Chicks On Lit discussion
Archive 08-19 GR Discussions
>
"Team of Rivals" Feb 2016 CHUNKY read discussion and schedule
message 51:
by
Sheila , Supporting Chick
(new)
Feb 19, 2016 08:35AM
Mod
reply
|
flag
Stacey - were you aware that Doris Kearns Goodwin has written a memoir called Wait Till Next Year that has to do with her love of baseball - but more perhaps about her childhood. I wish I had seen that interview - I'm not a baseball or sports fan either - but I love Ken Burns' material and love her historical writing. And I love the fact your husband reads with you.
How are we doing with the reading? Anything intrigue or confuse anyone in this week's section?I was intrigued by the popularity of political speaches. Without mass media, people regularly attended political speeches where they heard a candidate articulate a well thought out arguement or position. If they could not attend such an event, they read the entire transcript in a paper. Today, most of the electorate hears only sound bites. Even if we listen to a debate, the candidate is given 2 minutes to voice a position. If we attend a political rally, it is for a candidate we already support. I think that it is interesting that with greater means of mass communication, we hear less of a politician's thoughts. How do you think the shift in political communication has changed the election process? Do you think a Lincoln would have been electable in today's system?
During the Republican convention, Lincoln deliberately positioned himself to be the second choice of everyone. If a candidate overtly made him/herself the second best person, we might see that as manipulative. What do you think of Lincoln's strategy? Obviously, it was successful, but was it honest? As he puts his cabinet together, he privately says one thing while publically saying something else. He does it to preserve as much unity as possible. What do you think of this double speak? How would you feel about a candidate today who said one thing privately while saying another publiclly if that discrepancy came out?
Mod
I agree Irene, that is was interesting how involved people were in politics then, how widely the full speeches were disseminated. It would seem that people then probably had a better understanding of all the candidates that we do now days with our sound bites media.
I think Lincoln was smart to position himself to be the best second choice. I would imagine that may be what both Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio are hoping to be in the current Republican primary, behind Donald Trump, though I don't think either of them compare to Lincoln! :-)
Good points Irene. And modern politicians don't just have advisors, they have speech writers. I don't think I had a problem with Lincoln's double speak. I'm sure in today's world we are rampant with it. IMHO there is a fine line between good manners in not saying everything we think, and outright lying and manipulation. Lincoln was certainly manipulating, but it struck me that his intentions were targeting a greater good.
Along those lines that Sheila mentioned the power of the printed word comes to me. I was thinking how little content there is anymore in our local newspaper. It is assumed that the masses want to or will read it online. I guess. I am old fashioned I still like to read the newspaper and read books hard copy. It irks me that most of what we want to read or hear is selected for us.
Rebecca wrote: "Along those lines that Sheila mentioned the power of the printed word comes to me. I was thinking how little content there is anymore in our local newspaper. It is assumed that the masses want to o..."But wait, that's the beauty of online! In pre-internet days, you were subject to whatever news the newspaper wanted to print or whatever the TV station wanted to broadcast. All of the content was selected for us! That's why I love the internet -- it has democratized news. So much can be swept under the rug if the powers that be don't deem it newsworthy or if there is a systematic bias to portray the world in a certain light.
I used to never read the news when I was young because none of the stories in the papers appealed to me. Now, I love reading news online; so much to pick and choose from. I'm not captive to some editor.
Sorry, off-topic from the book, but I felt compelled to respond.
It appeared that the newspaper giants of Lincoln's day were, to a significant degree, king makers. The papers did not just carry everything, they editorialized. They could make or break a candidate.
I'm SO shocked by the violence and brutality that occurred in Congress at that time. I forget names now, but there was the incident where one congressman (or senator?) threatened another with a pistol? And I'm now at the part when Sumner was beaten unconscious?!? I thought today's politics were bad, but at least no one is literally bringing weapons into the Capitol and bludgeoning each other over disagreements.
I have not begun this week's reading, but I had heard of the violence in the legislature in the mid 19th century.
It's so funny -- I'm really enjoying this book now. Haha. Glad I stuck with it, and maybe... just maybe... I'll go back to the beginning and read the parts that I skipped.
Where are you at in the book Viola? I am behind I won't catch up but will keep reading and follow the discussion.
