The History Book Club discussion

Note: These threads are being set up in advance.

This is the "Book as a Whole and Final Thoughts" thread.

*****SPOILER THREAD*****

For those of you who have completed the book and/or who want to discuss aspects of the book which are beyond our weekly assignments in the non spoiler threads, this thread is a spoiler thread where you can discuss those points. We know that some folks like to color outside the lines - so this a place for them.

If you have completed the book and would like to tell us what you thought about this selection, please feel free to discuss your opinions in a respectful way here.

However, please no links to personal reviews because we consider that self promotion. Simply post your thoughts here without the links.

Many folks read ahead of the weekly assignment and that is OK too; however, you must make sure that your posted comments on the other weekly non spoiler threads do not reflect reading ahead of the posted weekly assignment. If you would like to discuss aspects of the book further along, this is a spoiler thread where you can do just that.

We try to move along the discussion slowly on the weekly non spoiler threads but realize that some folks like to move along swiftly. So we have options for both groups of folks.

This is also the thread where you write your review of the book after completing it.

by Jonathan Darman (no photo)

Just an FYI:

Folks, goodreads has a disclaimer at the bottom of their book giveaways which says the following:

In compliance with FTC guidelines, please disclose in your review that you received the book for free through the History Book Club on Goodreads if that is the case.

http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2009/10/endort...

In the instance of a book you may have gotten here through one of our kind publishers - make sure to say that you got the book for free through the History Book Club on Goodreads if you plan to post reviews elsewhere - like on the goodreads site or on the web.

I guess any free item when you review it has to have that disclaimer if you do the review on goodreads, on a blog, anyplace - you have to identify how you got the item because I guess they feel that getting something free could sway your review.

For the folks who received the free book through the History Book Club - one of the t's and c's is that you do a review of the book. This is the thread where you would post it although you are free to post it elsewhere afterwards. Your review and your rating are totally up to you - but please feel free to discuss your opinions in a respectful way.

Martin stated:

Let's be clear about something. Any relationship between the collapse of the Soviet Union and Reagan's defense spending is one of those stories fabricated around Reagan.

There was no one economic cause for the Soviet Union's collapse. It's defense spending was a part of the Soviet's economic problem, but by no means large enough to cause the house of cards to collapse.

If you had to single out a cause, it would have to be the collapse in the price of oil driven by the good old law of supply and demand.

But that happened within a context. That the Soviet collapsed was no surprise, at least to Russia hands in the US Department of State, but also to those who understood the inefficiencies historic to the Soviet, but also Czarist Russia.

Let me try to paint a picture: The economy of the Soviet was so primitive that assignment to the US Embassy in Moscow was regarded as a hardship post. That meant that families assigned there had to bring two years worth of canned goods to supplement what could be scrounged from the street.

Lines of Russians would form in the old Soviet to buy they knew not what. But if there was a line for it, that meant there was a supply of something consumable, something of value at the end of it, so better to get in line in the hopes of getting something that either could be used or bartered later.

Those two snapshots of the Soviet economy ought to give some idea of what it was like.

The Soviets' Vietnam, their nine year invasion of Afghanistan, where empires go to die, also can't be ignored.

This is getting a little ahead of the chapter at hand, but this myth around Reagan causing the collapse of the Soviet through his escalated defense spending has been mentioned a couple of times, and its relationship to the facts is tangential at best.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dissolut...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_w...

Jerome stated:

It's certainly an interesting debate, Martin, how much of role Reagan played in the Soviet Union's demise. From what I've read, the Soviet Union was spending a huge amount of money on defense way before Reagan was president, and that reducing this spending was a major consideration for Gorbachev and his regime--in fact, the Soviet's military budget was almost the same throughout the 1980s.

And it seems to me that the Soviets responded to Reagan's toughness not with fear, but with more of their own toughness. I think the collapse of the Soviet Union was entirely an internal affair, and Reagan's "contribution" was more diplomatic than military.

