National Journal: “Broadly speaking, these books—which I read in rapid succession over the past few weeks (well, I skimmed a bit at times; I’m not a complete masochist)—come in two forms. First are the narratives—autobiographies… The second group—unmoored by the constraints of narrative or plot—might generally be classified as polemics…”
“But perhaps the biggest commonality is that you really don’t learn much about the candidates that you can’t learn elsewhere. Which raises the question: What’s the point? Why—if they don’t really tell us anything and are out of sync with our fast-moving digital age—do these books remain basically de rigueur for those seeking the White House?”
Save to Favorites