Susan’s review of Confidence Man: The Making of Donald Trump and the Breaking of America > Likes and Comments
115 likes · Like
Helpful review. Thank you. I'm a bit undecided about this one and your insight helps.
But she's Maggie Haberman, most reputable journalist.
Lilly, I suspect you are being sarcastic, but that's okay.
Kimberly, I'm glad it was helpful.
Upon reflection, I would probably recommend Susan Glasser and Peter Baker's recent book The Divider: Trump in the White House, 2017-2021 over this one, though both are fine options. I gave the Glasser/Baker book five stars. That one did concentrate more on his political life, whereas this one was half bio/half politics. But while Baker and Glasser have done plenty of media as well, their book feels less over-exposed.
@susan good to know about Divider – I was going back and forth btwn the two and you helped me decide. <3
Wonderful! Pan the book because of the author's appearances on TV!! How in-depth of you! Of the many Trump books I've read, this is the most complete study of Trump's roots and how he became so warped. I saw a lot of Haberman's TV appearances selling her book and that didn't keep me from reading it or cringing at what it shows about us and the state of our republic.
Um, Mike? I would hardly call this four-star review a pan. But thanks for sharing your thoughts.
Susan—Read your review again. Most of it has nothing to do with the timing of the book and your reading of other Trump books, certainly not this one! For sharing my thoughts, ☺️
I too have read several books on Trump and found very little here that was new. I too have been obsessed with this man and cannot understand why he is still at large. At any rate, I have decided to give myself a break. No more books or news stories about Trump until I see a headline saying “Trump sentenced to……”
I read Bill Wyman’s review and in his opinion he states it is truly terrible, that the author has just pieced quotes and articles together and has done much insightful work at all.
That’s Bill’s opinion. I have the book here and will be reading it soon. I might think totally different or even the same as Bill. The only way to know is to read the book.
Excellent book. Not a lot new here, but she goes behind the scenes a few times to prove what we already know. Everything is very well documented. Well-written, well-researched book. Tells it like it is.
Every book that has been written about the narcissist is from personal experience with him. Maggie Haberman has been personally covering the White House for four years and gives a history starting from his infancy which I've not heard anywhere. Evidence that he has developed the skill to be a 'con-man' which he has continued to fine-tune.
Thank you Susan. So many people on here when they go to leave a review feel they need to provide a lengthy description of the book basically regurgitating it. However you’ve provided the essentials here: a succinct description of the book, and what made you think it was good/bad. I appreciate this. Bless.
I have also been obsessed with this man who has generated followers willing to blow up the US Constitution and the Rule of Law. I've read many of the books, but I'd welcome your recommendations for the ones you thought were really good.
I've come a little bit late to this book. Like someone else here mentioned I needed to take a break from reading about Trump. I've read quite a few Trump books and this one compares well. I would recommend it to anyone to read. In addition to being informative of his life before the presidency it gives a nice summary of his term in office. I thought the author was quite lenient on Trump compared to others (Wolfe, Woodward). There were some instances where she seemed to withhold negative commentary (which would have been well justified). My guess is her intention was to deliberately just report the facts and let the readers draw their own conclusions.
Thanks, Susan and other commentators. I finally got around to reading this book a few weeks ago. I hesitated to read it mostly because of this article and review of the book in the New Yorker earlier this year:
newyorker.com/ culture/ persons-of-interest/maggie-haberman-the-confidence-mans-chronicler
The New Yorker author Katy Waldman has some mixed feelings about Haberman's balancing act between NYT reporter and author.
I've appreciated Haberman's work as a CNN commentator during the hush money trial, so I decided to give it a quick read, knowing that most of the best tidbits have been shared during her many, many, many promotional interviews during a very long book tour. I agree with the New Yorker that her book clarifies many things that her daily bylines do not. As a reporter, it's just the facts, but her book is much more clear and direct about the ever-present danger of this con man.
Look, I get she's not an NYT OpEd writer (I wish she were), but it makes me think the reporting in the New Yorker has many valid points and criticisms. Mainly, was content held for the book that could or should've been reported or shared previously? Even in her CNN gig, she'll share unflattering antidotes only to catch herself and try to retreat to a neutral position.
