What It Takes: The Way to the White House

As a lifetime Democrat, I was horrified to read this book and feel not only sympathetic towards Bob Dole, but also admiration.
Of course, the author goes on to confirm my worst fears about George H.W., Reagan and some of the Democratic party's candidates from the era.
A stunning work. It is inspring and depressing at the same time.

I ordered this volume shortly after the death of the author was reported on the national news. It was described as "the gold standard" work of presidential politics. It was priced well, arrived promptly, and now awaits my attention.

I feel weird giving this just three stars because I actually enjoyed this book. Yet, it has enough problems that by the end I found myself slogging through it.

First, this isn't so much about the 1988 presidential election as it is about the psyches of men who believe they could be president, believe it enough to actually put themselves through years of campaigning, knowing full well that the odds are more in favor of them not being the ones to go on to the White House.

The biographical explorations of each candidate are very, very detailed. The chapters on each candidate are written in a style that mimics their speech and behavior. It's a daring choice, and it often works, but it can get old after a while. As others have said, it's tough to not imagine Dole talking like a pirate when you read his chapters.

By the time I realized this was not going to be about specifics of the campaign, and instead about the mindsets of the central characters, I was probably more than halfway through. I was a little disappointed, but kept going.

When I was about 3/4 of the way through, it became apparent that the book was also going to stop at the end of the primaries, and not tackle the actual Bush versus Dukakis stretch of the campaign. It briefly glosses over it in an epilogue.

Am I wrong to be disappointed by a book because it didn't write about what I wanted it write about? Maybe, but when I buy a book about the 1988 presidential campaign, I expect it to cover the main event.

If you're a political junkie, you'll find the insight into the candidates and the primary system interesting. I certainly did. But I'd be lying if I didn't admit that by the end, I was eager to wrap things up and read something else.

If you ever doubted the importance of editing, this book will convince you of its importance. Overall, this is a terrific book -- full of compelling details about flawed men (I especially enjoyed the chapters on Joe Biden and Michael Dukakis).

However, after a while it becomes tiresome and the one-word, two-word sentences begin to grate. If one can get beyond this aspect of the work, which isn't hard to do given its inherentely interesting subject, then a reader will find an amazing political story.

I love reading political books, and remember the 1988 election well, but this book was too much for me--it was a struggle to finish it.

This book is a collection of scenes from the lives and campaigns of the six candidates covered (everyone in the race except Jesse Jackson, Paul Simon, and a few minor candidates). It is liberally sprinkled with the impressions of the author, and even the supposed thoughts of the candidates. The book attempts to mimic the speaking of the candidates, which gets really, really tiresome (especially for Bob Dole, Arrgh! The book makes him sound like Long John Silver, without the parrot on his shoulder). There are no references of documentation of any sort--presumably everything in the book came from interviews done by the author, plus unspecified documents or readings.

The book gives a depressing impression of six men driven to be president, with little insight into or respect for any underlying goals or purposes they would want to pursue once they achieved the office. All of them emerge as somewhat unlikable, as do the members of the press. This book makes George HW Bush seem like an empty headed, socially-driven preppie, but he actually made a number of thoughtful decisions during his presidency that put the welfare of the country above personal political considerations. All 6 have more substance that what is revealed in this book. I think all these men have an inner intellectual core that they don't share with reporters during a primary horserace. This book gives little insight into that inner core.

Being that I read this as a kindle book, I didn't realize that it was a 1,000 pages, and that most of the 1,000 pages would only take us up to the New Hampshire primary. At that point, the author must have run out of steam, and the rest of the primaries and the election itself is skimmed over--otherwise, the book would be 2,000 pages.

This book does give you a lot of details about the personal and professional life of these six men. In terms of information per page, it's low in density. It's a lazy, unedited mess.