Michael had the following to say about Obamacare:

Ann, you are right. I have been thinking lately that the US needs election reform particularly in how campaigning is conducted. I have ideas but they may be oversimplified. As I read your post above it reminded me of the campaign for Obama's first term. I am a US citizen living and working in Canada. When Obama started talking about socialized medicine many friends and family in the US asked me about it, i.e. is it socialism. We have a public health care system in Canada and it works well but it does not equal socialism. I told them at that time if the US was smart they would look at systems around the world select best practices, fix the weakness and design the best of the best. Instead they did their own thing ended up with a mess and Obama is paying the price in the polls. I do not like him but in my opinion this was his chance to shine and it went away. Bentley, I am ok if we have to move this quote.

With regard to the current discussion I say all of this to simply say that Obama will have a lot of needless things said about him because of this particular issue.

It is interesting that LBJ did not gain the same reputation (or I have missed it) of being Marxist because of his policies.

I agree with you Ann and want to thank you for clarifying your post.

All, the author Jonathan Darman is on the threads live as we speak.

https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

He is answering questions right now - please keep posting your questions as you read Landslide on the thread above for Jonathan.

The author is in the house.

Folks who got the book offer - all of you signed up to do a review. Here is where that review should be when you complete the book. Make sure to add the disclaimer as explained in message two.

DO YOUR REVIEWS ON THIS THREAD - PART OF THE T'S AND C'S.

One of the requirements of the free book offer was the fact that you would post your review of the book here. Your review is entirely your own.

But if you were part of the free book offer - this was one of the t's and c's so please being posting them here on this thread and make sure to add the disclaimer.

Thank you.

I'd like to thank the History Book Club and Goodreads for getting me this book.

In Landslide Jonathan Darmen traces the political lives of Lyndon Johnson and Ronald Reagan primarily during the 1,000 days after John Kennedy was assassinated.

Landslide has a lot going for it:

1) It's well written; Darman has a nice, easy style that doesn't get in the way of his material

2) It's well-researched. Although it's not an exhaustive biography, Mr. Darman has clearly done a lot of work regarding what was happening at the time.

3) It's balanced. I had a hard time figuring out whether Mr. Darman is a Democrat or a Republican. That seems like a sign of balance.

4) It covers two very interesting men and a fascinating time in our history.

5) It's a nice length. Although I read it chapter by chapter, week by week, along with the History Book Club, it's a book that could be read much more quickly, yet it doesn't skimp.

But it has one big flaw, and the author only tries to manage that flaw in the closing pages of the book: In the period the book covers, Johnson was the leader of the most powerful country on Earth and Ronald Reagan was campaigning, first for Goldwater for president and then for himself, for governor of California.

And, while Reagan would win his own landslide presidential election, that was years off: It wasn't 1968 or 1972 or 1976 but all the way in 1980. There were three presidents between Johnson and Reagan. Two of them were Republicans (Nixon and Ford) and one Democrat (Carter). None of the three were much like Reagan, neither in their politics nor in their appeal. In particular, it is hard to think of a Republican of the time who was less like Reagan than Nixon.

Reagan was hands-off; Nixon was paranoid.
Reagan was a hard-line conservative; Nixon ushered in some progressive legislation.
Reagan was good looking and charismatic; Nixon was not.

So, I recommend this book with some reservation. I think it's as good a book on its particular theme as could be written, but I think the theme has some flaws.

I look forward to reading Mr. Darman's next book, whatever it may be.

by Jonathan Darman

Well written, Peter, thank you. I keep waiting for Nixon to play a larger role in this book and I think this is an important missing piece here.

Bryan - I think that Darman makes it clear that the book really is a study of LBJ and Reagan - the two landslide presidents. So I never was looking for Nixon.

Peter thank you for your independent review - I do think Darman accomplished a lot with this book and he did state his narrow focus. I do not think that the book was supposed to or even could be a chronological examination of all of those years and presidencies in one book. But I think you explained very clearly what you liked about the book and what else you would have liked to see in the book. I am very interested in reading everybody's review since this was one of the t's and c's for receiving the book.

