Mark Schmitt asks,
What sort of guide would most help the nerdy boys and girls of 2009 understand and appreciate American politics? It is likely to be something altogether different from The Almanac of American Politics.
I have, as Matt W was gracious enough to point out, done my share of Congressional history. And the answer to Schmitt’s question is, of course, teh Internets: using the Congressional Biographical Directory, the House history site and the Senate history site, there’s not much you can’t figure out. If you’re minimally competent with a spreadsheet program, you can quickly create entire rosters of who’s in a given Congressional session. Pair that with information like what you get from Keith Poole, and you’re on your way to Congressional nerdtopia. No, don’t thank me.
But lordy, did Barone really write this book?
In 2004, he authored an entire book, Hard and Soft America, in which various books, ideas, policies, and politicians are classified as either “Hard” (good) or “Soft” (bad). The world of Theodore Dreiser’s novels is admirably Hard, John Dewey’s theories of education are Soft. Social Security: Soft. Rudy Giuliani: Hard. Intellectuals: Soft. Most baby boomers: Soft. But George W. Bush: “a consistent advocate of Hardness.” And the ultimate in Hardness: “our amazing victories in Afghanistan and Iraq.”
Why yes, he did. How did I miss that particular effusion? Let us consult our verities: ah yes, “masculinity in crisis.” Heavens.
The Edge of the American West 
32 comments
January 26, 2008 at 3:34 am
Ben Alpers
Hard America, Soft America appears to be out of print. But it is available in a Kindle edition. Is Kindle “hard” or “soft”?
p.s. Since you mention it, Eric, do you have any hints on becoming “minimally competent with a spreadsheet program”? I’m generally tech savvy, but Excel completely confuses me.
January 26, 2008 at 7:01 am
Greg Miller
Hmm, maybe Mr. Barone could use Al Goldstein’s rating system to let everyone know just how “hard” or “soft” something was.
January 26, 2008 at 8:56 am
eric
do you have any hints on becoming “minimally competent with a spreadsheet program”
Depends what you’re trying to do; go ahead and email me if it’s a specific question. Generally, the rule is, set aside enough time to learn how to make the program do what you want, so that you then have enough time to do what you want it to do….
January 26, 2008 at 1:54 pm
hipparchia
my favorite congressional nerdtopia jumping off point
———————–
some excel tutorials
also, community centers and public libraries sometimes offer free or low-cost classes in basic computer skills
January 26, 2008 at 2:01 pm
urbino
I recommend foregoing Excel, Ben, and using an Access database instead. Most of the things people use spreadsheets for can be done better (and more easily) with a database.
January 26, 2008 at 2:35 pm
ari
Know-it-all.
As I think about it, the evolution of slurs that I’ve deployed Urbino’s way might be pretty interesting. “Might” is key here. Let me do some research and let you know for sure.
Nope. Not interesting. Just scattershot nonsense.
January 26, 2008 at 2:51 pm
urbino
But endearing, nonetheless. (And I prefer “dilettante,” btw. Although, on this score, I’m actually a professional.)
January 26, 2008 at 4:02 pm
eric
Most of the things people use spreadsheets for can be done better (and more easily) with a database
Graphs?
January 26, 2008 at 4:03 pm
urbino
Yeah, like I said: “most.”
January 26, 2008 at 4:10 pm
andrew
the rule is, set aside enough time to learn how to make the program do what you want,
The problem I had when I was looking into this for history purposes was that I wasn’t sure what kinds of things I could or should want my spreadsheet – or database – to do. I ended up using Excel to make
spreadsheetslists that kept track of correspondence, which was helpful, but I always had the feeling that I there was something better I could do.I actually recently made a spreadsheet to keep track of some Senate votes, and then a few minutes later the Senators postponed consideration of the bill. So inconsiderate.
January 26, 2008 at 4:15 pm
eric
I actually recently made a spreadsheet to keep track of some Senate votes, and then a few minutes later the Senators postponed consideration of the bill. So inconsiderate.
Stupid historical actors, exercising agency.
January 26, 2008 at 4:16 pm
eric
Yeah, like I said: “most.”
Ah, well, then the thing really is to decide what you want to do, then pick your program accordingly, right? So, if what you want as an end-result is graphs, then….
Actually, I don’t have any idea why you would use a program like Access. What is it actually for?