I've heard many good things about this books over the years, and as someone very interested in political history, I'd looked forward to reading it. Unfortunately, the narrative style was just atrocious, with cutesy nicknames given to different candidates and the annoying attempt to capture their vocal inflections on the page...it just didn't work. Maybe it worked 25 years ago, but the style seems dated and off-putting. I came into this hoping for the 1988 version of "Game Change," but instead I got something altogether different...and just plain poor.

This book was highly acclaimed by TV commentators last week after the author died. They said if you love politics you must read this book. I am not finished reading it and I'm not sure I will or if I do I'll skim. It follows the candidates for the presidential election in 1988 and it goes into GREAT detail about Bush the 1st and Dole - their backgrounds from children, etc. Now I've come to Gary Hart, who I had pretty much forgotten and don't really want to review. So I guess I'd have to say this book is too dated and overly detailed to hold my interest

This book tries too hard to be entertaining, thereby becoming disjointed and meandering. Although information-dense, the writer misses the mark on the apparent goal of a look inside the lives of these presidential contenders. The rambling nature makes it a tough read.

Unfortunately, this book has disappointed. After listening to a review on radio and discussion of the author and his recent death, I was interested in reading the book. I am not a fan of this style of writing; semi-factual and slight chip on the shoulder with the author being obviously superior to his subjects.

Numerous times over the past few years, I've come across references to this book as being the gold standard in political reporting. Having read it at last, I understand why - and I concur. It's prodigious in size (130 chapters plus epilogue, 1047 pages!), but the author's intention is equally immense. By closely following the campaigns of George H.W. Bush and Robert Dole for the Republican party's 1988 presidential nomination, and the campaigns of four contenders for the Democratic party's nomination in that same year (Gary Hart, Joe Biden, Richard Gephardt, and Michael Dukakis), Cramer attempts to answer the question, What does it take for someone to successfully run for president of the United States? There is little surprise in the answer he arrives at - it takes a fierce willingness to subsume every aspect of one's life (family, friends, and in some cases, morals) to the one overriding goal of winning. What is surprising, if not revelatory, is the insight Cramer gives his readers into how such willingness emerges out of a complex interaction between each candidate's uniquely different personal life story and the uniformly stifling demands made upon them by the heartless public process they have each chosen to participate in.

Most Americans are not fans of our lengthy presidential selection process that begins each cycle soon after the midterm elections are over. A minority of the country, though, sees the gauntlet that candidates must run as a healthy test of our prospective presidents' characters. In "What It Takes," Richard Ben Cramer tells the story of six of the men who were first-tier candidates for their parties' nominations in the election of 1988: George Bush, Michael Dukakis, Bob Dole, Richard Gephardt, Joe Biden, and Gary Hart.

"What It Takes" demonstrates that the marathon in fact begins years before the candidates declare, if not early in their lives. Cramer seeks to understand what makes the candidates tick, going back to their upbringings, family lives, and experiences that forged their characters long before they ever hit the campaign trail. He also tries to fathom the motivations that would drive them to run such an exhausting race, how they overcame adversity, and the strengths and weaknesses of each man and how they came into play during Campaign '88.

Strategy plays a part in campaigns, but those who have followed politics for a long time know the far more commanding role that money and organization play in determining the nominees of the two major parties every four years. Many thought that Dole would upset Bush for the Republican nod, but Cramer illustrates the enormous advantages that Bush enjoyed that enabled the vice president to hold Dole off. Even though personalities and characters do have an effect on a campaign, "What It Takes" shows why no dark horse has captured a major-party nomination in decades and likely won't in the foreseeable future, either.

Most of the book gives the backstory of the campaign that most people (viz. those who aren't political junkies) miss--all that takes place before the Iowa and New Hampshire primaries. Over the course of this long book Cramer recalls all of the major evens of the campaign, including the exits of Biden (for plagiarism) and Hart (for adultery), Bush's turnaround in New Hampshire, Dukakis outlasting the other Democratic contenders to capture his nomination, and Bush's strategy that turned his summer poll deficits into a 40-state near-landslide in November.

