Winter War: Hoover, Roosevelt, and the First Clash Over the New Deal

by Eric Rauchway

The history of the most acrimonious presidential handoff in American history -- and of the origins of twentieth-century liberalism and conservatism


As historian Eric Rauchway shows in Winter War , FDR laid out coherent, far-ranging plans for the New Deal in the months prior to his inauguration. Meanwhile, still-President Hoover, worried about FDR's abilities and afraid of the president-elect's policies, became the first comprehensive critic of the New Deal. Thus, even before FDR took office, both the principles of the welfare state, and reaction against it, had already taken form.

Winter War reveals how, in the months before the hundred days, FDR and Hoover battled over ideas and shaped the divisive politics of the twentieth century.

Genres: History, American History, Politics, Nonfiction, Presidents, Economics, 20th Century

304 pages, Hardcover

Published November 20, 2018

About the author

Eric Rauchway is an American historian and professor at the University of California, Davis. Rauchway's scholarship focuses on modern US political, social and economic history, particularly the Progressive Era and the New Deal.

Reviews

[CoachJim · Rating 4 out of 5]

Told by a friend that if he succeeded, he would forever be the greatest president ever to serve, and that if he failed, he would forever be regarded as the worst, he [Roosevelt] replied, “If I fail, I shall be the last one.” (Page 6)
Winter War: Hoover, Roosevelt, and the First Clash Over the New Deal by Eric Rauchway

The DNA of the Republican Party in the Twentieth Century runs from Herbert Hoover to Barry Goldwater to Richard Nixon to Ronald Reagan. Hoover represented the shift from the progressive ideals of Theodore Roosevelt to the ultra fiscally conservative and anti-bolshevism philosophy that we now identify with the Republican party. The Hoover economic policies were the tickle-down economics, which was that tax breaks for the wealthy would spur investments that would create jobs and therefore help the working class. This policy would become known as supply-side economics during the Reagan era.

The 1932 presidential election in the United States signaled a major realignment of the political landscape. This election saw a shift by Black Americans from the Party of Lincoln to the Democratic Party. It also saw a change in the Democratic Party from the reactionary politics of Woodrow Wilson and the Southern Democrats that had dominated the party since Reconstruction to a more progressive party.

Black Americans, many of whom had a photo of Abraham Lincoln in their house, continued to see the white class favored. This became even more apparent during economic downturns, where relief efforts were directed towards White Americans over Black Americans.

There is an eerie similarity to our most recent presidential transition. Hoover also was unwilling to acknowledge the legitimacy of his defeat in the election. This affected the preparation Roosevelt would need following the inauguration to deal with foreign and domestic problems. Hoover’s secretary of state Henry Stimson felt he had a duty to help the president-elect. But Hoover remained “steadfastly opposed to his secretary of state having anything to do with his successor.” (Page 166)

This became extremely important given the banking crisis that developed. The financial system was in a panic and the United States faced the possibility of a complete collapse of its banking system. Banks were failing and taking their depositors money with them. Hoover delayed any cooperation hoping the crash would come after the inauguration making it Roosevelt’s fault.

Hoover also began his rehabilitation into the Republican Party. He orchestrated an effort to put his record into a favorable light. He wanted to build a legacy to counter any attacks on his record. He wanted allies placed in the Republican Party to ensure his continued support. Hoover’s conservative politics would become the future of the party.

The 1930s are thought of as the age of dictators. The aftermath of World War I left economic chaos in much of the world. This became especially acute with the crash of the Stock Market in 1929. The lackluster efforts of several governments during that period gave opportunities for dictators to prey upon the economic woes of the masses of people affected. Whether the Romanovs of Russia in 1917, or the Weimar Republic of Paul von Hinderburg in Germany in 1932, or even potentially in the inept government of Herbert Hoover in the United States, many saw dictators as an easy solution. Just prior to Roosevelt’s inauguration Adolf Hitler assumed power in Germany by rallying the people with violent, racist vision. “Roosevelt worried about a similar movement rising in the United States if Americans did not find reason to renew their trust in the institutions that governed them.” (Page 5) Although there were some who wanted him to become a “Benevolent Dictator” Roosevelt wanted no part of a dictatorship and saw fascism as a threat to democracy.

