‘The big casino’

Double Down: Game Change 2012
Mark Halperin and John Heilemann
New York: Penguin Press, 2013
Pp. 499

Based on extensive interviews with over 400 persons involved in the events, Mark Halperin of “Time” magazine and John Heilemann of “New York” magazine take the reader behind the scenes of the 2012 US presidential campaign from beginning to end. You are there, so to speak, not only at public events, but at the candidates’ closed-door strategy meetings, mock-debate training sessions, private donor dinners and rare moments of relaxation.

While the main focus is on the presidential contenders, Barack Obama and Mitt Romney, the authors also sketch close-up profiles of their advisers, staff, family and funders, as well as pollsters, kingmakers, media figures and other influential politicians. It is a dizzying array; luckily, the authors provide an index. 

This is the sequel to “Game Change” by the same writers, which chronicled Obama’s 2008 election victory. While an incumbent president is usually thought to enjoy the advantage, Obama’s re-election was far from certain. The US economy was still faltering. “The opposition inspired by his presidency was intense and at times rabid, from the populist ire of the Tea Party to the legislative recalcitrance of the congressional wing of the GOP to the wailing and gnashing of the anti-Obama caucus in the business world… The country was split almost cleanly down the middle, and more polarised than ever.” At the same time, “the practical implications of which man won were vast”. (p. 6)

With the stakes being so high, Halperin and Heilemann liken the election campaign to “a big casino” with the major players doubling down, increasing their investment (and risks) in their chosen positions and strategies. 

With so much opposition to Obama, one might think the Republicans would have had minimal problems coalescing on a viable candidate, but a substantial part of the book covers how Romney became their candidate largely by default. It is interesting to revisit the 2012 campaign just as the current presidential race is gearing up. Most of the major players from the earlier campaign are still around, and similar disarray exists in Republican ranks, but this time, Donald Trump has stepped decisively into the vacuum, whereas in 2012 he was a sideshow. 

“Double Down” makes for fascinating reading due to the amount of inside information the authors impart in crisp, erudite language. Paradoxes and irony run rife as friendships and alliances are forged, broken and sometimes re-forged. A case in point is the Obamas and the Clintons, whose relations were conflicted at the beginning of the campaign. By the end, however, things healed, not least due to Bill Clinton putting his oratorical skills wholeheartedly in the service of Obama’s re-election: “Once upon a time, not that long ago, the Obamas and the Clintons had been the Montagues and the Capulets. Now, more and more, it seemed as if the four most popular political figures in the country — Barack and Michelle, Hillary and Bill — were part of the same powerful family.” (p. 473)

 “Double Down” is as entertaining and suspenseful as any novel, even if one knows the outcome in advance. One gets immersed in the intricacies (and crudities) of US politics, but also appalled by the predominance of money, style and advertising techniques in determining the course of the campaign. That these factors play a big role is nothing new, but in 2012 they spiralled out of control, not least due to the 2010 supreme court ruling in the Citizens United case, which allowed unlimited spending in political campaigns by outside groups. According to the authors, “Everyone was grappling with the new financial terrain created by Citizens United.” (p. 110) 

Like in other fields, money impacts on people’s choices, and generates compromise on principles. When the Romney campaign created the first-ever presidential super PAC (Political Action Committee) to fund his campaign, even Obama, who had opposed super PACs, acquiesced to having one established to benefit his campaign. It is also disturbing to read that Obama was considered a poor debater, pedantic and unappealing to voters, because of his tendency to explain his policies in detail backed up by facts and figures. Again and again, money, style and advertising trumped content with dire repercussions not only for addressing racism and poverty in the US, but because of the great impact of US politics on other parts of the world. Trump’s current campaign — showmanship devoid of truth — seems to be the looming alternative. 

Notably, for a region considered so vital, the Middle East is seldom mentioned except when events there intervene in American domestic politics, as with the attack on the US embassy in Benghazi. The same is true for the rest of the world. “Double Down” is exclusively about the US political scene, and one will search in vain for any wisdom about the real links between US domestic and foreign policy.