Especially poignant is the description of the moments at which the losing candidates knew that their years-long (in some cases, life-long) dream was coming to an end. Another theme of the book is that prominence is no guarantee against tragedy in one's personal or family life, as each of these six first-tier candidates profiled had to deal with something exceptionally difficult at some point in their lives.

"What It Takes" has been called by many the best book ever dealing with a presidential campaign. While there are other contenders for that title as well, and the book's length might seem off-putting, any political junkie ought to read it once in his or her life.

I received my indoctrination in presidential campaigns when, as a teenager, someone gave me Theodore White's The Making of the President 1964. Enjoying it, I made a point of reading White's 1968 version, and then, immediately thereafter, doubling back to read the first in the trilogy, about the campaign in 1960. Each of them had great merit, and were insightful about the men who wanted to sit, or remain in the Oval Office.

But Richard Ben Cramer's gargantuan What It Takes surpasses even Teddy White's classics. Focusing in on the candidates who sought the presidential nomination of our two major parties in 1988, it combines an explanation of campaign strategies with the more important motivations of the candidates to reach the top of the political mountain. Within the book are biographies of each, and there were clearly potentially better presidents than the two who squared off in the general election, George H.W. Bush and Michael Dukakis. Jack Kemp, the real Reagan heir, but flawed as a campaigner, might have succeeded more than Bush who while a fine man, did not seem to have much substance or belief in anything other than he should be president.A diffident campaigner, had he not been Vice-President under a popular Ronald Reagan, he would not have survived into the spring. One wonders about the book's hero, Robert Dole, inspiring as a result of his physical burdens, but, like Bush, lacking core beliefs or perhaps, even basic leadership skills outside the clubby Senate. He was a poor candidate when he won the nomination twelve years later, but he was also twelve years older.

On the Democratic side, Dick Gephardt, who was not then so far left,and was honest and earnest, might have succeeded in office. But in reality, one never knows whether a person with the skills to win the presidency will have the obviously different skills necessary to govern well. Only Reagan and Eisenhower in my lifetime had both abilities, although Truman, who took office after Franklin Roosevelt died, is a special case who had the power of incumbency in 1948 and deserves much credit for his role in the post-war world.

But one thing is certain. Nobody should seek the presidency unless there is a full-fledged desire to hold the office. The last person who served in the White House, but never wanted the job was William Howard Taft, elected in 1912, and a mediocre president. Recent history proves the reluctant candidate does not win anyway. Mitt Romney did not want to run in 2012, John McCain was not as hungry for the office in 2008 as he was eight years earlier.

For some reason I have never understood, What It Takes was hammered by reviewers, and Cramer, disappointed, turned to writing about sports, including a great biography of Joe DiMaggio. The reviewers were wrong. This is a a brilliant work.

The Making of the President series by Ted White are my baseline for books about presidential campaigns. Richard Ben Cramer's detailed account of the 1988 presidential primaries is a different approach to this type of book, but a strong one.

Cramer dives deeply into Mike Dukakis, Dick Gephardt, Joe Biden, Gary Hart, Bob Dole, and the eventual winner, George HW Bush. A warning, because Cramer focuses so closely on these chosen candidates the others get barely a mention. Notable candidates who get little attention are: Al Gore, Paul Simon, Jesse Jackson, Bruce Babbitt, Pat Robertson, Al Haig, Jack Kemp, and others. When these candidates become important, for example in specific primaries where they are major factors, they are suddenly brought up and then dismissed. When the book came out in the early 1990s and the primary campaign was still a fresh memory, that was probably not a problem. Two decades later, with the primary a distant memory, it makes some of the races a bit hard to follow.

Cramer's book offers biographies of each of the candidates he follows, touching on the important moments of their lives that brought them up to the point of their 1988 campaigns (or near campaign in the case of Biden). The book spends a lot of time on the "invisible primary," that long period between when a person decides to run and the first caucus in Iowa. It taps into each person to try and show us what makes them run. In my view, Cramer was more fawning of Dole and Bush. I did not count pages, but I felt as though their biographical chapters were longer. However, both Dole and Bush were older veterans of World War II and the life biographies of the Democrats could not match that. Still, I felt that we could have learned a bit more about the Democrats and what they had done. Besides Dukakis, we were not told too much good about the Democrats' personal and political histories.