The election of 1932 was a “profoundly ideological election.” For Hoover the New Deal threatened to transform America from its traditions. For Roosevelt America faced its most severe threat and the New Deal was an opportunity to restore the vitality of American life. His focus was on the need to preserve and strengthen democracy against the threats of fascism. He rejected the appeal of the alleged dictatorial efficiency with its loss of liberty. He believed that the way to “avoid radicalism and revolution was to provide a greater measure of democracy and prosperity for all.” (Page 150) Government should better the conditions of the many ordinary people instead of the wealthy few. This contest was between Republicans, who would serve the rich, and the Democrats who would serve the middle and poor classes of people. Roosevelt felt that relief should come in the form of jobs and not just dole. He stressed the interdependence of the economy where workers with jobs would have money to buy goods which would lead to businesses hiring employees. This bottom-up approach contrasted with Hoover’s trickle-down approach. Felix Frankfurter a Roosevelt advisor wrote him that “The way to resume employment is to resume employment. The budget will be balanced when business recovers rather than this foolish theory of magic that business will recover by balancing the budget.” (Page 162)

In 1933 the Twentieth Amendment to the Constitution was ratified shortening the interval between the election and inauguration of the president. (The amendment would not become effective in time for the 1932 transition.) This amendment addressed the need for the incoming administration to deal with a crisis that the nation might face. This was especially important in 1933 with the increasing severity of the depression.

In the 2020 presidential transition a different type of crisis arose, one that will undoubtedly happen again. I wonder what changes might be enacted by Congress someday in regard to that.

[Bryan Craig · Rating 4 out of 5]

Recent historiography has been more kind to Hoover. Historians have said Hoover was not opposed to using the federal government during the Great Depression, but it just wasn't enough to stop the economic hemorrhage of the Great Depression. We forget just how conservative Hoover was.

Well, historian Eric Rauchway has filled in the gap found in the literature regarding the transition from Hoover to FDR. In this book, Hoover hated what FDR stood for and planned for the country, really despised him. Rauchway puts Hoover into a more of a conservative light in this fascinating book. I can understand the trace of conservationism in 1932 that Goldwater would pick up 30 years later, and Reagan over 10 years after that, and then today. One example of today comes from the part of the book covering the failing bank system. You can see the shades of 2008 in these pages as Hoover felt that the weak banks should fail and leave the strong. We heard this same argument during the Great Recession. Save a few banks or save the entire financial system?

Overall, a really interesting book. Worth the time.

[Jim Cullison · Rating 2 out of 5]

Badly organized and downright tedious for lengthy periods of time, this brief volume on the transition from Hoover to FDR seems to last as long as the four months between FDR's ascent and Hoover's exit. While Rauchway's revelations of Hoover's last minute financial machinations are utterly damning, the overall quality of the book is severely undercut by the author's later blithe (and arguably ahistorical) description of the New Deal as a success. Not well-written and not worth your time.

[Cropredy · Rating 3 out of 5]

I chose this book for its possible parallels to the 2020/21 political season with a possible change from Trump to Biden. Hence, readers reading this review post November 2020 may find the comments either prescient or irrelevant.

As we stand amidst the calamity of a pandemic-induced economic disaster with tens of millions unemployed and a president disinclined to initiate any specific relief to those unemployed all the while asserting that everything will naturally come roaring back, one is struck with somewhat similar actions and attitudes of the Hoover administration. Now, I grant you that Hoover was an educated man who had done much good in his lifetime (e.g. Great War relief for Belgium) but he was certain that government programs to distribute funds to the masses (farmers, workers) were dead wrong ("it would lead to communism"). Hoover was convinced that the business cycle would eventually lift the country out of the depression once prices got low enough to entice investors.

Unfortunately for Hoover in the 1932 election, the populace couldn't wait any longer for this natural rebound and overwhelmingly elected FDR. In those days, while the election was in November, inauguration didn't happen until March 4 1933.

During those intervening months, the book promises a dive into the policy disagreements between the lame duck Hoover administration and the announced, but as yet-unenactable policies of FDR. Again, one could imagine the parallels between a lameduck Trump admin and the incoming Democrats in 2021

OK, with all that as motivational backdrop, does the book deliver on its title and provide an interesting read?

Sort of.

