25 May 2022
I preface all the reviews I think I have ever written on here by stating that I am dreadful at formal reviews. Don't read this as a formal review, read this as a guy trying to piece together random thoughts into something coherent.
So how does one actually review a book like this?
This is a genuine question. I don't know how to do this.
Don't expect a nonpartisan lens here.
This Will Not Pass is impossible to read without a partisan lens. If you admire Trump, I have a hard time imagining you've touched this book, except to possibly deface it at a bookstore. (I haven't seen that happen to THIS book but I have seen it to other books.)
If you identify as a centrist, moderate, or progressive Democrat, you will find yourself frustrated to the hilt with any number of major and minor players in this book.
I identify with the progressive wing of the Democratic Party, and perpetually feel myself drawn ever leftward. I voted Sanders in the primary, though I gave money widely. (Not a lot of money, mind you, but I gave a little to several candidates.) Despite this orientation, I have quite a lot of admiration and respect for folks like Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden. The Clintons, in particular, I find endlessly fascinating as topics to read about.
So reading this book, for me, was a frustrating and occasionally heartbreaking endeavor.
Is there a moral here? Yes.
I think you have to get to the end of the book to get a "moral" of the story of sorts. There are two quotes that could be considered a moral. One is from former Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull about America's diminished reputation and influence on the international stage. The second is more blunt, from Rep. Lauren Underwood (D-IL):
"Someone is going to get shot."
A book like this has limited utility, if we are being honest.
It's hard to read a book like this as anything but an extended piece of journalism, outdated by the time it's been published. It's shelf-life is limited, and it's biggest bombshells were made public in strategic releases in the weeks leading up to its eventual publication day.
One imagines that a book like this will be useful to future scholars attempting to piece together the psyche of American politics during this period.
(Assuming, of course, we have some kind of future and we haven't all succumbed to the ravages of pandemics, nuclear annihilation, climate change, and whatever our robot overlords will inflict on us.)
I listened to this book as an audio book.
I say that for two reasons:
#1) The following review would likely be less haphazard if I had a copy of the book in front of me.
#2) This book listens like an old-time radio soap opera. Were this not real life, this might be a good thing, an entertaining romp. But it is real life. as a result, it is exhausting.
Is it Veep? Is it The West Wing? Or is it the hellhole that swallowed CNN Plus after four weeks?
Eh, I tried.
Okay, so the book itself: I have tried to pull out some themes of sorts. The following are not exhaustive.
Theme #1: Trump looms large.
It's hard to read a book like this and not see villains everywhere.
But we have to start with the monstrosity that is Donald Trump. A failed president, a clear and present danger to America here and now. Trump looms over this whole book, much like he looms large in the modern political era.
The modern Republican party is absolutely disgusting in obsequiousness to Trump, and this book is chock full of examples of that.
Theme #2: Wild as though this might be, Kevin McCarthy might be worse.
I'm watching last night's episode of The Mehdi Hasan Show on MSNBC on Peacock as I type this, and one of his guests is Tara Setmayer. Tara Setmayer is a conservative ex-Republican who spent years working on Capitol Hill in communications. She is now heavily involved with the Lincoln Project, the polarizing outfit of ex-Republicans doing what they can to demolish their old party. (I know they're held with skepticism by political purists, and for good reason, but their campaign ads hold no punches.)
I disagree with Tara Setmayer on plenty of policy aspects, but as a pundit with incisive commentary on her former party, she's one of a my favorites. I doubt it will happen, but she's the one I'm pulling for to be Meghan McCain's replacement on The View. (Seems like the show is leaning toward Alyssa Farah Griffin, depressingly enough.)
Anyway, Setmayer is in a segment talking about the cravenness of Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY). Setmayer talks about how, once upon a time, Stefanik was seen as indicative of a new generation of women in Republican politics: she wanted bipartisanship, she thought climate change was a crisis, etc.
Mehdi Hasan mentions that he believes that Stefanik's 180 on Trump is more worthy of condemnation of even the most ridiculous of the right-wing elements of the Republican party, because she know better.
I think the exact same thing can be said of McCarthy. We see McCarthy do whatever he can to get into power. He has no governing philosophy. He has no principles. He has a single objective: get power. He is desperate to Speaker of the House. Setmayer has said on TV for MONTHS that that will never happen and there is some intriguing corroboration of her point in this book.
Anyway, if Trump is the most toxic element of politics in 2022, McCarthy might be #2. And this book is full of evidence to support that.
Theme #3: The Altar of Bipartisanship
In the summer of 2021, my hometown was in the midst of a heated contest to fill a congressional seat vacated by former Rep. current Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Marcia Fudge. The hot candidate of the moment was Nina Turner, a Bernie Sanders campaign chair who had served on the Cleveland, Ohio City Council and in the State Senate. Turner picked up the endorsement of the Plain Dealer, the city's major newspaper.