I have to say that I have found the book very thought provoking and extremely readable - the only segment that I had to scratch my head about was the scope and depth of the prologue.

I received this book through the History Book Club on Goodreads.

The book compares the political strategies of LBJ and Reagan, despite their presidencies being separated by 16 years. The comparison stems from the idea that both men made outlandish promises during their campaign that ultimately went unfulfilled. LBJ claimed that America, under his guidance, would be destined for an economic and social utopia. Reagan, on the other hand, loathed the idea of big government, and promised that the country’s problems would be solved by reducing its size and allowing individuals to prosper without government interference.

Darman takes us through LBJ’s impressive first initial Presidential burst of activity, as he pushed through a number of ambitious domestic programs that had stalled during JFK’s presidency. After his landslide victory in 1964, things began to unravel for LBJ in large part due to Vietnam.

Reagen’s rise from B-movie actor to central figure in the Republican Party is also covered in detail. His landslide came during the 1966 California gubernatorial election. Although he wasn’t able to land the Presidency until 1980, his star was always rising in the GOP.

Overall, I thoroughly enjoyed this well-written book and would recommend it to anyone interested in American history and politics. It was very interesting to see a direct link between two Presidents who, on the surface, seem to not have a great deal in common. Darman did a fantastic job of telling these stories in a way that was entertaining and thoughtful.

by Jonathan Darman

Steve excellent and I love to see how a book strikes each person in its own unique way. I always find it fascinating when I read the reviews. I especially liked your last paragraph which is very true. I never would have connected the dots between Johnson and Reagan without Darman's help.

I also very much enjoyed Peter's perspective too.

Everybody sees something different and that is what is so great about this thread and reading everybody's perspective.

Masters of the Game

Landslide by Jonathan Darman was given to me by Goodreads and the History Book Club. Many thanks to both entities for the book and for introducing me to this brilliant author.

In Landslide, Jonathan Darman examines the political maneuvers of President Lyndon Johnson and Governor, later to be President Ronald Reagan. The book focuses mainly on these two powerful men during the 1,000 days which followed the assassination of President John Kennedy.

Landslide is extremely well written and researched. The fact that the book reads more like a novel than a political essay attests to the talents of the author. In examining the two men who won the largest elections in US history, Darman remains fair and balanced in revealing the information he shares within the book.

Darman shows us two men who appear so different, yet when we focus on them, they are remarkably similar. Both men were supporters of FDR. They were only three years apart in age, even though one is a symbol of 1960s America and the other symbolizes America of the 1980s. LBJ and Reagan were both masters of give and take politics. Even their political claims, however different, show how each man had a personal power agenda - LBJ felt that America would become the Great Society if only the country would follow his plans. Reagan claimed that big government was the cause of America's problems and by following his plans the country would be a better place.

Reagan's career transition from B movie actor to President of the United States was riveting although I found it perplexing that Nancy Reagan and Richard Nixon were not more involved in his rise to power.

Jonathan Darman's skill in weaving research with the historical focus of Landslide is remarkable. I recommend Landslide to anyone interested in American History as well as anyone interested in the history of American politics. I greatly look forward to his next book.

Good review and I do too.

Jonathan Darman’s book Landslide is a great first book by a well known Newsweek journalist. He has a way of presenting history and historical details with the expertise of a skilled news man.

What makes the storyline and the book so engaging is his talent as a journalist.

And that is the style and the reason that this book grabs you immediately and draws you in.

The true historian would have a slow build while the news writer/journalist gets the lead in the first line. Darman knows how to write a good lead and that is why the book just propels itself naturally from chapter to chapter.

The drawback of this approach is that some readers never capture the true essence and factual backdrop of the story or the reference and primary source material behind the lead. Some of the readers felt that this was a missing part rather than simply a more journalistic approach to history.

