Double down : game change 2012

by Mark Halperin

Hardcover, 2013

Status

Available

Genres

General Nonfiction

Politics, Government, Law and Public Policy

Nonfiction

History

All Topics

Publication

New York : Penguin Press, 2013.

Description

The authors of the best-selling Game Change present an account of the 2012 presidential election that draws on hundreds of insider interviews to illuminate what the election meant to both parties, covering such topics as the dramatic Republican nomination fight, the rise and fall of Mitt Romney and Barack Obama's Election Day triumph.

User reviews

LibraryThing member Charles.ODonnell

Better Lucky Than Good; It really Sucks Being Neither
If you wonder how a sitting president can get re-elected in a time of 7+% unemployment with approval ratings that barely crack the halfway mark, whose signature accomplishment is widely unpopular, the answer is to be found in Double Down.

Halperin and Heilemann position Double Down as the sequel to Game Change, their account of the 2008 presidential election, and indeed it is, as many of the same characters reappear and the plot is the same: the focused, disciplined, ruthless campaign with the smooth, unflappable candidate (Obama's) vs. the scattered, dysfunctional, shoelace-tripping campaign with the awkward, gaffe-prone candidate (McCain/2008, Romney/2012). The outcome, even if it weren't already known, is predictable.
It's easy for me to give this book four stars. I'm a total political fanboy/junkie/sycophant--whatever pejorative term you want to apply. I don't care. One of the high points of my life was running into Debbie Wasserman-Shultz in a Washington DC deli and getting my picture taken with her. My wife is almost as bad. We went to the hills of Kentucky on our anniversary getaway in November of 2011 and when I asked her what she wanted to do that evening she looked at me sideways and answered, "You're kidding, right? There's a Republican debate tonight!"
But even if you're not as hopeless as I am, you'll like this book. What the average voter is exposed to during a campaign is the tip of very interesting iceberg. And Halperin and Heilemann write it well.
What they write is the story of Seal Team 6 meets The Gang That Couldn't Shoot Straight. The Obama campaign is depicted as a model of competency. Apart from Obama's disastrous first debate performance (in which Obama's peevish, impatient, and yes, arrogant side, as well as his self-reflective and adaptive side are revealed), and the episodes of infighting among his staff, including the feud between Robert Gibbs and the Valerie Jarrett/Michelle Obama alliance, and the consideration given to replacing Joe Biden on the ticket (shameful way to repay the ultimate team player), the Obama gang fires away at Romney with deadly accuracy.
And a fat, juicy target it is. Part 2 of the book is devoted to the Republican primary campaign, and Romney's frustration as one candidate after another (Bachmann, Perry, Cain, Gingrich) takes the top spot in the polls, only to self-destruct (oops!) or succumb to relentless negative attacks, largely from super-PACs (ostensibly) separate from the Romney campaign. WHY DON'T THEY LIKE ME? reads the headline on TIME magazine. Absent viable candidates (Huckabee, Barbour, Daniels, Christie), Romney finally wins the war of attrition, The Candidate Of Last Resort. And the Obama campaign is content to let the shrapnel fly as they fortify their arsenal.
Not that they needed it. The propensity for self-inflicted wounds--the 47% remark, "I'm not worried about the very poor", and the awkward use of language ("severely conservative" and those right-height trees)--earned a special term among Romney's staff: "Mitt happens." Add to that the external factors such as hurricane Sandy and Clint Eastwood's dada-esque convention performance in prime-time, and it would be reasonable to suppose that the gods had it in for Mitt Romney.
Regardless of your political leanings, Double Down will inspire respect for Obama's campaign (if not Obama himself) and sympathy for Mitt Romney. And regardless of your opinion of the outcome of the election, this book will explain why it was almost a foregone conclusion.

Show Less

11 more

LibraryThing member nomadreader

The backstory: After reading (and loving) Mark Halperin and John Heilemann's first book, Game Change, about the 2008 U.S. presidential election, I grabbed a copy of their follow up, Double Down, which chronicles the 2012 election, as soon as my library had it.

My thoughts: Admittedly, I'm fascinated

by politics. I won't go as far to say I enjoy it most of the time, as I far too often find the antics and actions of politicians maddening, but I do love it in retrospect. Looking back at the minutiae of how elections are won and last, bills are passed, and scandals embraced or ruined fascinate me. Double Down offers all of those things and more. It begins with a prologue of the first debate between Romney and Obama (remember the one when Obama bombed and Romney came off as charming and likeable?) Then the book shifts back to the beginning of the 2012 campaign.