I am having a heck of a time trying to find the article which discussed their interviews with the dozen candidates for the seat, but in the clips of their editorial board interviews as published, Turner made comments about bipartisanship that are incisive. She described bipartisanship as honorable and a noble goal, but one that requires a willingness to give and take. She stated that the modern Republican Party doesn't have enough spine to engage in good faith discussions when it comes to major policy, but that she would seek to find as much bipartisan cooperation wherever she could. This stood in stark contrast to the other candidates, including eventual winner Shontel Brown, who spoke about how bipartisanship was a major priority for them.
It's hard not to pay attention to politics in 2022 and not be aware of the outsized significance of two Democratic senators who have successfully held up large swaths of the Biden administration agenda: Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) and Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ).
This book talks about multiple efforts to woo the pair to the GOP, about how they've rebuffed those efforts.
The image conjured of the two is, frankly, not flattering. Manchin is portrayed as someone who views bipartisanship as an end goal, not as a means to a policy end. Sinema is portrayed as a nightmare to work with, someone who bonds more easily with GOP Senators and Representatives and both holds and is held at a distance by her Democratic colleagues.
Sinema in particular is already facing serious headwinds going into a 2024 reelection bid. This book demonstrates why, over and over again.
Manchin taking umbrage at the fact that Neera Tanden tweeted negative things about Republicans is fantastically dumb.
Both seem to worship at the altar of bipartisanship. Bipartisanship itself is the goal, not actually accomplishing something for the country.
Oh and Manchin is quoted MULTIPLE TIMES dismissively saying that people in his home state shouldn't get any money because they'll all just go use it to buy drugs. I am not kidding.
Theme #4: The old party leaders are still there, in the peanut gallery.
One unsurprising "revelation" in this book is the fact that the Obama/Biden bromance is far less real than it has been portrayed.
This 100% did not surprise me. The more I read about Obama as a human, the more I think I wouldn't like him very much at all. Biden, for all his faults and tendency to gaffe, is a genuine human, complete with the quirks that endear and frustrate. At one point, Biden is reported to think that Obama is jealous because Biden seems willing to go bigger than Obama. Obama seems to scoff at his former VP and the folks of Obamaworld are even more incredulous. Honestly, I have a lot of admiration for Obama and what he accomplished during his presidency, but I have a feeling I wouldn't get along with much of Obamaworld, Obama included.
Hillary Clinton gets a single mention, as someone frustrated she isn't consulted enough. I like Hillary a lot, but I can't say I blame Biden for not consulting her regularly. They were once close, but that largely seems to be a closeness of the past. Also, Biden won. Hillary lost. Her place is set in history, to be sure, but...
Theme #5: The need for generational change is wildly apparent.
Again, I have plenty of respect for Nancy Pelosi in particular, and Chuck Schumer as well, but there definitely seems to a sense of frustrated tiredness in every single description and conversation this book reports regarding these two. Schumer in particular seems to have met his match in the relentless stubbornness of Manchin and Sinema, and doesn't seem to have anywhere to go with them.
I reacted skeptically a few years ago when Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) talked about the need for "young people" in politics in his own writings. While I recognized the truthfulness of that fact...Swalwell is in his 40s. Only in American politics are the middle-aged deemed "young." And while I don't doubt that Nancy Pelosi probably has more energy than I do despite being more than 50 years older than me.... well, again. Generational change.
Theme #5: The expectations for the incoming Biden administration were sky-high.
And this encompasses so many things, from the pandemic to diversity represented in his Cabinet, to the nature of the bills he wanted passed.
That second one sticks out a great deal in my mind. Biden's closest intimates in politics tended to be older white men, and they are undoubtedly overrepresented in his Cabinet. Yet his administration is undoubtedly the most diverse in American history. Of course, he cannot and should not have tried to rest on those laurels, and the frustration described in the book seems misplaced. The Democratic Party undoubtedly wanted, needed, Biden to succeed in office, so those criticisms came from a place of support. As a white man, I wish my fellow white men would react to challenges with grace and humility, not frustration.
Theme #6: Kamala Harris.
We get a good look at the VP selection process, and the perpetual frustration that seems to have been Harris' tenure as the VP.
I hope and pray, genuinely, that Harris succeeds as VP. But this book is bleak in its outlook of her prospects.
Theme #7: Afghanistan.
Not good.
Theme #8: All told, though... Biden might actually have a quite a lot of substantive accomplishment to show for a chaotic first year in the presidency?
I mean, by the end of year 1 of the Trump presidency, he had already expressed sympathies with white supremacists and tried to ban a whole religion. Biden got decent legislation passed?
The final, ultimate question: Is Biden transformational or custodial?
This seems to be the great unanswered question of the Biden presidency. I was one, and frankly I am still one, who thinks Biden is uniquely poised to be a transformational president in the way a Franklin D. Roosevelt was, or a Lyndon B. Johnson was. Frankly, the myriad problems the US and the world are facing demand he be one. Hopefully he will be.
Okay that's all I got.
And it's not much.
Anyway, I gave this book four stars. Do with that what you will.