• Complain

Carville James - Were still right, theyre still wrong: the Democrats case for 2016

Here you can read online Carville James - Were still right, theyre still wrong: the Democrats case for 2016 full text of the book (entire story) in english for free. Download pdf and epub, get meaning, cover and reviews about this ebook. City: United States, year: 2016, publisher: Penguin Publishing Group;Blue Rider Press, genre: Politics. Description of the work, (preface) as well as reviews are available. Best literature library LitArk.com created for fans of good reading and offers a wide selection of genres:

Romance novel Science fiction Adventure Detective Science History Home and family Prose Art Politics Computer Non-fiction Religion Business Children Humor

Choose a favorite category and find really read worthwhile books. Enjoy immersion in the world of imagination, feel the emotions of the characters or learn something new for yourself, make an fascinating discovery.

Carville James Were still right, theyre still wrong: the Democrats case for 2016
  • Book:
    Were still right, theyre still wrong: the Democrats case for 2016
  • Author:
  • Publisher:
    Penguin Publishing Group;Blue Rider Press
  • Genre:
  • Year:
    2016
  • City:
    United States
  • Rating:
    5 / 5
  • Favourites:
    Add to favourites
  • Your mark:
    • 100
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5

Were still right, theyre still wrong: the Democrats case for 2016: summary, description and annotation

We offer to read an annotation, description, summary or preface (depends on what the author of the book "Were still right, theyre still wrong: the Democrats case for 2016" wrote himself). If you haven't found the necessary information about the book — write in the comments, we will try to find it.

Every politico and pundit has tried to explain the 2016 presidential race, but James Carville - the multiple best-selling Ragin Cajun and grand strategist of Bill Clintons rise to the White House - has largely stayed silent. Until now. He straddled the punch bowl, dropped his pants, and whipped out his member, which, he assured everyone, was very large. Then Donald Trump pissed right into the punch of the Republican Party. So begins Were Still Right, Theyre Still Wrong- with that image of Donald Trump defiling the celebration that shouldve been the GOP Establishments easy march to the White House. In Were Still Right, Theyre Still Wrong, Carville updates his #1 New York Times bestseller from 1996, the campaign tract that Bill Clinton once credited for his re-election. Carville skewers the GOPs dumpster fire of a record over the past twenty years, and argues that Trump is the living manifestation of a failed party. From income inequality to race relations, Carville believes that Democratic Party is not only the dominant party of the past, but of Americas future, too - and he makes the case in his uncensored and earthy style. Among other things, Were Still Right, Theyre Still Wrong features a hot take on the Clinton e-mail scandal, a story about Carvilles momma schooling a pair of crawfish mongers, a lecture on political panics called The Anatomy of Bullshit, and a recipe for how to grill your (non-existent) Trump Steak. And wit and sharp tongue aside, Carville turns it all into the most cogent and thoughtful analysis of the 2016 and how the Democrats can--and must--be victorious--;A letter from the author -- Prologue: 1.6 billion facts & a snowball -- Introduction: Americas Muller moment -- Snake oil or the cure? -- American isnt what it used to be -- Shit sandwiches -- The anatomy of bullshit -- Interlude: where we were wrong -- Trumps original sin -- Id sooner work for Kim Jong-un -- Conclusion: do facts matter anymore?

Carville James: author's other books


Who wrote Were still right, theyre still wrong: the Democrats case for 2016? Find out the surname, the name of the author of the book and a list of all author's works by series.

Were still right, theyre still wrong: the Democrats case for 2016 — read online for free the complete book (whole text) full work

Below is the text of the book, divided by pages. System saving the place of the last page read, allows you to conveniently read the book "Were still right, theyre still wrong: the Democrats case for 2016" online for free, without having to search again every time where you left off. Put a bookmark, and you can go to the page where you finished reading at any time.

Light

Font size:

Reset

Interval:

Bookmark:

Make
ALSO BY JAMES CARVILLE Love War with Mary Matalin Its the Middle Class - photo 1
ALSO BY JAMES CARVILLE

Love & War (with Mary Matalin)

Its the Middle Class, Stupid! (with Stan Greenberg)

40 More Years (with Rebecca Buckwalter-Poza)

Take It Back (with Paul Begala)

Had Enough? (with Jeff Nussbaum)

Stickin: The Case for Loyalty

Buck Up, Suck Up... and Come Back When You Foul Up (with Paul Begala)

... And the Horse He Rode In On

Were Right, Theyre Wrong

Alls Fair (with Mary Matalin)

Were still right theyre still wrong the Democrats case for 2016 - image 2

Were still right theyre still wrong the Democrats case for 2016 - image 3

An imprint of Penguin Random House LLC

375 Hudson Street

New York, New York 10014

Were still right theyre still wrong the Democrats case for 2016 - image 4

Copyright 2016 by Gaslight, Inc.

Penguin supports copyright. Copyright fuels creativity, encourages diverse voices, promotes free speech, and creates a vibrant culture. Thank you for buying an authorized edition of this book and for complying with copyright laws by not reproducing, scanning, or distributing any part of it in any form without permission. You are supporting writers and allowing Penguin to continue to publish books for every reader.

