The Right to Nominate: An In-Depth Look into the Federalist Papers

The thesis of The Right to Nominate is that party politics have taken control of government and the people have less input on selecting candidates than the founding fathers had hoped for. Parties have dug into positions and created a divisive society and ruling system. Party politics has taken away the ultimate choice of who represents them in the larger government.

Thomas Peterson presents a detailed history of the birth of the United States and how people at that time envisioned people’s representation in government. He leads us through the battles within the Constitutional Convention and after, and how those thoughts shaped the original ideas of checks and balances in government, and how those ideas evolved, or devolved, into the system we have today. There are chapters on history, a detailed explanation of what the problem may be, and the offer of a solution.

Despite the clear premise of the book, I think this book is a 2 out of 4 stars. The thesis is fine, but the execution is poor at best. Though there are chapters that seem to lend structure and guide the argument, the author really just jumps around between thoughts throughout the book. The same points are reiterated over and over, making the reader feel either lost or insulted that they couldn’t remember what has already been said. The layout of paragraphs, changing fonts, and changing text sizes make the book really hard to read.

The Right to Nominate was a great idea that is not presented in a way that is accessible to most readers. I thought the best part about this book was the in-depth research into the Federalist Papers to support the author’s arguments. He presented a litany of quotations and sources that relate to the overall thesis and provides quality background material. The least impressive part of this book was how that material and history was organized. The same information was repeated numerous times and it was not organized in a way that flowed or kept my attention. This book should appeal to students of political history that are looking for a fresh viewpoint on nominating candidates for office. The book is also a great reference for sources on that topic. The book will not appeal to those who want a concise thesis with easy to follow arguments. It was difficult to tell if there were any errors due to the layout and changing text within the manuscript. The entire format of the book reminds me of a personal manifesto, though one that can’t hold people’s attention.