The book digs deep into its chosen subjects. Cramer must have interviewed thousands of people, including the candidates and their families. Because he did not rush to release it immediately after the election, he had time to craft a great book.

Unlike White's Making of the Presidents books, Cramer does not pay much attention to where the country is in 1988 or what issues are of concern. Those are subsidiary to the personalities and psychology of the candidates. The book also lacks an index (at least my copy), which is problematic in a book with this many names.

Anyone who picks up this book will quickly see why it is near the top of political must reads. If you get past the length and start reading, you will not be able to stop.

This is one massive tome. Clocking in at over 1000 pages, in dense ten point font, Richard Ben Cramer packs an enormous amount of information into his account of the 1988 presidential race. The scope of the book is amazing. We don't just get to see the candidates on the campaign trail, but we learn about their lives, and what experiences they endured that have created the right balance of traits that make them want to run for the American Presidency. Cramer starts out by looking at George Bush and Bob Dole, and then concentrates on Democrats such as Michael Dukakis, Richard Gephardt, Gary Hart and Joe Biden.
Cramer has a cocky and cynical writing style that doesn't hesitate to shoot daggers at those deserving of scorn. One of his biggest targets is the media, and the so-called power brokers that can make or break presidents (Cramer calls them "big-feet"). People like David Broder, Jack Germond and Howard Fineman all fall under Cramer's critical eye. Cramer shows how the media obliterates people for their own benefit. Bringing down a candidate isn't done for the good of the country over serious issues, but rather to build careers and increase the salaries of the media darlings. The question "Who is watching the media?" looms large in this book. Cramer also targets the campaign teams who mold and buff a candidate so that he can be elected, no matter what the cost. These are the folks who are brought in to dig up dirt, lie, and raise lots of money so they can buy elections. People like John Sasso and Lee Atwater are the most prominent of these figures, and are painted in less than flattering terms by Cramer.
Some of Cramer's observations can get tiresome. How many times do we need to hear about George Bush making new friend because it "will be neat"? His cynicism can get old too, but since he's dealing with politics, it's totally understandable. I've seen several of the people talked about in this book on TV recently, and I immediately thought of them in terms of this book (Hey! There's Joe Biden! I wonder if he's buying a new house!). I also laughed out loud whenever Cramer talked about Elizabeth Dole. He would write her words in North Carolina accent, and you could almost hear her talking!
Only those interested in politics will probably enjoy this book. Since some of the people in this book are still involved in politics today, this book still has merit. I read the other day that Joe Biden might be an early prospect for president in 2004. Clear your calendar, too, as this is a long read. Recommended.

It's unfortunate that, as 1988 slips into history, this masterful book is remembered as a "campaign book" from that sorry and boring election. What Cramer did in What It Takes is create a psychology of politics. He was not attempting to cover the election or go behind-the-scenes a la Germond and Witcover to expose the inside baseball. His goal was to show what sort of people run for president -- and what inner demons drive them to do it. It's interesting that this book predates Bill Clinton, as it was under Clinton that the presidential psyche went under the microscope. We've all read far too much about all Clinton was trying to prove and overcome. Here, we see a different set of men using the campaign for different kinds of therapy: The son of a strict religious upbringing trying to be a good boy despite his own desires (Gary Hart); the Boy Scout overachiever (Dick Gephardt); the injured veteran who had to prove his impairment did not make him less of a person (Bob Dole); the ambitious but cerebral climber who couldn't figure out why he was running (Mike Dukakis) and several more. Seeing what it takes to get through an election, and the damage it does to one's dignity, why do they do it? The names may be forgotten, but the story is worth reading even now.