I enjoyed the book tremendously and would have loved to have dialogued more with its author. One question that I did have is why the prologue was not more aggressively edited by the publisher because the depth and the breadth had more the feel of an advance or an outline of the entire book versus an introductory piece. It was too long, too meaty and could have stood alone as a short story for publication in The Atlantic - I wondered why the book was being condensed in the prologue. I honestly would recommend that you not read the prologue first - too much is given away.

Everyone approaches a book differently but most readers will find that this book is fun, informative and an engaging read. What it is not is a deep historical and heavily researched account such as those that Caro wrote about LBJ. From my viewpoint, Jonathan Darman had one foot in the journalistic camp and another in the historian one. I am hoping that in his next book he decides on which side of the fence he wants to be.

I recommend this book with great confidence and believe that most folks would love this book and would also want to read Mr. Darman’s next effort. I am one of those readers and believe that I will become a great fan of his writing. I do want to add that I am a fan of Landslide - a wonderful first book by Mr. Darman.

In compliance with FTC guidelines, please note that I received this book for free through the History Book Club on Goodreads.

by Jonathan Darman

by Robert A. Caro

Robert A. Caro

Landslide by Jonathan Darman compares and contrasts LBJ and Ronald Reagan.
I found it very informative and liked his writing style. His premise was based on the fact that both men had Landslide victories to the Presidency and both men had unreasonably high expectations. It was very interesting to read how LBJ was treated by the Kennedy’s and how he took over the helm as President after the assassination of JFK.

LBJ’s expectations were claims to an economic and social utopia. He was a very accomplished legislator and was able to get many bills and programs passed. Some of these, the Civil Rights Act, Voting Rights Act, and Medicare and founder of the “Great Society” were major accomplishments for him. Some of these programs were ideas under JFK but were stalled and LBJ was able to push them through. Things began to unravel with the Vietnam War which he initially did not even want. He became depressed and his health began to fail as well.

Ronald Reagan’s rise to politics and the presidency from a B-movie actor was insightful. He became a central figure in the Republican Party during the Barry Goldwater era and had a landslide victory to Governor of California in 1966. Reagan was an opponent of big government and wanted to cut the social programs. Reagan's rise to the presidency came in 1980 also with landslide wins. He became a favorite figure to the media and the people. I found it very interesting how LBJ and Ronald Reagan were lives intersected in the 1960’s and how in 1988, Ronald Reagan awarded Lady Bird the Congressional Gold Medal.

I really liked this book and recommend it to readers. I received a copy of this book from the publisher through the History Book Club on GoodReads

Thank you very much Helga for your review.

This has been an interesting read. This is a piece of history that honestly I have never truly studied, but lived through the 60's as a child. We get a closer view of LBJ in the white house and the struggles of the country during that time. A small glimpse of Reagan, but our author ties the two men together with the unrest and changing ideas of the country during the time.

To me though, the person I'd like to know more about after reading this book is Lady Bird Johnson. What a remarkable lady.

All in all a good read, and certainly a different focus from most books. A blend of history and journalism.

I received a copy of this book from the publisher through the History Book Club on GoodReads.

This book compares and contrasts the political careers of LBJ and Ronald Reagan in the mid-sixties. LBJ was president, winning by a historic landslide in 1964, and Reagan was just entering politics, winning a landslide gubernatorial election in 1966. His was a Republican victory in a populous state in a midterm election - a great disappointment for the sitting Democratic president, much as we just saw this past November.

But the similarities to today's times don't end there. Though the book has plenty to say about the personalities of both men, the main contrast is in the myths they both represented, myths that we're still hearing over and over again today. LBJ, founder of "the Great Society," was the force behind our current social safety net a/k/a welfare state. (Language is so politicized.) Reagan called himself an opponent of big government, so one of the main aims of his program was to cut social programs a/k/a entitlements. Sound familiar?