There were many policy disputes between Hoover and FDR and the book devotes a chapter to each:

* Aid to farmers (what eventually turns out to become the modern Farm Bill - a price support program)
* The origins of the Republican's "Southern Strategy" to spin off white Democratic segregationists to the Republican side and hence thwart FDR's agenda
* The addition of counsel from women's advocates
* The threat of Nazism and the rise of American isolationists
* The collapse of the banks and Hoover's desire to stick to the Gold Standard, no matter the cost

All sort of interesting, but the "clash" between Hoover and FDR is not like the "clash" between Trump and his opponents. We've become accustomed to histrionics these days and 1932/3 just wasn't the same. There's no doubt that Hoover wanted FDR to fail so he could return to office in 1936 and would do nothing to lift a finger to improve the welfare of Americans during the lame duck period.

Rauchway's book is bookended by chapters on the election and the inauguaration and because these events have a stronger narrative arc, they are more interesting than reading about disputes over aid to farmers.

Summary: An interesting but hardly the first book to read on the Depression and the politics thereof. I'd recommend Lords of Finance: The Bankers Who Broke the World for a far more interesting read on how we got into the Depression and the folly of the Gold Standard. I'd also recommend The Worst Hard Time: The Untold Story of Those Who Survived the Great American Dust Bowl for a searing look at the devastation to farm country in 1935-6. And of course, The Grapes of Wrath

Nevertheless, the paradox of Hoover - smart man, man of good works - who utterly failed during the Depression is an intriguing one so I've added Hoover: An Extraordinary Life in Extraordinary Times to my list.

[I. David · Rating 4 out of 5]

An Excellent Historical Narrative That Looks Much Like the Drama of Today

Please visit I. David’s blog at:

https://www.goodreads.com/author/show...

Winter War: Hoover, Roosevelt, and the First Clash Over the New Deal by Eric Rauchway is the story of events that occurred between Franklin Roosevelt’s November 8, 1932 election and his March 4, 1933 inauguration. While I appreciated this book for its vivid depiction of a critical moment in American history I could not help but compare that moment in history to events of our current time.

Herbert Hoover was a highly conservative Republican President who refused to use the power of his Government to address the country’s Great Depression. He seemed to feel that occasional economic suffering is one of the costs of a capitalist system and that interfering with the suffering would be a threat to capitalism. After one term in office the voters replaced Hoover with Franklin Roosevelt, the Democratic candidate who promised to use an activist Government to aid suffering Americans.

During the period between the election and the inauguration Hoover continued to assert that Roosevelt’s activist Government spelled the end of capitalism. He tried to convince Roosevelt to endorse his conservative policies before the inauguration. And as the inauguration drew near, and he saw that Roosevelt was going ahead with his activist policies, Hoover tried to position himself to be the leader of the Republican Party and the consensus Republican Party candidate for the 1936 election.

This is a very good book that describes the actions and thoughts of the outgoing and incoming Presidents in 1933. The contrast between their views of the role of Government continues to plague the country to this day. And Rauchway uses this contrast when depicting the potential for a calamitous national financial failure during the final days before the Inauguration. Confidence in the banks was falling and customers were lining up to withdraw their money. Banks were starting to go into foreclosure taking their customers’ savings with them. Rauchway deftly goes back and forth between Hoover and Roosevelt to compare Hoover’s refusal to take action with Roosevelt’s preparation to declare a thirty-day Bank Holiday as soon as he is inaugurated. The tension he builds is real and is comparable to that of a good thriller.

Roosevelt’s activist Government response to the crises of his time is similar to Joe Biden’s activist Government response to the crises of our time. It is hard not to see the similarities between the Hoover to Roosevelt transition and the recent Trump to Biden transition. Careful readers will find more and more similarities between the two transitions. One interesting similarity that did not exist was Hoover’s calling Congress into session so that they could approve all of Roosevelt’s cabinet nominees as soon as he was inaugurated. It is hard to imagine that happening today. Notwithstanding this exception, Rauchway has, whether he intended to or not, written a book that proves the idiom “history repeats itself”. I give this book 4 stars and recommend it for anyone with an interest in American history or the role of Government.

[Jordan · Rating 5 out of 5]

Popular lore has it that when Franklin Roosevelt began his presidency, he had no real plan for combating the Great Depression. In this version of the story, often repeated in the press and various histories over the decades, the new deal was little more than a campaign slogan. FDR had supposedly run as a budget cutter, outflanking Hoover on fiscal restraint, not as a big government progressive. Insofar as he had any plan at all, it was to experiment vigorously and see what worked.

