The Red and the Blue: The 1990s and the Birth of Political Tribalism

 Believe it or not, a person cannot learn everything that is worth knowing about the 1990s by watching one of those cringe worthy VH1 specials (if you know, you know). I was merely eight years old by the end of the decade, so my knowledge of that political era can only be learned through studying history. My first political memory came from the year 2000,  a news clip of then president Bill Clinton signing a woman’s shirt while on vacation. I am sure a psychiatrist could provide me with some earth shattering analysis as to why it stuck in my mind so prominently. Before that moment a decade of consequential elections, camera hungry elected officials, and tantalizing scandals shaped our country’s history. 

The Red and the Blue: The 1990s and the Birth of Political Tribalism tackles what the author, Steve Kornacki, refers to as a “misremembered” era of American history. He starts the book making the case that the ‘90s were a pseudo “era of good feelings” for many Americans, who look back at the time logistically, especially when comparing to the politics of today’s America. However, Kornacki argues that the tribalism of American politics today has its roots in the last decade of the 20th century, and that much of what we are experiencing today was already a feature of the political landscape then. I must say that while reading the book, I often lost sight of his thesis. I will not say he made the argument poorly, but I do believe he could have done a better job of more often directly connecting one of the stories he tells back to the idea of our tribalism’s birth. He provides ample material to make the argument, which is what makes this book so interesting. The book is a broad, but not too broad, telling of the biggest political stories of the 90s, complete with enough biographical information on people like Bill Clinton, Newt Gingrich, Ross Perot, and a handful of other lesser known political figures to make the human connection. What I like about the way he told stories about elections and policy fights was that despite his background as a political analyst, no judgment was passed on the characters. Flaws were pointed out, but only within the context of the history and only the flaws noticed by people at the time. Clinton and Gingrich are not exactly politicians with flawless personal records, and Kornacki does a fine job of explaining how that impacted their perception by the American people in the middle of some of the most consequential moments of the era. As with many history books in which the author lived through the period, and clearly has some affinity for it, there are times where the stories become a little long winded or stay down one inconsequential path for a page too many, but the entertainment value and readability is high. Upon completion, the reader will come armed with some great trivia (Clinton’s ‘88 DNC speech, boring the audience to tears) and a better understanding on how modern American politics really work. I found the read fun and approachable, while leaving plenty of room for one to deep dive into a topic that piques their interest.