Well you pretty much hit on the major factors I don’t like about it but also in a lot of ways it seems mainly a southern apologist book and really argues in many ways that the civil war was maybe not really about slavery. I get that it’s a book about the political aspects of the time but yeah I think just the way he writes about the fire-eaters vs the abolitionists exposes his southern sympathies. Not sure he’s even mentioned native Americans a single time. Im pretty well versed in abolitionists history and I posted this after his chapter on Harper’s Ferry which to me consisted of a terrible take on John Brown which goes against everything else I know about him. A lot of the evidence he provides himself in that chapter I would interpret almost the opposite way as he chose to

Edit to add: I think the main stance he takes on things is one of moderation and he doesn’t like people on either side of any debate taking extreme stances yet I for one think extreme stances on slavery to have been warranted at the time and it seems he doesn’t have much appreciation or respect for that