Almost none of that is actually true. Eric Rauchway's Winter War is framed as a story about the bitter conflict between FDR and Herbert Hoover during the long transition period between their presidencies, a months-long stretch during which a massive series of bank runs essentially brought America's financial system to a screeching halt. But the book is less a narrative drama than an important historical corrective. Rauchway has carved out an important niche rooting out myths that have burrowed deep into the New Deal's historiography, and here, he takes on the idea that the sweeping legislative effort was just a disorganized, ad hoc exercise in throwing shit at the wall. FDR in fact carefully laid out the main pieces of his agenda during his 1932 run, both in speeches and campaign literature. Voters knew what he stood for. And so did his opponent Hoover, who would spend much of the winter handoff period trying to make Roosevelt renounce his agenda, rather than taking the dramatic actions that were necessary to save the economy, and the country. It's a must read for understanding the era.

[Corin · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very readable, lots of in-depth research. This book specifically covers the period between when Roosevelt was elected and when he took office - on March 4 of the following year.

Bottom line, Roosevelt did a lot of good even if he was politically motivated. Hoover was a racist, antisemitic, self-righteous, self-centered *sshole.

[Gerry Sacco · Rating 4 out of 5]

Wow, reading about tariffs sure hits different in 2025...

This was a good book. It had a decent amount of information I wasn't aware of, conversations, general backroom information, it was good.

Main takeaways:
Hoover, though sometimes though of by me as an absent minded, in over his head person, really wasn't. He was a complete idiot that was very loud and very, very wrong about a great many things.
FDR, really had to play quite the balancing act his entire presidency, and it's easy to forget that at times. But also, he was right about so many things, and very early on as well.

I really liked the bit about only being able to run ahead of your constituency on a few things before you lose them, really apt.

As I said, good book. Work the read for sure. It came off textbook-y at times is why I gave it 4 stars instead of 5.

[Jason S · Rating 4 out of 5]

An interesting book. Argument that Hoover is the father of modern conservatism, not Goldwater, could be more spelled out. Slightly too hagiographic to FDR, but otherwise insightful into the transition between administrations in 1932.

[Barbara · Rating 3 out of 5]

As we negotiate the Trump-to-Biden transition, it is interesting to learn more about another fraught interregnum. And to be grateful that the inauguration is now in January!

[Ray Palmer · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a history of the transition from the Hoover administration to the FDR administration, from November 1932 to March 1933, the last time a president was inaugurated in March. The author details the difference between Hoover and FDR on policy regarding government intervention in the Great Depression, foreign policy, civil rights, and the collapse of the banking system.

Hoover was adamantly opposed to FDR’s stated policies during the campaign. The author points out that the New Deal, contrary to what some historians have argued, was a well articulated, clear system of policies and that the American people knew exactly what they were voting for. And this put pressure on FDR to stick to his guns and fulfill his promises to the voter.

Also, my previous reading history on the subject paints Hoover as more of a moderate compared to his conservative predecessors, Harding and Coolidge. The author argues that this is not the case and that Hoover, by the time he became president, was as conservative as his predecessors and was actively trying to restructure the Republican party, eliminating all the Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt influences, in order to make a strictly conservative party.

This is the time of the “Lily-white Republican” movement. Black people had been the backbone of the Republican party in the South since they could vote. But conservative Republicans felt that in order to be successful they needed to embrace segregation and abandon civil rights.

FDR for his part was happy to let the Republicans hang themselves with their own rope when it came to civil rights. However, he said absolutely nothing about civil rights during his campaign because he, too, needed southern support in order to implement the New Deal. He only allowed his campaigners to state that in helping the poor the New Deal would also help black Americans considering how conservative economic policy had continued to keep them poor.

But the biggest bone of contention appears to be economic policy. Hoover was irrationally convinced that liberal/progressive economic policies were socialist and was convinced they would destroy America. This is mind-boggling for a number of reasons. First of all, 12 years of conservative economic policy had pushed the US closer to collapse than at any time in its history aside from the Civil War, and as inauguration day loomed, the economy was only getting worse. Second, Hoover’s own conservative advisers were arguing the same thing FDR’s advisors did, that the empirical evidence showed he needed to do something to address the issues of the financial collapse that was picking up steam in the winter of ‘32-’33.

Think of the US economy in late 1932 as a series of fires burning throughout a city that is threatening to engulf everything. Hoover was convinced that the government should do nothing and let people suffer as they may. He believed that if a neighborhood burned down, that was evidence that it should burn down and the people deserved it for poorly constructing it. Meanwhile, FDR believed the government should do everything in its power to work with the people to put out the fire and then worry about fire hazards.