My kindle says page 207. I think that's in the middle of Chapter 6.
We are supposed to be discussing chapters 11-14 this coming week. Is this still good for folks? Do we need to slow down?
Mod
I was amused to see mention of the little girl Grace Bedell twice in this book so far. A few chapters back it talked about Lincoln writing letters and he had replied to a letter from her, an 11 year old girl, when she told him he should grow whiskers because his face looked thin. Then on his train trip after winning the election, it mentioned he stopped at her town to give her a kiss.
When my daughter was younger one of her favorite stories was a book called Mr. Lincoln's Whiskers, which is about this little girl and the letter she actually wrote.
Well, I am a bad discussion leader because I am not keeping up with the schedule. I am through ch. 13, but should finish ch. 14 tonight. How are the rest of you doing? Anything stand out for you in this week's reading?The part that caught my attention was the number of times Lincoln superceeded the law. He had telegraph communication shut down the night he rode from Philadelphia to DC, violated habius corpus (spelling) and so on. I can only imagine the outcry there would be in the press if a president did that today. Lincoln was on the brink of a civil war which he was trying to avert. Some would say that all is fair in love and war. Others would say that laws are in place exactly for the difficult times, so that when it is most difficult to do the moral thing, we will be compelled not to violate the rights of others. What do you think? Many perceived us to be under a similar threat after 9/11 and there has been debates of the suspension of laws around Middle Eastern residents in the U.S. and policies in military zones in the Midde East. How did you respond to Lincoln's executive actions?
I continue to be struck by Lincoln's willingness to tolerate slavery if that would preserve the union. As a child I was taught that Lincoln was the great defender of the enslaved. Does reading of his willingness to put the union of the States over the freedom of hundreds of thousands of brutalized people change your perception of Lincoln?
Mod
I was not bothered, or surprised by Lincoln's executive actions. It seemed they were probably wise given the nature of the times, with civil war breaking out due to his election, state succeeding, not knowing who was a traitor, etc. Interesting that the political division of the country at that time was so vast, almost as vast as it is becoming again today. Is a civil war ever going to be a possibility in this country again?
I'm in the middle of Chapter 9.I've some reactions to prior questions:
What do you think of Lincoln's pragmatism verses Seward's absolute anti-slavery stance? Lincoln argues for accepting the rights of current slave owners and for returning run away slaves in places like DC and new territories just so he can limit new slave ownership in those places. Do you agree or disagree?
This was what finally drew me into the book and made it so much more interesting. Lincoln's legacy is that he was the one who freed the slaves, so to read about his more moderate stance on slavery and to read about how it contrasted with Seward was fascinating to me. It's on this point that I think that the author's concept of comparing and contrasting Lincoln with his contemporaries really works. This was a big turning point for me in reading this book.
What did you think of Lincoln giving up his nomination so that the party could win rather than fighting for his clear majority? How would you feel if your candidate did that today?
I was impressed by his magnanimity. Actions like these make me feel like he really does deserve his outsized hero status.
Any thoughts about Mary Lincoln? She seems to be in fragile mental health. I can't imagine that being cooped up in a little room in DC with little kids would help. Nor, do I think her time away from her husband helps her situation. Politics seems to be a way he can escape her irratic moods. Should he leave her to pursue his career given her state? I can't imagine what it is like for the kids to be left with a mother who is so unstable.
We don't see too much of her, but I think of the other wife - I forget her name now - who was also prone to being depressed. And there was this commentary about how life was depressing for women who were oppressed and unable to do more with their lives. That women wanted greater independence and to get more out of life and to contribute more to society, but that they couldn't. And, I can completely sympathize with that. I too would go crazy if I was forced to be cooped up in the house with the kids and housework and be unable to do anything else more with my life.
How are we doing with the reading? Anything intrigue or confuse anyone in this week's section?
Like before, I wish the author gave us more information about the political process. I don't understand this idea of first ballot, second ballot, and third ballot. She talks about how Lincoln had X number of votes in the first ballot and then there was the second ballot, and then by the end, everyone switched over so that Lincoln could have a unanimous vote. I can follow it, but I wish she spelled out the process more.