January 26, 2008 at 4:17 pm
urbino
Update tbVotes Set vote = null;
January 26, 2008 at 4:22 pm
urbino
Access? It’s handy as a hip pocket, doncha know. Slices, dices, juliennes, frappes.
Actually, depending on how much data you have, I’m not sure you wouldn’t be better off with a database, even when you want graphs. You can always pull the data you want into Excel when you’re ready to graph it.
January 26, 2008 at 7:12 pm
Paul
I’d like to suggest checking out congresspedia.org. It’s a comprehensive wiki on Congress with information on members of congress, votes, committee hearings, etc… truly a great resource.
January 26, 2008 at 7:17 pm
teofilo
My knowledge of both Excel and Access is no more than rudimentary, but urbino’s totally right.
January 26, 2008 at 9:01 pm
eric
Alan Taylor keeps data on index cards he makes out of birch pulp and bees’ wax. Why, oncet I saw him write a book on a tanned beaver pelt with a bolt of lightning, and publish it with the wind.
January 26, 2008 at 9:18 pm
andrew
First, that’s hilarious.
Second, was it Braudel or maybe Bloch who wrote substantial portions of a book from memory while being held as a prisoner of war?
January 26, 2008 at 9:26 pm
eric
Braudel wrote The Mediterranean while POW, I think.
January 26, 2008 at 9:39 pm
andrew
Yes, it was Braudel. From the Journal of Modern History, December 1972:
January 26, 2008 at 9:41 pm
andrew
Meanwhile:
January 26, 2008 at 9:43 pm
ben wolfson
But isn’t Access actually hardly a real database at all?
January 26, 2008 at 10:04 pm
teofilo
I’ve heard that, yes, but I don’t know enough about databases to evaluate its truth value.
January 26, 2008 at 11:24 pm
urbino
But isn’t Access actually hardly a real database at all?
No, it’s not an enterprise-level DBMS, capable of handling terabytes of data and large numbers of concurrent users. You couldn’t run Goldman Sachs on it. It’s not Oracle or SQLServer or DB2 or even MySQL.
Access is a terrific single-user, desktop database, though. For the projects being discussed here, it has way more than enough horsepower to do the job. And unlike all those “real” databases, it’s extremely easy to install, learn, and use. (It’s also cheap, which is unlike all those others — except MySQL, which is free.) It’s got a terrific built-in report builder, too.
Even as an “unreal” database, Access beats hell out of Excel for organizing the kind and amount of data you guys are talking about.
(Just for the record, I’m not even particularly an Access aficionado. I use Oracle for my work, but I’m a programmer, dealing with billions of rows of data. Even as an Oracle jockey — a very real database — I’m sayin’ Access is the bomb as compared to Excel.)
January 26, 2008 at 11:28 pm
urbino
Also, it’s more compact than birch bark.
January 26, 2008 at 11:28 pm
urbino
And less flammable.
January 26, 2008 at 11:31 pm
ari
Maybe so. But is it as durable as a beaver pelt. Because I think that’s the key point of comparison here. For archival purposes, I mean.
January 26, 2008 at 11:33 pm
teofilo
Are you familiar with the OpenOffice equivalent (“Base”), urbino?
January 26, 2008 at 11:49 pm
urbino
Oh, if it comes to archiving, what does beat beaver pelt? Especially when written on with lightning.
I fiddled with OpenOffice and GIMP a little, several years ago, teofilo, but never looked at their database, specifically. By and large, though, my impression was that they seemed to be pretty good products. If they did as good a job mimicking Access as they did mimicking the other MS Office products, it’s probably darn good.
January 26, 2008 at 11:55 pm
teofilo
The database is pretty new, I think. I’ve looked at it a little, but the interface seems to be a bit different from Access’s so I’m not sure how similar it is overall. I’ve been using the word processor and spreadsheet a little, but since I have Word and Excel that’s really just to see if they work as well (so far: yes). I don’t have Access, though, and while I haven’t really needed a database in a while, if I ever do need one it looks like it’ll have to be the OpenOffice one.
January 27, 2008 at 12:10 am
urbino
Free is always good. That way, if you fiddle with it for a while and decide you don’t like it, you’re not out anything.
January 27, 2008 at 8:58 am
The historian’s workflow (or, son of return of nerdtasia) « The Edge of the American West
[…] 27, 2008 in meta, our thing by eric Inspired by the discussion to this post, and by Kieran Healy’s evolving workflow post, I pose some questions with my tale of woe […]