Everyone except Hoover himself was looking at the data and trying to address the problem while Hoover stuck to his principles regardless of the evidence to the contrary. Hoover even predicted immediate collapse as soon as FDR attempted to implement any of his policies and demanded FDR reject the New Deal publicly in order to stabilize the economy.

Of course, as soon as FDR became president and started working with congress through his famous “100 days” the economy almost immediately stabilized and everything Hoover had been arguing was proved to be wrong and the US enjoyed its greatest era of progress ever over the next four decades.

Meanwhile Hoover spent the rest of his life promoting his empirically vacuous conservatism, which heavily influenced Nixon, among others. It would eventually come into prominence again with Reagan for the first time since the ‘20s.

The author argues that the contention between Hoover and FDR is a precursor to the current state of the Republican party relative to the problems we face as a country.

[Stefanie Van Steelandt · Rating 4 out of 5]

FDR’s first inauguration was the last presidential inauguration to be held in March, almost four months after the elections in November. He was elected by an overwhelming majority, defeating incumbent President Hoover. Winter War describes those four months in detail, highlighting how the fight between the progressive FDR and the conservative Hoover led to the establishment of the Democratic and Republican parties as we know them today.

Hoover was convinced he would win re-election against NY Governor Franklin Delano Roosevelt, so when he ended up losing he decided to do everything possible to work against FDR, even if it meant worsening the plight of the American people as the Depression got worse. In eight chapters, Rauchway highlights the differences between Hoover and FDR in dealing with the issues of the day: foreign policy, the plight of the farmer, Communism, African Americans and social justice, the threat of Nazism and the bank failures which reached a peak just days before the inauguration.

Winter War was a good read which is relevant to today’s political world. While in certain places it came across as a little scholarly, it incorporated lots of new information not often found in other books on the Roosevelt presidency. The ride FDR and Hoover took together on their way to the Capitol for the inauguration was marked by an icy silence which came about through the events of the previous four months (and longer if you add in the campaign). While the focus is on politics, many anecdotes are included which make both presidents human.

Having read many books on FDR, this provides a focus on his four months as President-Elect not often found in other books. On the other hand, if you are interested in how the Republican Party became what it is today, then Winter War should be on top of your reading list.

[Bill Sleeman · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Winter War: Hoover, Roosevelt and the Clash over the New Deal by Eric Rauchway (2018) focuses on the interregnum between FDR’s first election and his inauguration, a period that Rauchway suggests, that outgoing President Hoover used to create obstacles to Roosevelt’s success before taking office. While I was always aware of the lag time before the inauguration date was moved I had not considered it in the light of how the time could be used to the detriment of the incoming president. Rauchway successfully focuses on this brief window to illustrate exactly how Hoover did bear responsibility for the national bank failures and for fully anticipating the rise of fascism in Europe.

Published in 2018 the author’s thesis offers an engaging comparison (intended?) between the purposefully obstructive Hoover and President Trump’s insistence that he did not lose the election. Most telling though was Rauchway’s comparison to FDR and our current situation, quoting Rex Tugwell that “Roosevelt’s fear was not only or even immediately of the war Hitler wanted to start, but of the ‘latent Nazism in the United States.’ Sympathy for Nazism would weaken American democracy.” (p.186). Consider today’s news (2/23/2022) recounting an attack by Neo-Nazis on a community reading of the Communist Manifesto or, more directly, the multiple Nazi flags in plain sight in the Trump inspired attack of January 6 and you cannot but see that history sadly does repeat itself.

This is an excellent book – both for what it tells us about our past and for what it tells us about our present.

[Brendan O'connell · Rating 1 out of 5]

A terrible, terrible book. Mr. Rauchway is incapable of rising above his own partisan, biased politics and writing a proper review of a critical time in the development of the U.S. Hoover/Roosevelt was a major clash over how America would be governed. The founders crafted the Constitution to keep the power in the hands of the people in the form of republicanism. They rejected federalism and being 'governed from above'. In 1932, the program of the New Deal was a gross intrusion into the economic and political lives of Americans and was a rejection of republicanism and the independence of the individual. Mr. Rauchway mentions this, briefly, but he obviously believes Roosevelt was right and the book just justifies that opinion by misrepresenting facts and coercive writing. Mr. Hoover grew up in a tiny cabin in Iowa and his parent died before he was ten (not mentioned in the book). Hoover went on to become an internationally renowned mining engineer, worked in Australia and China and became a self made millionaire, saved literally 10's of millions of Europeans after the war (again, not mentioned) and then devoted himself to politics. Roosevelt was born rich. To make Hoover sound like a callous, arrogant SOB is to grossly misrepresent him. Hoover believed in the resourcefulness of America and he thought, if left alone, Americans would sort out their finances. Roosevelt promised handouts, which was a fundamental shift of American political philosophy from the founding til his tenure. This topic deserves better than this partisan, biased rendition of the story as presented by Mr. Rauchway. NOT RECOMMENDED.