I was intrigued by the popularity of political speaches. Without mass media, people regularly attended political speeches where they heard a candidate articulate a well thought out arguement or position. If they could not attend such an event, they read the entire transcript in a paper. Today, most of the electorate hears only sound bites. Even if we listen to a debate, the candidate is given 2 minutes to voice a position. If we attend a political rally, it is for a candidate we already support. I think that it is interesting that with greater means of mass communication, we hear less of a politician's thoughts. How do you think the shift in political communication has changed the election process? Do you think a Lincoln would have been electable in today's system?
The one thing that left me completely baffled is how LONG the speeches lasted. THREE hours for a speech? Are you kidding me? I can't even begin to imagine. And they didn't have microphones or jumbotrons back then. So, how in the world can you even hear the speeches?
I think Lincoln would absolutely be electable today. I came into this book being very skeptical, and so far, I continue to be impressed by him.
During the Republican convention, Lincoln deliberately positioned himself to be the second choice of everyone. If a candidate overtly made him/herself the second best person, we might see that as manipulative. What do you think of Lincoln's strategy? Obviously, it was successful, but was it honest? As he puts his cabinet together, he privately says one thing while publically saying something else. He does it to preserve as much unity as possible. What do you think of this double speak? How would you feel about a candidate today who said one thing privately while saying another publiclly if that discrepancy came out?
It's a fine line between being strategic and being manipulative. I think that Lincoln was being strategic without being manipulative. I don't think it was dishonest at all. I'm not up to the part where he puts together his cabinet, so I'll have to comment on that later.
I just heard an interview piece on NPR this morning talking about the Republican primary. The person was talking about what it might take to beat Trump. One scenario was that the remaining other candidates got enough votes between them that Trump did not get the necessary minimum number of deligates to win the nomination. At that point, it would go to a convention format similar to that depicted in this book for Lincoln's nomination. Each candidate would have to try to convince enough deligates to switch to their side, those with smaller amounts would have to combine with someone dropping out, etc. Now, that would be fascinating to watch.
I finished chapter 14 last night and am caught up.Mary Lincoln is getting a bit more interesting. What do people think of her? I have always thought of her as someone so crippled by depression that she could hardly function. But, here we see a bright, competant, highly admired hostess, countering the country bumpkin image people had of her husband. What do you think of her spending spree for White House decor? I have a hard time imagining the White House in the dilapadated state described, but spending so much during war time seems irresponsible. Is she manic or does she have a necessary vision for the headquarters of a head of state?
What do you make of Lincoln's treatment of McClellan? Lincoln is head of a country entering a civil war and he sits for an hour or more in McClellan's waiting room over and over again? Is Lincoln prudent or too passive? What would you make if you heard of Obama or Bush doing that today?
I got way behind on this. I had checked it on overdrive so I could read it on my kindle, but couldn't renew it. I just got it back, so I'll get back into it, but I'm sure I'll never catch up; & won't even try. I'll just keep plodding along & finish it a few months or so. Have enjoyed reading through the comments anyway.
Even if you are commenting on chapters we have already discussed, we would still love to hear your insights. So, comment whenever you want.
Mod
https://www.archives.gov/exhibits/fea...
and link to text transcript of the document
https://www.archives.gov/exhibits/fea...
Are we ready to discuss this week's reading? Anything catch your attention?What did you make of Lincoln's slowness to deal with McClullen? Most historians blame the prolonged progress of the Civil War on his refusal to attack during those early years, resulting in countless deaths and serious wounds. Lincoln's contemporaries realized that McClullen was not serving the Union well. But, Lincoln does not take decisive action until his hand is forced. Then, the man he appoints to replace him is even more inept. Lincoln is such a great judge of character in every other situation, what is his problem in this situation?
What did you make of Lincoln statement that, if he could preserve the Union without freeing a single slave, he would do so? He is given credit for being the great emmancipator, but is he really the champion of the freedom of every person as he is credited with?
How did you react to Lincoln's interview with the black leaders when he tried to convince them to pursuade all blacks to leave the US? His arguements and remarks about the black race is racist even for his day.
Mod
Were his remarks considered racist for his day? To the blacks I am sure they were, but would anyone else have considered his ideas racist?