Blue Rider Press is a registered trademark and its colophon is a trademark of Penguin Random House LLC

eBook ISBN 9780399576232

Version_1

To Bill and Hillary Clinton

CONTENTS
A LETTER FROM THE AUTHOR

Dear Reader,

Im a guy who likes to traffic in metaphors and analogies. Some pundits use words like ideologically divisive or partisan entrenchment to describe our politics. But, for me, the tribal nature of American democracy can always be described with more colorful words, phrases like dogfight or pissin contest or pig slaughtera boucherie, as we say in Louisiana.

Maybe I got this literary nature from my momma, who went door-to-door selling encyclopedias. Maybe its just the way we Cajuns talk. But whatever the reason, last year, when I thought about the upcoming presidential election, the metaphor I chose was a grand celebration.

I envisioned a party. A literal Republican party.

I could see it all, clear and bright. There they were, all the Republicans in Congress whod been hoisted to victory in the 2014 midterm landslide.

And there were the Republican governorsall thirty-one of themstanding sentry by the bathroom doors, ready to pounce should a transgender person walk in.

And there were Hannity, Rush, and OReilly, surrounded by a bevy of blonde commentators, clinking glasses of a beautiful red punch served by white-gloved girls from the Junior League.

Oh, my friend, it was all so vivid! It was as clear as my crystal scotch glass, and the clearest vision of all was the bright center of the affair. There, huddled around the punch bowl, were the presidential candidates themselves. Not all the candidates were there, of course. Not the carnival barkers or the outsiders. Only the real candidates had been invited. Among them were five governors and four senators, the most promising batch of Republican contenders in a generation, with a collective 193 years of experience in elected office.

What were they doing? you ask. Well, they were laughing of course. They were guffawing their lily-white asses off.

And why not?

At the moment of this particular fiesta, the Republican Party controlled the House, the Senate, and the vast majority of state legislatures and governors mansions across the country.

Basically, all the GOP needed now was an easy 270 electoral votes on Election Day, and then theyd effectively control the entire government. It would be a Republican paradise, just like the 1950s. The GOP would be able to pollute what they wanted... deregulate what they wanted... and discriminate against whom they wanted! The only thing standing in their way was the Democratic competition, which happened to be a seventy-four-year-old socialist and a woman under FBI investigation.

So, yes, of course the candidates were laughingand laughing loudlyas they sipped their punch, a dazzling crimson punch with lime wedges and just the right amount of Veuve Clicquot champagne.

In fact, maybe it was all that celebrating that kept the GOP dull-eyed to the intruder in their midst. Maybe it was the laughteror the alcoholthat kept everyone from noticing there was an uninvited guest, a person who was just then landing his helicopter outside.

Indeed, someone was crashing this Republican party, but no one knew it until the ballroom doors flew open and in walked a man who promptly strode to the center of the party. He straddled the punch bowl, dropped his pants, and whipped out his member, which, he assured everyone, was very large.

Then Donald Trump pissed right into the punch bowl of the Republican Party.

As Im writing this, I do not know for absolutely sure that Trump will be the GOP presidential nominee. Its May now. The Republican National Convention is still three months away, and for all I know, the delegates in Cleveland could give the big prize to Trump or to Speaker of the House Paul Ryan or to the cryogenically frozen head of Walt Disney. Frankly, it does not matter.

Win, lose, or draw in Cleveland, Trump has presided over the death of the Republican Party as we knew it. In a race that seemed like a lock for the leading lights of the GOP, Trump found a rip in the body politic, an edge like one of those perforated lines on a ketchup packet that says, TEAR HERE . Except, in this case, the line divided the GOPs Establishment from its base, and Trump tore it away with his tiny stumpy fingers. He ripped the party straight through the gut.

Today we have a Republican Party where voters hate the party leaders, and the party leaders hate the voters. In fact, the magazine National Review is the closest thing the GOP has to an official publication, and one of their main contributors, Kevin Williamson, painted Trump supporters as loser drug addicts, writing that the truth about these dysfunctional, downscale communities is that they deserve to die.

Donald Trumps speeches make them feel good, he wrote. So does OxyContin.

Of course, the billion-dollar question of this election cycle has been: Why did this Republican civil war happen?

Why Trump?

Why now?

Well, there are probably a thousand explanations for Trumps hostile takeover of the GOP. There are demographic shifts and economic indicators that help explain it, and Ill get into many of them later on. But sometimes the best explanation is the simplest one: Trump happened because the Republican Party had been so wrong... for so long... about so many things. That also happens to be a core argument of this book:

Trump succeeded because the Republican Party failed.

For thirty years, Republican politicianseveryone from Reagan, to W. Bush, to Paul Ryanhave shown up in those hardscrabble towns that the National Review talked about. Theyve visited dilapidated bandstands and the union watering holes, places where they dont serve Veuve Clicquot champagnejust dollar beers and a shot. And those politicians have offered the voters the same bargain every time.

That bargain went something like this:

Next page
Light

Font size:

Reset

Interval:

Bookmark:

Make

Similar books «Were still right, theyre still wrong: the Democrats case for 2016»

Look at similar books to Were still right, theyre still wrong: the Democrats case for 2016. We have selected literature similar in name and meaning in the hope of providing readers with more options to find new, interesting, not yet read works.


Reviews about «Were still right, theyre still wrong: the Democrats case for 2016»

Discussion, reviews of the book Were still right, theyre still wrong: the Democrats case for 2016 and just readers' own opinions. Leave your comments, write what you think about the work, its meaning or the main characters. Specify what exactly you liked and what you didn't like, and why you think so.