The author stays in the 60's for the bulk of the book and never makes any direct comparisons to the present until the Afterword. I don't think President Obama's name appears even once in the book. But any astute observer of politics will see the ideological origins of the red state/blue state divide at the very beginning, which makes the book an astounding achievement. It simultaneously gives you a picture of the 60's while keeping you connected to 2014.

I received a copy of this book from the publisher through the History Book Club on GoodReads.

Thanks Kressel and Kathy.

4 stars! I had a hard time grading this one. I usually do not read books exclusively based upon politics unless there is a significant military portion. I chose to read this one based upon an offer from the History Book Club which was gracious enough to provide. That being said, I found that I was woefully uninformed about the politics of the late 50's and the 60's, therefore I learned a considerable amount that had previously been neglected by me. Reagan's and Johnson's presidency and those of the candidates after them are entwined more than we can imagine. One president will cause ripples that the next two or three must deal with an so on and so on. I always suspected they were there, but never spent the time to delve into them. I found this book very informative of how politics were shaped after Kennedy's assassination. Not sure if I will continue to pursue any books exclusively on poltics, but I recommend this one for those of you who find the topic interesting.

I received a copy of this book from the publisher through the History Book Club on GoodReads.

Thank you Jack

In complaince with FTC guidlines I received this book free through the History Book Club on Goodreads

I don't usually read the history of modern American politics but this read was worth the effort. The author's style flowed easily through the story of two American Presidents.....LBJ and Reagan. I didn't realize some of the undercurrents that were in play, especially during LBJ's term in office, especially the Kennedy resistance that made it extremely difficult for Johnson to initiate his policies. We sometimes forget about the Kennedy attitude since the Viet Nam war seems to be what we remember about LBJs time in office. We see that LBJ was exactly how I expected him to be.....the master politician whose life was dedicated to it at the expense of his family. I also discovered that Lady Bird Johnson may be the most overlooked First Lady in history.....she was a very tough woman who smiled through it all.

Ronald Reagan's place in political history always puzzled me. He was very charismatic and could work a crowd as well as anyone. The media loved him but does that mean you are Presidential material? Obviously it was enough but then the author gives us more insight into his political skills and maybe his rise to the position of POTUS was not so surprising after all.

If you are interested in the "political game", this book will give you an inside look at how that "game" worked for two Presidents. Very well written and even a bit gossipy!!

Following is the review I posted on Goodreads upon completing Darman's book:

Around 7 a.m. one morning during the peak, if you want to call it that, of the 1988 US presidential campaign, the fax machine near my desk at work rattled to life. Given the hour, my interest was piqued.

An X-rated cartoon of a penis desperately chasing a vagina eked out of the machine, line by line. The caption read, “With Bush and Dukakis, it’s just one F-ing thing after another.”

That was the election I wrote in my father’s name. It seemed like the right thing to do.

Perhaps the cartoonist, and myself, were guilty of succumbing to the political malaise originated by the unfulfillable myths created by presidents Johnson and Reagan explored by Jonathan Darman in Landslide: LBJ and Ronald Reagan at the Dawn of a New America.

In the afterword tacked onto the end of this magazine piece expanded to 376 pages, Darman concludes, “To fix its broken politics, today’s America needs new stories. Or perhaps it just needs a new version of an old one.”

Briefly, Darman attributes much of the seemingly failing politics of the country to the overly simplistic myths cooked up around Johnson during his campaign for the Great Society; and Reagan’s reactionary response to it and the myth that the cult of the individual, unburdened of government’s chains, is the country’s future.

Both myths, Darman finds, are overly simplistic reactions to uncertainties that faced the country. He argues for a more nuanced message from political leaders acknowledging that the future is not certain, despite the pablum served up during campaign season.

Darman’s choice of Johnson and Reagan administrations is imaginative and his writing makes Landslide imminently accessible and readable. I’m not so sure there is anything particularly new in the narrative, although the revelation that Johnson planned to attend the ’64 Democratic convention in Atlantic City to tell delegates he wouldn’t run was news to me and my son (resident presidential scholar here).