According to the book, yes, many in the abolitionist community were upset by his remarks, found them offensive. Certainly, the majority of white Americans would not have found them so, but he is far from the progressive edge on the race issue. He seems to be in the middle of the pack. I want Lincoln to be a leading voice on this issue, but he seems to be getting pushed by far more progressive figures. He treats the slaves as a pawn in the war, not as valued, dignified human beings.
Irene - It's McClellan. (Went to HS with one of his descendants) . George McClellan was a bully and I don't think that Lincoln really knew how to deal with him. From his prior war experience, he should have been the one to stop Robert E., but what McClellan really wanted was to make Lincoln look bad so that he could run for President. McClellan seemed to be very short sighted regarding this mission. He (McClellan) also thought that Lincoln was beneath him and that he had all of Lincoln's advisors on his side. A gross miscalculation on his part. I think that Lincoln had some self-esteem issues here as well. As to the next General appointed, Burnside - he didn't want the position and was maneuvered into accepting or reporting to his own nemesis (Hooker). Grant was too busy in the west and too many of the upper ranking officers were scared of the publics perception if too many men were killed. I think basically , once Scott retired, Lincoln was just trying to work with what he had. And he always seemed to be walking a fine line.
Thanks for the spelling correction. I had checked the spelling, but promptly forgot by the time I typed out my post.
I am surprised that Lincoln is so brilliant in balancing/managing very different and conflicting personalities in his administration, but seems baffled by McClellan. He even defends him at times.
I got through the part where Lincoln puts together his cabinet, so I just wanted to chime in with some thoughts.Irene's question was:
As he puts his cabinet together, he privately says one thing while publically saying something else. He does it to preserve as much unity as possible. What do you think of this double speak? How would you feel about a candidate today who said one thing privately while saying another publiclly if that discrepancy came out?
I thought it was rather cunning of him -- the way that he put together his cabinet. I think that strictly speaking it runs afoul of his "Honest Abe" moniker. But, I personally don't have issues with it -- I think that what Lincoln did was for a greater goal in mind. Not that the ends always justify the means, but his means were *that* egregious. I think that it shows him to be much more strategic and skillful as a politician than his legacy allows.
I also found it different that he put so much emphasis on getting representation from all parts of the nation. I suppose that is easier when your nation is small. But I don't imagine that is part of the calculus for today's politicians. Or is it? I'm not close enough to politics today to say. But certainly with 50 states, you can't possibly try to get representation from everywhere. Does that even matter? I sort of think it doesn't anymore.
As a side note, I find Mary Lincoln baffling. She is described as someone who loved socializing. That she loved playing host. She enjoyed having a shopping spree in NY. It was reported that she was unhappy with her negative reception when she arrived in DC, when the crowds were hoping that it was Lincoln and disappointed that it was just her. I just don't understand how Lincoln and Mary even got along, their personalities seem to be so different. She is painted as being much more social and in some sense frivolous and petty. She's not at all like Seward's wife, who seems to be so involved in the politics. She's just put on the side. I don't see any love or attraction or any appeal. How in the world are these two very different people even married?
Yes, we don't get much of Lincoln's personal life. It would be interesting to learn more about Mary and Abe's marriage.
I am finally to part II. I am amazed with all the advice and trust Lincoln seems to give and take from his cabinet rivals. It seems kind of ironic to me given they were his rivals. How could he ever trust them? Can any one blame Sewards thoughts that he was in charge? Do you think Lincoln was misleading or it it's still Seward's hope and ambition to blame?
Lincoln seems to believe that his rivals all wanted the best for the Union and I think that is what allowed him to trust them. They might have undermind him had it been about an election or some political ambition, but when it came to this moment of national crisis, they all wanted above all to preserve the Union.I am amazed at Lincoln's ability to craft win/win solutions to situations. He makes people feel as if they are heard and their concern is addressed. I keep wondering how he would handle the current polarized political atmosphere. Would he be able to find a way to bring these warring factions together or does the absence of such high stakes as a civil war give politicians permission to pursue their own position at any cost?
Mod
Irene, I think Lincoln would get eaten alive in today's political climate. I can almost imagine Donald Trump being on a debate stage with him, mocking him for his looks, others slamming his background, etc.
His rivals mocked his bacground and looks back then and the political tension was so great that we have the gun pulled out on the House floor in this week's reading. But, somehow Lincoln charms everyone. Watching the funeral coverage of Nancy Reagan, I heard a commentator compare how the Reagan administration managed to pull divided factions together in a way that we have not seen since. I wonder if a different personality in leadership would elicit a different reaction from people.