Much of what I loved about Game Change was the lengthy piece about the Iowa caucuses in 2008. It was my first time living in Iowa and participating in these first in the nation events, and both parties had wide open races. That wasn't the case in Iowa in 2012. Obama was the Democratic nominee and Romney was an early national front-runner. In this election, there was so much more drama behind the scenes in the Republican race, and one of my favorite chapters in this book was the one detailing all of the qualified, popular, and well-respected Republicans who opted not to run for a variety of reasons. As fascinating as these insights were, within them is a reminder of why my fascination with politics fares better in hindsight than the present: our election system does not entice the best, most-qualified candidates to run. I also think it's a refreshingly reasonable decision to not want to be president (or go through the brutal election for a chance at the job.)

As with Game Change, my favorite parts of Double Down were the earlier parts, simply because the narrative at the time was so muddled. In the summer of 2011, the Republican nominating contest was a delightful (or appalling, depending on your take) circus to watch...if it weren't part of the process of choosing a president. At the time I found it stressful, but in retrospect, it was fascinating and amusing to relive.

Because I read Double Down only one year after the election, its final chapters held fewer surprises for me. I followed the general election carefully and watched at least an hour of political news coverage each day. Halperin and Heilemann do a wonderful job of placing each event into current and recent historical context, but with the details so fresh in my mind, there were few surprises. It's certainly not a fault of Halperin and Heilemann, but I think I would have enjoyed the ending chapters more if I read them in a few years.

The highlight of Double Down was once again the part closest to my life. In this case, it was the night before the election when Michelle and Barack came to Des Moines. Our little city may play an important role in the beginning of campaigns, but it was a shock to have the president spend his last day of reelection campaigning right here. Mr. Nomadreader and I were there that night, sitting outside on a very cold night, first listening to Bruce Springsteen play, then cheering for Michelle, and finally crying along with President Obama as he gratefully recounted the role Iowa played in his first presidential election. To have caucused for Obama in 2008 with my heart full of hope and to have shared that moment with him (and thousands of others) the night before the 2012 election was a poetic bookend for me. I cried again as I read Halperin and Heilemann recount that night, which will always be a very special one for me.

Favorite passage: This example of Mitt Romney valuing fitness: "Oh, there’s your date for tonight," he would say to male members of his traveling crew when they spied a chunky lady on the street."

The verdict: Double Down is as fascinating, beguilling, intriguing, depressing, frustrating and hopeful as the presidential election it recounts. There were moments I muttered "I can't believe that really happened," and moments I laughed and smiled while saying the same words. It's faithful, entertaining account of a fascinating election.

Show Less

LibraryThing member Schmerguls

I read the authors' book on the 2008 election, Game Change, in 2010 and it was the best book I read that year. I found this book similarly exciting and reveled in it, though at times, as they told of the problems in the Obama camp and of the first debate in Denver I had to remind myself that it all

comes out right in the end. I was surprised that apparently many in the Romney camp actually believed Romney would win, even though I myself, who am no political guru, knew he would not as the campaign ended. Reading this book is something anyone interested in politics will want to do, and if you enjoyed the result of the 2012 election it will be a joy to you, as reading it was a joy to me.

Show Less

LibraryThing member hammockqueen

dsptng. too many big big words...lost the flow of the read. Info good but not as many fun dynamics as when Sarah Palin was running.

LibraryThing member TulsaTV

Couldn't put it down. I followed the 2012 primaries and election fairly closely, so all the inside details were fascinating. The authors did a good job of portraying the point of view of most of the candidates, and making you feel their pain.

If you want to run for President, be sure to have a lot

of resilience and drive, and a supportive spouse.

Show Less

LibraryThing member etxgardener

Mark Halperin and John Heilemann seem to have picked up the mantle of Theodore White as the chroniclers of Presidential elections. Following hard on their book of the 2008 election, Game Change,, Double Down gives us a micro-view of the 2012 race showing all the cxandidates warts and all.

If you're

a political junkie, this is a must read.

