<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: with presidential voting, race has mattered
Review: I love it when Brown alums make provocative, sharp, deep texts and films. In this book, Mayer looks at how issues affecting African-Americans have consistently played a role in presidential elections for the past 40 years. Each chapter focuses on a specific election. Though Mayer is knowledgeable that the black-white paradigm is breaking down, he still focuses upon it. This will rub many non-black people of color the wrong way. He may have been more prudent to say "African-American" rather than the overgeneralized "race." Furthermore, he is clearly a progressive and conservative readers will accuse him of bias. Plus, like West, Guinier, and many others have said, people don't want to talk about race; so there will be tons of readers that will resist this book, period. That's unfortunate because Mayer's book is an example of strong political science. And remember, this is a white male scholar saying, "Race has and still matters." I'm sure readers won't find it as easy to label him biased as they would a black academic. It contributes greatly to the field of presidential studies and voting behavior. The fact that this book covers a 40-year span rather than an instant moment in time is also an achievement. (Then again, many can argue that such a book could have covered the presidency since Washington.) The conclusion offers mixed hypotheses that readers across the political spectrum should hear. Mayer's book is an important addition to the study of American history.
Rating:
Summary: with presidential voting, race has mattered
Review: I love it when Brown alums make provocative, sharp, deep texts and films. In this book, Mayer looks at how issues affecting African-Americans have consistently played a role in presidential elections for the past 40 years. Each chapter focuses on a specific election. Though Mayer is knowledgeable that the black-white paradigm is breaking down, he still focuses upon it. This will rub many non-black people of color the wrong way. He may have been more prudent to say "African-American" rather than the overgeneralized "race." Furthermore, he is clearly a progressive and conservative readers will accuse him of bias. Plus, like West, Guinier, and many others have said, people don't want to talk about race; so there will be tons of readers that will resist this book, period. That's unfortunate because Mayer's book is an example of strong political science. And remember, this is a white male scholar saying, "Race has and still matters." I'm sure readers won't find it as easy to label him biased as they would a black academic. It contributes greatly to the field of presidential studies and voting behavior. The fact that this book covers a 40-year span rather than an instant moment in time is also an achievement. (Then again, many can argue that such a book could have covered the presidency since Washington.) The conclusion offers mixed hypotheses that readers across the political spectrum should hear. Mayer's book is an important addition to the study of American history.
Rating:
Summary: A Definitive Guide to the last Forty Years
Review: Jeremy Mayer has delivered a definitive account of the last forty years of presidential elections in the United States. What makes this an even more interesting read is Mayer's uncanny ability to combine raw facts and statistics with irony and impeccable analyses---almost naturally, he describes the racial divide in the United States in a non-partisan nature.There seems to be no target audience for "Running". Reading it will present the known problems of bigotry to those who are interested in transcending the horrible racist cloud that hangs
over America every day (not just on election day). Mayer's book will tell reactionary right wingers what they already know. Occupants of the political middle will undoubtedly be surprised at what they read about the last forty years of presidential politics. For example, JFK had made almost no outreach to minorities until he decided it was essential to winning the White House in 1960. Before that point, African-Americans were in a large part, loyal to the party of Lincoln, but didn't shift Democratic until the Civil Rights movement, along with many sweeping advances enjoyed by minorites during the Democratic 1960's.
Partisans will not always be happy with what Mayer has to say, but one can be sure his writings are accurate, well-researched and honest.
It is virtually impossible for anyone born before the Civil Rights movement to live totally free of racist roots. Presidents and candidates from the American South have racism indeliably stained in their upbringing, and have no way to run from them, no matter how liberal their platforms appear. Such candidates included Jimmy Carter, Al Gore, and Bill Clinton. The only candidate the book depicts as a candidate perceived by voters as a benevolent anti-racist was Walter Mondale, and he was wiped off the political map in 1984; that says a lot about the tolerance of intolerance in the USA.
Ronald Reagan's campaigns ignored racism and he even came across like he thought it was no longer a problem; if this is true then Reagan might as well have professed affinity for the KKK. Mayer depicts Clinton as a candidate who told the nation to simply forget about race, a stance that, if it were true, would have eroded the coalition of moderate whites and minorities that elected him twice.
Mayer has reinforced my negative view of Reagan and has slightly altered my opinion of Bill Clinton, who seems to look for power at every possible opportunity. In conclusion, I predict it will be a long time before we have any honest candidates running for president, Democratic or Republican.
<< 1 >>
|