How is everyone doing with this week's reading? Anything stand out for anyone or confuse anyone?I keep wondering how Lincoln would handle the current polarized political situation. We see him in scenario after scenario creating a win/win situation. People who are actively trying to ruin him or work contrary to him come away from an encounter passified if not won over. He also does not actively try to thwart the efforts of people like Chase who are beginning to campaign against him long before the next campaign season. He displays an incredible sense of how to manage people.
After Lincoln's statement that he put the Union over slavery, even saying that, if he could preserve the Union without freeing a single slave, he would do so, I am glad to see him becoming more definitely anti-slavery. He is praised in this book for being able to identify the course of public opinion and knowing when to move. But, I have even more admiration for those abolitionists who preceeded public opinion and called for the outlawing of slavery long before it was popular. Should a president see the right and call people to it before popular opinion has caught upor should a president wait until the popular mood is right, leading from behind?
I am gaining admiration for eward. He really wanted the presidency and nearly had it. But, he is able to put any bitterness/disappointment behind him, recognize the gifts of Lincoln and work to ensure that Lincoln succeeds. I did not know that Seward was the one to dream up a national day of Thanksgiving.
Mod
Lincoln's decision to allow blacks into the military was a major deal. It seems as though that may have been the thing that changed the tide back then. And meeting with Frederick Douglass, hearing his concerns about the black soldiers, and saying he would sign the papers for any to be an officer that were presented to him.
I appreciated his meeting with Douglass and with the delegation from the Jewish community. He treats everyone with real dignity and respect no matter their race, creed, economic standing or political position. He has more integrity than we seem to see in many politicians, today or back then.
Mod
I have not started this week's section, but it makes sense that Lincoln regularly attended the theater. The assassination was a well coordinated attack, not a random act. So, it makes sense that Booth and the others who wanted him dead had studied his pattern.
Anything catch anyone's attention in this week's reading?I was surprised to see Lincoln nominate Chase for Supreme Court after how Chase tried to undermine him. Lincoln seems a bit naive in the immediate, but extremely wise in the long view. I wonder what Lincoln would do if he were president today.
What do you make of Lincoln's reconstruction plan? He asks for only 10% of the population of a state to swear loyalty to the Union in order to incorporate that state back. And he is offering so much money for the freed slaves that it almost looks as if the North is paying war reperations rather than the defeated South. In the long run, it prooved to be the wise route, but would you have supported such a plan had you lived back then?
I am sorry Irene. I feel terrible about my co leading. I liked this book. I just couldn't keep up.
Mod
I'm dreading reading this weeks section a bit, as I am finding myself really liking Lincoln and his ways, and know he is going to be killed soon.
No worries, Rebecca. How are others doing with the reading. Do we need to slow down the reading; maybe take a make up week? Or do people want to keep with the original schedle?
Mod
I am on chapter 16. The upcoming chapters seem to not be so long. Starting to read about McClellan.
I am wondering if others have given up. I have asked each week how everyone was doing with the schedule and if we should slow down, but no one has said anything.
I didn't know that Louisa May served as a nurse. I really enjoyed the her and Mary served so actively. It made me kind of lose sight of her spending sprees. I was really mad that McClellan didn't listen to Lincoln. His delay was for personal reasons against Lincoln Yes I think that had he listened things would have ended differently.
I felt bad for the breaking of Kate's engagement. I guess I missed that she had been involved with a married man. Seemed odd for what a smart girl she was.
I was also impressed by Mary's service in Union hospitals. It showed a strength of character that she is rarely credited with. I had known of Alcot's nursing. The more I read of McClellan the more he comes off as an immature, arrogant ass. History does not treat him very well.
I kept wondering, as I read about Kate and her father, how their close relationship would be viewed today. I wonder if their closeness would have raised suspicions of sexual abuse today.
Chicks On Lit
Books mentioned in this topic
Mr. Lincoln's Whiskers (other topics)Wait Till Next Year (other topics)
Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln (other topics)
No Ordinary Time: Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt: The Home Front in World War II (other topics)
Abe Lincoln's Hat (other topics)
More...
