Now that Democrats have won the White House and majorities in both branches of congress, the Republican Party must confront very important questions. How should the party relate to the ex-president and his supporters? Have the events of early 2021 done lasting damage? What, if anything, of the Trump legacy is worth retaining? What should the Republican Party do to regain their congressional majorities and position themselves to win the presidency in 2024? The Elephant in the Room brings together a distinguished group of right-leaning pundits and political scientists, from ardent supporters of Trump and Trumpism to prominent leaders of the never Trump movement. Taken together, this lively debate lays out the contours of a debate that will rage among Republican conservatives in the years ahead.

Now that Democrats have won the White House and majorities in both branches of congress, the Republican Party must confront very important questions. How should the party relate to the ex-president and his supporters? Have the events of early 2021 done lasting damage? What, if anything, of the Trump legacy is worth retaining? What should the Republican Party do to regain their congressional majorities and position themselves to win the presidency in 2024? The Elephant in the Room brings together a distinguished group of right-leaning pundits and political scientists, from ardent supporters of Trump and Trumpism to prominent leaders of the never Trump movement. Taken together, this lively debate lays out the contours of a debate that will rage among Republican conservatives in the years ahead.

Why have the Democrats lost five of the last seven presidential elections, even though polls consistently show that more Americans identify with that party than with the Republican party? And why are Democratic presidential nomination races usually so much more bitter and fractious than those held by the Republicans?The answer, argues William Mayer

The Uses and Misuses of Politics is a detailed examination of the politics of George W. Bush's presidency, focusing on the work-and the mistakes-of presidential political advisor Karl Rove. In his role as political advisor Karl Rove stands apart from his numerous counterparts in modern American politics in three major ways. The first measure of Rove's distinctiveness is the totality of his direction over Bush's political career. Simply put, George W. Bush never won an election, of any kind, in which Rove was not the dominant, even sole campaign strategist. A second important difference between Karl Rove and other major presidential campaign strategists was the role that Rove played in helping formulate policy after Bush became president. In fact, Rove became the first presidential aide to both provide political advice to a sitting president while at the same time controlling the policy levers inside the White House, especially as an advocate for his own agenda in the areas of domestic policy. Finally, Karl Rove is noteworthy for the scope of his ambitions: his goal for the Bush presidency was to create a durable Republican majority that would dominate American politics for the next several decades. ,br>Even though theories of party systems and realignments have received serious challenges, Karl Rove was a believer; providing a key insight into how he approached his work with the Bush presidency. Where previous realignments were the result of historical accidents and recognized only after the fact, Karl Rove believed he could engineer the next one. In The Uses and Misuses of Politics William G. Mayer analyzes Karl Rove's performance as presidential advisor: the roles he played, the advice he gave, and how the Republican Party fared with Rove as its principal strategist. By offering the reader a comprehensive assessment, Mayer provides valuable insight into the larger, enduring, and critical questions: What is the proper role of politics in the contemporary presidency? When does politics enhance a nation's long-term welfare, and what does it detract from it? And what positive contributions can political advisors make to a modern-day president?

Why have the Democrats lost five of the last seven presidential elections, even though polls consistently show that more Americans identify with that party than with the Republican party? And why are Democratic presidential nomination races usually so much more bitter and fractious than those held by the Republicans?The answer, argues William Mayer, lies in an important but too often ignored feature of American politics: The Democrats are a more ideologically diverse, less cohesive party than the Republicans and thus have greater difficulty maintaining party unity. After extensively documenting the Democrats' traditional problems of division and disagreement, Mayer presents evidence suggesting that in recent years the Republican advantage over the Democrats has finally started to narrow--raising important questions about the future of the Republican coalition.

This book is important reading for all who are interested in American politics and public opinion. It appendixes, which include the results of more than 250 survey questions that have been asked regularly of national samples over the last three decades, make it an indispensable reference source for everyone who studies or participates in American politics.

The process of nominating and electing a president is a spectacle that never falls to engage and excite millions of Americans - and rarely falls to enrage us, as well. Enduring Controversies in Presidential Nominating Politics retraces the more than two hundred-year history of presidential elections in the United States to provide a primer on how the process has evolved from the days of the founders, through the heyday of nominating conventions, to today's overwhelming interest in early primaries. Original essays by the editors introduce, critique, and occasionally even refute a wide variety of historical readings including Alexander Hamilton's defense of election procedures, excerpts of individual states' nominations of candidates in 1824, an overview of the impact television has had on nominating conventions, and calls for a national rotating primary scheme in 2004. As a whole, the collection reveals the common threads that run through the history of the nominating process, and points out that today's litany of complaints are not at all new.