I usually read Massachusetts political history from the ‘20sand ‘30s, so this was a bit of a change-up. For me, then, was this book a “missinglink” between ye olde politics (some good anecdotes and asides that neverderail the story) and current politics? Was it analysis of the evolution ofMassachusetts politics over the course of a half-century? Was it a snapshot of politicalfigures easily within living memory, some of whom still appear on ballots tothis day? Was it a demonstration of how the more things change, the more theystay the same (“affordable housing” was the main issue except for those votermaking over $35,000 (!))? Was it a showing for sociological fads that nevercaught on, such as “new collar” populations? Yes, yes, yes, yes, and yes. Thecrowded Congressional primary looked very familiar from the past few cycles.The acerbic anti-Kennedy meritocratic candidate looked very familiar from thepast few cycles (Bachrach was my favorite). Books like this are good because Ifind that a lot of political history within living memory stays locked innewspapers and in oral tradition and never makes its way into books, and growsincreasingly less accessible. I wish there were books like this on everycampaign.
A deep dive into the nitty gritty of how local political campaigns work. The hard work of knocking on doors, contact to get out the vote, getting voters to the polls, campaign strategies, are all here. Also interesting were the analyses made to determine if to run, who can’t win if you run, not if you can win. An interesting perspective. Well worth the read.