Time magazine called 1988 "the year of the handler." The political handlers were so good, we didn't get to know the candidates very well. So thank goodness for What It Takes, a very detailed and lively look at the '88 candidates as 3-D Human Beings, faults and all. Cramer pulls back The Oz-like curtain of flag factories, pumped up biographies, and blitzkreig sloganeering. Cramer provides the Big Picture, so the reader can contrast the headlines of the day (simplistic) with the mainstream media's REAL feelings on the candidates (not quite so simplistic), and with Cramer's more detailed and colorful take. The book is epic in its number of characters, sweeping in its biographical information, educational in its look at campaign machinations, and best of all, laugh out loud funny. Believe me, you'll be reading episodes aloud to family and reciting them for coworkers. From 'The Bobster's' action walk, to Gephardt the Eyebrowless Martian, to Biden the Ultimate Charasmatic throwing up from nerves before speeches, going from Kennedyesque to Shaken Shell, to Bush the Boxer going toe to toe with Dan Rather and saying "Take that Dan! Didn't lay a glove on me!"

Think about the best dessert you've ever eaten. Remember how delicious it was? How it melted in your mouth and how you never wanted the experience of eating it to end? Remember that experience when you pick up Richard Ben Cramer's 'What It Takes". This is the literary desert that feels like it melts in your mouth as your read: a beautiful, lyrical tale about the lives of six candidates for President in 1988.
It is hard to describe Cramer's writing style. He seems to have an uncanny knack for getting into his subject's mind and giving you a vision of the world from their perspective. He seems to find what makes his subject unique and showcase it to the world. His Sports Illustrated piece on Cal Ripken, Jr.'s consecutive games streak in September of 1995 remains the finest article I have ever read in SI since I began subscribing back in 1989. Cramer's style of writing is a joy to read. You simply never want him to stop writing, even if it is about something as mundane as observing Bush traveling to a speech.
Needless to say Bob Dole emerges as the hero of Cramer's work. (During the '96 campaign Cramer later released a separate book with just the Dole chapters.) The wounded veteran comes across as a man of stunning drive, courage and loneliness. You can't help but think of the horrific pain and suffering he endured during those years rehabilitating himself and attending law school. The Dole of Cramer's book is easy to admire and quite likeable, despite his gruff demeanor and occasionally cold treatment of people around him.
Gary Hart, in contrast, comes across poorly. (Surprise, surprise.) So much of his portion of the book is devoted to attacking the media and refuting his public persona as either an odd loner or a serial adulterer. Hart's hardscrabble life in rural Oklahoma and journey to Yale divinity school gets pushed aside. There seems to be a huge gap between Hart leaving divinity school for politics in 1960 and his role as George McGovern's campaign manager in 1972 that Cramer doesn't explain.
George Bush takes it on the chin too. Our 41st President and the winner of the 1988 contest was probably the least qualified of the six to run. Bush comes across as a likeable guy (and a hero during World War II), but no leader. While Dole is tested on the campaign trail and works hard to master the machinery of the U.S. Senate, while Dukakis is weathering fierce political storms patching together Massachusetts runaway budget, while Biden loses his wife in a car accident and nearly dies of a brain aneurysm, Bush seems to sail through adversity by relying on his resume to get plum jobs (CIA director, chairman of the RNC, ambassador to the UN and to China). Bush's charmed life and patrician view of the world hurt his reelection campaign four years later when he didn't appreciate the suffering his citizens were enduring during the recession the way a Bob Dole would have. Dole seems to have learned, through his experiences, that life is hard and people need a helping hand. Bush, in contrast, seems to have learned from his life that a smile, a handshake, a spiffy resume and knowing the CEO of a Fortune 500 company will get you far.
What of Biden, Dukakis and Gephardt? Joe Biden, the Senator from Delaware, comes across as a real leader. Elected in an upset at the age of 29, the Senator suffered terrible heartache losing his wife in a car accident after the election. You cannot help but sympathize and feel for him as he struggled to put his family together again and to take responsibility for the poor choices he made as a law student at Syracuse University in the 1960s. After Dole, I found Biden's story to be the most compelling.
Dukakis? Gephardt? I think both men come across the same, as smart, driven, intelligent guys. The theme of Gephardt's chapters is that he has been and always will be an Eagle Scout: smart, popular with his peers and elders, a success in everything. In other words, Gephardt was the guy from from school your parents wanted you to be like in middle school. Dukakis comes across as even more flawless, more driven and more sure of himself. Dukakis, in other words, was the guy from high school that graduated with a 3.9 and still thought he could do better. Both men had to tough out difficult obstacles in their lives, however.
In the final analysis, this is a book you simply do not want to end. Cramer plays no favorites and gives all six men resolutely fair treatment. This is easily one of the three greatest books I have read in my life. (Along with "Thank You For Smoking" by Christopher Buckley and "Truman" by David McCullough). This book is the literary equivalent of desert.

