Electing the President, 2000: The Insiders' View

Rating:
Summary: A look back at Campaign 2000
Review: There is much that can be learned from this compilation of the campaign strategists holding forth on Election 2000 -- much more so than in any of the other popularized accounts of the campaign and the "36 days." Especially if Bush and Gore wind up facing each other again in three years, this is a book to refer back to.

Several things struck me from this volume. One of them was the completely unrepentant manner the TV network representative dealt with the badly botched Florida call on election night. Every indication is that the media in future elections will continue to rely on the same pseudoscientific models that led to more than one mistaken call that night -- rather than relying on the actual results, which are really the only story one should follow.

Other revelations from this book will fascinate political junkies: why Karl Rove says Bush lost Iowa, how Al Gore's handlers tried to test ad hominem attacks on Bush in focus groups, why Clinton never really campaigned with Gore. Sure -- none of these revalations are juicy enough to make the pages of the National Enquirer, but they are nonetheless an impressive addition to our body of knowledge about how political campaigns are planned and executed at the highest levels.

Rating:
Summary: An interesting read
Review: This book, like Larry Sabato's but unlike almost all others on Election 2000, is an attempt to be unbiased. Unlike Sabato's book, however, it is "The Insiders' View." That is to say, it was produced from a conference attended by many of the principals: Gore workers, Bush workers, and media workers. And I found it interesting as a guide to what the people were thinking as they managed the two campaigns and the media coverage. I enjoyed it, though it was not as much an analysis of the election (which most of the books were) as the campaign. It's certainly a worthwhile read.