Overall, I found the book frustrating and a little late to the party. She's smart, articulate, and a great writer, but I found her approach disappointing.
back to top
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Kimberly
(new)
Oct 05, 2022 02:52AM
Helpful review. Thank you. I'm a bit undecided about this one and your insight helps.
reply
|
flag
But she's Maggie Haberman, most reputable journalist.
Lilly, I suspect you are being sarcastic, but that's okay.Kimberly, I'm glad it was helpful.
Upon reflection, I would probably recommend Susan Glasser and Peter Baker's recent book The Divider: Trump in the White House, 2017-2021 over this one, though both are fine options. I gave the Glasser/Baker book five stars. That one did concentrate more on his political life, whereas this one was half bio/half politics. But while Baker and Glasser have done plenty of media as well, their book feels less over-exposed.
@susan good to know about Divider – I was going back and forth btwn the two and you helped me decide. <3
Wonderful! Pan the book because of the author's appearances on TV!! How in-depth of you! Of the many Trump books I've read, this is the most complete study of Trump's roots and how he became so warped. I saw a lot of Haberman's TV appearances selling her book and that didn't keep me from reading it or cringing at what it shows about us and the state of our republic.
Um, Mike? I would hardly call this four-star review a pan. But thanks for sharing your thoughts.
Susan—Read your review again. Most of it has nothing to do with the timing of the book and your reading of other Trump books, certainly not this one! For sharing my thoughts, ☺️
I too have read several books on Trump and found very little here that was new. I too have been obsessed with this man and cannot understand why he is still at large. At any rate, I have decided to give myself a break. No more books or news stories about Trump until I see a headline saying “Trump sentenced to……”
I read Bill Wyman’s review and in his opinion he states it is truly terrible, that the author has just pieced quotes and articles together and has done much insightful work at all. That’s Bill’s opinion. I have the book here and will be reading it soon. I might think totally different or even the same as Bill. The only way to know is to read the book.
Excellent book. Not a lot new here, but she goes behind the scenes a few times to prove what we already know. Everything is very well documented. Well-written, well-researched book. Tells it like it is.
Every book that has been written about the narcissist is from personal experience with him. Maggie Haberman has been personally covering the White House for four years and gives a history starting from his infancy which I've not heard anywhere. Evidence that he has developed the skill to be a 'con-man' which he has continued to fine-tune.
Thank you Susan. So many people on here when they go to leave a review feel they need to provide a lengthy description of the book basically regurgitating it. However you’ve provided the essentials here: a succinct description of the book, and what made you think it was good/bad. I appreciate this. Bless.
I have also been obsessed with this man who has generated followers willing to blow up the US Constitution and the Rule of Law. I've read many of the books, but I'd welcome your recommendations for the ones you thought were really good.
I've come a little bit late to this book. Like someone else here mentioned I needed to take a break from reading about Trump. I've read quite a few Trump books and this one compares well. I would recommend it to anyone to read. In addition to being informative of his life before the presidency it gives a nice summary of his term in office. I thought the author was quite lenient on Trump compared to others (Wolfe, Woodward). There were some instances where she seemed to withhold negative commentary (which would have been well justified). My guess is her intention was to deliberately just report the facts and let the readers draw their own conclusions.
Thanks, Susan and other commentators. I finally got around to reading this book a few weeks ago. I hesitated to read it mostly because of this article and review of the book in the New Yorker earlier this year: newyorker.com/ culture/ persons-of-interest/maggie-haberman-the-confidence-mans-chronicler
The New Yorker author Katy Waldman has some mixed feelings about Haberman's balancing act between NYT reporter and author.
I've appreciated Haberman's work as a CNN commentator during the hush money trial, so I decided to give it a quick read, knowing that most of the best tidbits have been shared during her many, many, many promotional interviews during a very long book tour. I agree with the New Yorker that her book clarifies many things that her daily bylines do not. As a reporter, it's just the facts, but her book is much more clear and direct about the ever-present danger of this con man.
Look, I get she's not an NYT OpEd writer (I wish she were), but it makes me think the reporting in the New Yorker has many valid points and criticisms. Mainly, was content held for the book that could or should've been reported or shared previously? Even in her CNN gig, she'll share unflattering antidotes only to catch herself and try to retreat to a neutral position.
Overall, I found the book frustrating and a little late to the party. She's smart, articulate, and a great writer, but I found her approach disappointing.
