political analyst from 1990 - 2009. In STAND-OFF: HOW AMERICA BECAME UNGOVERNABLE, he applies the same clear, direct approach to 50 years of elections to make his case. He believes there are two Americas: a New and an Old, with different political and social outlooks stemming from the 1960’s. He works his way through each presidential election and each major issue and makes his case. There’s no question that the book is engaging and on point for our current climate. This is a historical analysis that ends at our present time; it offers no suggestions for the future. I admit I might have liked a few forward-leaning thoughts. There is, however, much to be gleaned from this fast moving book. I received my copy from the publisher through NetGalley.

[Greg · Rating 4 out of 5]

Standoff: How America Became Ungovernable

By Bill Schneider

Greg Cusack
January 18, 2019



The roots of America’s political deadlock go back to the great civil war of the 1960s: a cultural civil war in which a New Left and a New Right emerged to challenge the country’s post-World War II consensus. The center emptied out, especially in the 1970s, after two centrist presidents, Republican Gerald Ford and Democrat Jimmy Carter, failed to govern effectively. (p. 35)

The great disconnect in American politics today is between public opinion, which longs for unity, and politics, which thrives on division. (p.71)

These two quotations from Mr. Schneider’s book express his central themes. For someone who has lived through the entire period about which he writes, and who – as someone who has long both followed, and participated in, politics – remembers well the story he relates, I found little of importance in this book that was truly new to me.
This is not a criticism, however; it is just a statement of fact. Since most Americans are younger than I am today, this book offers a well-told, highly readable, and non-partisan account of how we got to the sad place we find ourselves at these days.
Ultimately, his account reveals not just countless failures of leadership –- on the part of multiple players, including elected officials, members of the media, and increasingly divided citizen-partisans – but also shows that as the executive branch of our government has expanded its powers, especially those of the presidency, the legislative branch has steadily weakened itself as it remained silent about executive expansion and sought safety by avoiding taking potentially costly positions on both war and major domestic issues.
In addition, a vital piece of maintaining a functional republic – the commitment by citizens and public officials alike to pursue the common good of the whole – has virtually disappeared. In their writings, the Founders referred to this essential quality as civic virtue, and by this they meant those qualities of honor, truth-telling, wisdom and moderation that the ancient Roman republic celebrated as virtu.
Our English word virtue fails to convey the fulness of virtu which is derived from the Latin word for man, vir. Essentially, the Founders believed that the Romans were correct when they looked with contempt upon anyone who did not pursue the larger good of the Republic because they preferred private endeavors focused on pleasure or profit. Only those persons who prioritized the pursuit of the larger common good over and against that of self-interest were acting as true citizens.
The Founders also despised factions or political parties since both inevitably led to divisions that undermined the common good.
Unfortunately, I have found no one who has written how republics that have lost civic virtue – like our own – manage to resurrect it before chaos and disintegration occur.
For the United States of America, the hour is truly very late!

[Oktay Yagiz · Rating 4 out of 5]

Standoff –How America Became Ungovernable by Bill Schneider puts into plain sight the ineffectiveness, if not the fragility, of the American system of government structured as an exaggerated version of checks and balances and separation of powers. What made it so was the paranoia of the Founding Fathers who represent generations of colonial settlers whose resentment of an all-powerful state was irreversibly molded by the oppression they had suffered in their countries of origin where the powers of the high and mighty went mostly unchecked and hardly balanced.

The American government is not only built on checks and balances among the executive, legislative and judicial bodies but also on separation of power among the Federal Government and the state governments, and between the latter and the cities and counties. Then, there is the media, and most importantly, the public opinion, the author contends, that has slowed down and halted many an adverse move by the political establishment.

With so many constraints, the government is almost stymied, and America has become ungovernable.

Every dark cloud has a silver lining though. As the author concludes, “The US constitutional system, which was designed in the 1770s to protect the country from a tyrant, can also protect the country from a megalomaniac.”

Perplexed and skeptical I have always been with the “American way of running a country” (through which stopping things getting done, by the way, is a lot easier than getting things done). After four perilous years with Trump, however, I have come close to calling this ‘way’ a blessing. Come to think of what would have happened had Trump been given as free a hand as those tyrants of whose ways he is openly so envious.

A great book to read to see how democracy may work sometimes by not working, though I wish he had spent fewer pages on the details of so many political campaigns,and naming so many names.

[Alva · Rating 5 out of 5]

Without minimizing the horror of the Trumplican takeover of the American government, Schneider manages to improve the spirits of this reader, at least, by putting developments into historical contexts, especially the history of the American presidency, the New Left and the New Right over the past fifty years. Schneider writes with the ultimate hopefulness of an observer who knows that all things must pass. Having bolstered my spirits, I now move on to the far bleaker outlook of Timothy Snyder's "The Road to Unfreedom," the necessary counterpoint in the dialectic of optimism and pessimism we must all conduct within ourselves so as not to drown.

[Michael Paquette · Rating 5 out of 5]

How we got from JFK to Donald Trump in half a century. An interesting and thoroughly researched historical study of public opinion, populism and political discourse that has divided our nation and split our political system. A brilliant and concise look at the shifts in our governing history over the last fifty years by a long time political correspondent. An insightful understanding of the political landscape and how Americans views have changed over time and how we have grown apart as a nation and become entrenched in a deeply divided government.

[Hapzydeco · Rating 3 out of 5]

Bill Schneider, CNN’s senior political analyst, feels that he system of checks and balances is working exactly as intended. Let’s hope Schneider is correct.

[Joanna S · Rating 4 out of 5]

It was sometimes hard to follow purely bc of the organization of the book. Overall, enjoyed the book as it summed up the views/sentiments/outcomes very well. Definitely had a lot of "oh wow" moments