[Dave · Rating 4 out of 5]

For most of American history the U.S. President was inaugurated in March, leaving four long months between the election and the inauguration of a new chief executive. Usually this wasn't an issue, but during the Great Depression, after the election of FDR in 1932 over the incumbent Herbert Hoover, there was tremendous conflict between the old and new administrations. Rauchway contends that this "war" of words presaged a century of struggle between liberals and conservatives who still share the profound philosophical differences over the proper role of government that divided Hoover and FDR.

Rauchway did extensive digging through the letters, papers, and even diaries of various prominent American political figures (including Hoover and Roosevelt) to discern double meanings behind proclamations and public speeches. Rauchway is highly critical of Hoover for his failure to act to stem the tide of bank failures in 1932, though Rauchway admits that Hoover's inaction was at least partly rooted in staunch anti-interventionist philosophy (and only a little sour grapes over the landslide election results).

This book covered a conflict that I never knew existed and made it compelling and full of meaning and portent. I especially enjoyed the portrayal of Hoover as a tragic figure, weeping on the train ride away from Washington after FDR's inauguration.

[Casey · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book was interesting from the perspective of two men with very different visions on how to end the Great Depression. Hoover spent the transition period after the election in trying to corner Roosevelt into approving or adopting his solutions. Roosevelt was more politically adept than Hoover and managed to avoid the traps laid out to commit his administration before taking office. The book does a good job of reinforcing what has been written about the personalities and beliefs of these two men.

I recommend this book for anyone who wants an insight into the transitioin that took place between these two presidents.

I received a free Kindle copy of Winter War by by Eric Rauchway courtesy of Net Galley  and Perseus Books, the publisher. It was with the understanding that I would post a review on Net Galley, Goodreads, Amazon and my fiction book review blog. I also posted it to my Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn and Google Plus pages.

I requested this book as I have read a great deal about these two presidents, but not one devoted to the transition of power between the two. This is the first book by the author that I have read.

[Laurel Deloria · Rating 2 out of 5]

I dont read fiction, and so to try to combat that bad habit. I read a few chapters, then skimmed all except the last. The book is full of details,(many more than I need too know) . the book gives the characteristics of the two opposite men, Opposite in phyisiques, character, preparation for a question, etc, etc, I'm sorry I wasted my time on this, could have spent in a good novel.

he history of the most acrimonious presidential handoff in American history -- and of the origins of twentieth-century liberalism and conservatism

As historian Eric Rauchway shows in Winter War, FDR laid out coherent, far-ranging plans for the New Deal in the months prior to his inauguration. Meanwhile, still-President Hoover, worried about FDR's abilities and afraid of the president-elect's policies, became the first comprehensive critic of the New Deal. Thus, even before FDR took office, both the principles of the welfare state, and reaction against it, had already taken form.

Winter War reveals how, in the months before the hundred days, FDR and Hoover battled over ideas and shaped the divisive politics of the twentieth century.

[David · Rating 4 out of 5]

A chronicle of the transition from the Hoover administration to FDR's New Deal and Hoover's resistance to what he considered to be a transition to a treasonous administration that would ruin America. However, it was Hoover who was neglecting his duty as President by ignoring the needs of citizens as he believed the economy would right itself if he balanced the budget, clung to the gold standard and just lest let the people suffer to save the status quo. He opposed government intervention and set the stage for what now we see as the modern Republican view, that government should serve the economy and those who do well in it and ignore the needs of the American people. Fortunately for America FDR ignored Hoover's frequent requests to give up on his proposed policies described in the New Deal.