"What It Takes" is not just the best political book I've ever read; it's one of the two or three best nonfiction books I've ever read. Maybe the best. Everything is perfectly in place -- an engrossing narrative (even though you already know how it ends), compelling characters, a dazzling use of vocabulary used without the slightest whiff of pretension (how does he pull that off?!), and most of all, a flawless authorial voice (in fact, several pitch-perfect voices: each of the candidates, many hangers-on, and of course, Mr. Cramer's itself).

I guess you can tell -- I can't recommend this book highly enough. Though it was universally hailed when it debuted in 1993, the book hasn't really stayed in the consciousness of the public, save for one subset, devoted politicos. I suppose that's probably because the story is old news. Of course, that was true when it was released, as well. At any rate, "What It Takes" deserves to be read now and always. And not because of the story it tells.

While the story is a very good one, as I now suspect all presidential campaigns must be, the power of the book comes from the electrifying, risk-taking greatness of the writing itself. In addition to the Nabokov-level command of the English language, it works because the author has fully mastered the art of depicting real human beings, their thoughts and emotions. As exceptional as the candidates are, we feel we know these people. Even though the details of their campaigning and some of their actions are foreign to us, we continually recognize their thought patterns and feelings as depicted by Cramer -- from having experienced them in our lives. The best compliment I can give to this masterpiece is to say that it's truly universal. That's why it will always be relevant and will always reward a reader's time investment, many times over. In 1993... now... and in perpetuity.

This book is wonderful, filled with superb stories about Biden, Dukakis, Hart(pence), et al. The fascinating opening chapter details the insane amount of detailed negotiations and planning required for....Veep George H.W. Bush to throw an opening pitch at a ball game. The character that stuck with me the most is Biden's father, who as a young man had a life of uniquely charmed circumstances, with those circumstances coming to an abrupt end when he was in his early twenties. You gotta read this, it's fantastic!

Ben Cramer follows the major candidates in their races to become president in 1988. He reproduces their speaking and thinking styles in such an incredible way that you will never be able to think of any of these people (Bob Dole, GHW Bush, Jesse Jackson) in quite the same way you did before.

His intense focus on how the candidates act differently when in private than they do when they're out giving their stump speech makes for fascinating reading. If you're tired of dry books that are "nothing but the facts, ma'am," you'll love this well-written story.

No study of modern American politics is complete without reading this book. At the center of the political universe is the presidency. What kind of people seek this office, and all of the attendant scrutiny and hardship that even the most fortunate candidates endure? What personal attributes set one candidate above the rest?
Essentially, one of these men will be the most powerful man in the world, and have a chance at shaping history. This book answers the questions "why" and "how."
Cramer understands his subjects, and the profiles of each candidate would be excellent stand-alone biographies. Extremely readable and well written, without sacrificing substance.
A truly unique and indespensible work. To find out what it takes, read this book.