Show Less

LibraryThing member stevesmits

If you feel that your cynicism about the political processes in America is waning, read this book and your disgust will be fully restored. It describes in detail the unfolding of the 2012 presidential campaigns of the Republican hopefuls and President Obama. Whatever one's ideological proclivities,

it is fair to say that there are underpinnings of legitimate principles that undergird conservative and liberal points of view about what's best for the American people. Our country has survived, if not always prospered, under all manner of political points of view. Notwithstanding the underlying strengths or resilience of our democracy, this riveting story of the 2012 election confirms how basically corrupt, manipulative and downright tawdry are the means that both parties use to secure victory.

What this in-depth history of the 2012 election describes most vividly -- from the circus-like, media-enflamed Republican primaries to the sound bite strategies of both parties in the lead up to the general election -- is how superficial and sensational the parties and candidates must be to secure enough electoral votes to win. It affirms, sadly, that the American voter is apparently well-satisfied with sensational sound bites, clever if not blatantly dishonest distortions and shallow imagery in reaching his/her judgment for whom to vote. In a real sense, we are responsible for this as we willingly accept this bizarre civic peep show year after year.

The influence of big money on the process is well chronicled. Both parties pander to the relatively few controllers of great wealth in their quest to secure the huge sums of money necessary to wage electoral campaigns. While the democrats have made inroads in attracting small donations from average people, both parties must rake in mega-bucks from the elites to have larders full enough to fund their campaigns. The political strategists and the media manipulate each other throughout the campaigns. Both parties exploit the gaffes of the opposing candidates (to which Romney was particularly prone) as if these were sufficient to tell the complete story of the candidate's character and governing philosophy. And the media fervently and rabidly exploit these meaningless images in their quest for ratings. It is as if the "47%" comment tells us all we need to understand about one candidate or a poor performance in a 90-minute debate tells us enough about the other.

What is also told in this book is how with almost scientific, laser-like focus the campaigns target blocks of voters (both geographically and demographically) who are seen as crucial to winning the "swing" states. For instance, in New York, where I live, there was very little advertising or public appearances by the candidates since the outcome in the state was considered a lock by the Democrats. Contrast this to Ohio or Florida where attention and resources were targeted to the county, maybe the precinct, level to sway the state to one side or the other. It is clear that the Obama camp performed this electoral marketing more competently than the Republicans, but does this not cheapen and diminish the outreach and appeal deserved by all segments of the nation?

There is a remarkable depth of detail and insider information contained in this book. The authors deserve credit for making possible the frankness of the people they interviewed. They do make judgments about the competence of the campaign strategists and, as the outcome affirms, they conclude that Obama people appeared to conduct a more coherent campaign. Romney was certainly constrained by his political past -- his moderate positions as governor of Massachusetts that he was required to abandon in order to win the right-wing oriented primaries left him with a "flip-flopper" image he could never shed.

It seems almost hopeless to expect that future campaigns can be conducted without insult to the intelligence of the American people and with a chance to truly and deeply consider the important philosophical and practical elements that define our leaders. But, as the people do ultimately make the decisions about who will lead them, perhaps there will sometime be an awakening that will promote the kind of political discourse we deserve.

Show Less

LibraryThing member SigmundFraud

I was disappointed by Double Down: Game Change 2012 by Mark Halperin and John Heilemann. Perhaps if you followed the election on a daily basis you knew virtually all that was in the book. I kept looking for new information but never found it.

LibraryThing member JBD1

Classic insta-history in the Woodward style, filled with little gossipy tidbits about the 2012 campaign. By the time I read it, though, I'd read most of the best bits in other places, so the impact was fairly limited.

LibraryThing member Scarchin

This will appeal to folks who like to analyze the X's and O's of politics. I feel that the authors leaked a bit of their personal biases at times when they described Obama and Clinton with over-the-top admiration (Full disclosure- I am politically conservative), but overall I think that the book

was a fair and interesting retelling and analysis of the behind the scenes action leading up to the election of 2012.
*** By coincidence, I was reading this during Christie's "bridge troubles." From how he his described in the book, the bridge-cident isn't surprising. I am convinced that he will not be the 2016 nominee.

Show Less

LibraryThing member jwood652

For all you political junkies, this is a detailed account of the 2012 US presidential election. It gives an insiders view of both camps, delving into complex strategies including preparation and postmortem of the debates. For the casual political observer, it can be a bit daunting at times,

offering comprehensive coverage of the process. I found it interesting, recalling the events, especially the first debate in Denver (where Obama was soundly defeated), getting new insights into the strategies and thought processes.

Show Less

LibraryThing member jwood652

Show Less

Fewer