[Monical · Rating 4 out of 5]

terrific short book covering the Hoover-Roosevelt election and the period prior to Roosevelt's inauguration (which, at the time, occurred in March!). In the depths of the depression (which was only going to get worse), Hoover insisted recovery was right around the corner while Roosevelt campaigned for active intervention. The book covers Hoover's machinations to try to hook Roosevelt into committing to policies favorable to Hoover but contrary to Roosevelt's aims; the development of new banking, agricultural and social policies by Roosevelt; and the activities of his "brains trust." I found it a fascinating thorough coverage of this short but important period in history. Looking forward to others by the author.

[Monte Lamb · Rating 3 out of 5]

The period of time between FDR's winning the election in November, 1932 and March, 1933 when he was inaugurated was a time of severe financial times, particularly with many banks closing and causing panic. This book details the differences in Herbert Hoover and FDR in how they believed the crisis should be handled. The different ideas were in stark contrast to each other and the tactics used by both were as well. These differences set the table for the basic liberal vs. conservative political fights for the next 100 years. I thought the book dragged a little in the middle but it ended well and gave a clear picture of the events as they occurred. It was very insightful for me and I learned a great deal.

[Rick · Rating 2 out of 5]

I'll give Eric Rauchway credit for trying to make something out of the period between the administrations of Hoover and FDR but he's trying to build off something that is just to thin. The period between the election is quite justifiably important but the argument that it warrants a specific history doesn't fly. We can all make the correct assumption that there would be a great deal of acrimony between the two based on politics and philosophy but there is little to build from. A greater focus on the desperate straits the country was in 1932 would have been much better.

All in all it's a book that I would pass on.

[Paul Henry · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good book: well written, well researched, footnoted. The period covered, leading up to the 1932 election, Hoover's lame duck last months in office, and the first 100 days, presents a very well balanced history. However the last chapter, dealing with Roosevelt's and Hoover's legacies, definitely shows the author's bias toward Roosevelt. Dealing with the depression wasn't all successes and roses, since even as late as 1939 the economy still hadn't fully recovered and many of Roosevelt's New Deal program had turned into failures. Still, highly recommended for the insights into the 1932-33 period covered by the book and the political genius of Roosevelt.

[Rebekah Chaney-Griggs · Rating 3 out of 5]

I always appreciate a perspective into a narrow scope of history (in this case - the four months between Roosevelt’s election & inauguration) to analyze greater patterns in an evolving system. It’s very ambitious, and Rauchway did it well. However, for something that is a sort of comparative history between two figures, there was much more focus on Roosevelt, and Hoover got much less analysis, and was left out a considerable amount for a comparative monograph. Also tended to draw too much of a Great Man History approach.

[Mark Greenbaum · Rating 4 out of 5]

The seeds of the modern Republican Party are right here in early 1933, ideologically *and* temperamentally in Herbert Hoover's obstinate refusal to accept the results in 1932, his utter dismissal of his drubbing. The seeds for Gingrich in Reagan, for Reagan in Goldwater, for Goldwater in Hoover. The idea that government can never be a proactive force for good and can only be shrunk further goes back more than I expected. And man: Hoover was an irresponsible, mean-spirited piece of shit.

[Austin Hahn · Rating 4 out of 5]

Compelling history about the transition period between FDR and Hoover, which arguably laid the foundations for the political divide that has lasted since and was cemented in the 60s.

Also, a contentious and uncooperative transition during a huge national crisis, a sitting president sitting on his hands riding out his term, progressives hoping for the best from the new admin, fascism on the rise are all fairly familiar.

[Jeff Hauser · Rating 5 out of 5]

Sadly relevant gripping account of how coldly calculating lame duck Herbert Hoover was... and how much FDR had a plan and mindset for the moment on nearly everything... except race. (conspicuous exception the otherwise supportive Rauchway gets into in real, depressing detail)

Brisk, informative read.

[Jonah · Rating 3 out of 5]

The book does a good job dispelling the myth that there was little ideological distance between FDR and Hoover, and provides an interesting history of the early stages of modern conservatism. However, the details are pretty thin, mostly I think to make it more palatable to a more general audience. Nothing wrong with the book, but only 3.5 stars because I doubt I'll ever think about it again

[Peter · Rating 5 out of 5]

Quite an impressive book that deserves more than my quick review. Clearly lays out the origin in the split in views on what the proper role of government is since 1932 between Republicans and Democrats.

[Aloysius · Rating 3 out of 5]

A quick overview of one of the most consequential presidential transitions in American history: one that set the stage for the ideological directions of the two major parties of this land.

[Andy · Rating 5 out of 5]

So much history repeating itself. Learned a lot.