Cramer's research and insights are impeccable. Frequent flashbacks are a bit disconcerting in what amounts essentially to a joint biography of six significant late 20th century political figures and the business of politics. Cramer's literary device of writing through the imagined thoughts of the principals is compelling. I know Mike Dukakis and Cramer has him absolutely cold. The Bush and Dole portrayals also comport with what I have learned about them elsewhere. Ii't fair to assume then that Cramer also "gets" Hart and Gephardt and, still significantly, Joe Biden. I am a political history buff. This is the best book I have read on the subject EVER, supplanting (in my eyes) "The Making of the President - 1960."

Anyone thinking of running for public office should read this first. A biography of the candidates for president in 1988, this shows the tradeoffs required to participate in politics at the national level and the perils of media and political consultants. Men give up any hope of enjoying their young children, sacrifice their wives and contort their own lives and beliefs in order to try to change the direction of the country. It's fascinating and addicting stuff. But I keep thinking that there's got to be a better way.

It's a great insight into the psyche of candidates, the jargon of campaigns -- and a demonstration of just how tough campaings are. (The author of this book is also a frequent contributer to Rolling Stone and Esquire. Some of the language in this book certainly isn't appropriate for younger readers).

A great read! I agree with an earlier review that, while long, it's not long enough. Richard Cramer has an unique style of writing that makes it hard to lay the book down and raises the anticipation level of picking it up again.

I read this book in hardcover when it was published. I can't imagine a better book on the rigors, the deceptions, a true inside story of how campaigns really work. So insightful! The section on Joe Biden is certainly worth re-reading. He is an amazing man. His history is so helpful in looking at this election and comparing him to McCain's Barbie doll saviour, if any comparison is needed after her lame performance reciting practiced answers even though the answers were not to the questions asked. Duck and dodge, but the Katie Couric interviews showed she is lost in the ring and doesn't belong there. Shame on John McCain for subjecting us to the possibility of a Palin presidency.

Richard Ben Cramer won the Pulitzer Prize for his book "What It Takes" for effort. And if not effort then it certainly wasn't for the writing, which was turgid.

"What It Takes" chronicles the lives, thoughts, and histories of the Republican and Democratic candidates in their respective primaries as the prelude to the 1988 Presidential election. While the writing is hard to read, the lives of both Republican candidates, Vice-President George HW Bush and Kansas Senator Bob Dole, are fascinating, especially contrasted with one another. Bush was a friendly and popular athlete at Andover and Yale, who was born to lead and to succeed. But there's also no doubt that beneath his glib veneer there's a passionate and thoughtful soul who almost died when his plane was shot down in World War II and who saw his first-born succumb to leukemia. After the death of their baby girl the family matriarch Barbara (who would raise a President in George W. and a Presidential contender in Jeb) broke down, leaving George Bush to valiantly hold her together throughout her depression (while also managing a multi-million dollar oil enterprise). George Bush was lucky, but he worked hard for and always believed in his luck.

Then there's Bob Dole, who was born poor in Kansas, and made up his mind to be the first in his family to attend college on an athletic scholarship. He was badly wounded in World War II, and the doctors had written him off -- at the very best he couldn't walk again. But an experimental drug saved his life, and from then on Bob Dole worked to reconstruct his life and dreams, becoming a lawyer and eventually finding himself in the U.S. Senate.

Both Bush and Dole are amazing representatives of their generation, who believed in only hard work, humility, and honesty. In comparison, the Democratic contenders came across as boring and petty. Michael Dukakis, a Harvard law graduate who is the son of a Harvard medical school graduate, is a crusading do-gooder, and the most interesting aspect of his life is his mercurial wife Kitty, who suffered from substance abuse. Joe Biden is chronicled in the book, and even though he's now Vice-President I still didn't care to read anything about his life. Dick Gephardt is...Dick Gephardt (does anyone remember who he is anymore?). Gary Hart is the most interesting of the Democrats, but there's something precious and sanctimonious about him.

Ultimately, I was overwhelmed by the length and detail of the book, and I found myself flipping through the book.