In the afterword, which should be read first as an introduction, Darman attributes the tendency in American politics to gravitate to one of the two polar myths when confronted during crises of uncertainty.

There are a number of flaws in Darman’s book. It fails to take into account the universal distrust of government, not just in America’s short history, but through all time in all governments. It is, after all, a guy named Aristotle who in his Politics concludes there is no good government. Best to form a hybrid of the various types (republic and democracy for the US) and muddle by as best we can.

From the Articles of Confederation to today’s congressional morass, and all points in between, there is good reason to find that Aristotle was on the money.

And contrary to what Darman offers, perhaps the fault does not lie in the myths created by the leaders and their camps. To be sure, both Johnson’s promise of communal utopia and Reagan’s cult of the individual are flawed. But so are other myths that rise from political camp fires. It’s an old story.

But, what’s the alternative? Darman would have us believe what he calls “consensus” politics and myths, such as those offered by FDR and JFK are the answer. But if LBJ and Reagan didn’t practice consensus politics (LBJ in passing his impressive body of civil rights legislation, and Medicare; Reagan in his tax cuts and welfare reform), then they practiced nothing.

Darman’s examination of Reagan especially could be more thorough, not an easy task I know given the likelihood that Reagan essentially was a cipher. At one point, Darman notes that aside from Reagan’s obsession with the perceived threat of communism reminiscent of Goldwater, he didn’t really hold any strong beliefs, which allowed him to make compromises (don’t tell today’s Republicans). This dynamic would warrant a more thorough examination.

In addition to findings that don’t seem to hold up, Darman’s text makes many claims about motivations and thinking by individuals that needs some kind of attribution, 32 pages of notes not excluded. The reader is left wondering: “How does Darman know that?”

As might be expected with an expanded magazine piece there is a great deal of repetition. He attributes a hero fetish to both candidates and repeatedly drives the point home. But again aside from the fact both politicians liked to ride horses we are offered little in the way of evidence that their heroic aspirations are anything out of the ordinary for presidents. Nor does this claim seem relevant to his narrative.

Normally, each book should be examined on its own merits. Readers who dwell on what a book doesn’t include generally are unfair, I think. That said, the importance of the myths Darman cites begs the question of the media used to deliver those stories.

During the Johnson administration, we saw TV supplant print. This was a revolution that perhaps should be taken into consideration in any narrative that explores political myths of the day.

During the Reagan administration, the microcomputer emerged, as big a revolution as TV supplanting newspapers. It presages individuals’ ability to broadcast their own myths, regardless of facts.

These media developments, even though not mentioned by Darman, are widely known and may give the lie to Darman’s yearning for consensus politics when radio and print were the dominant media.

Think of it. In the day of faxes, that cartoon in 1988 slowly was sent from one machine to another, to maybe half a dozen sites. Today that message could be global in a matter of hours, if not sooner.

The stories around campaigns are no longer authored so much by politicians and their organizations as by any fool in front of a keyboard who can strike a cord with their followers and their followers followers and those following the followers of their followers and…

Thanks Jill and Martin.

Woof, woof. ;)

(lol)

(In compliance with FTC guidlines I received this book free through the History Book Club on Goodreads)

A fairly good book on the parallel political careers of Johnson and Reagan, insightful and written with flair. Reagan has always been a bit of a puzzle, and Darman does a fine job figuring him out, as well as highlighting his unusual career (including his political ambition, something not often emphasized by his supporters). Darman also captures Johnson's forceful character, as well his curious mixture of pessimism and idealism. Both men had remarkable similarities. Darman's LBJ comes off neither as a foolish or a driven man, but a mix of both, which highlights LBJ's tragic aspect.

The main problem with the book's premise is that the two men's careers had no real cross-over, nor was their relationship significant. The book can also get a little melodramatic, but it is still a good introduction to a turbulent era.

Thank you Jerome

A very interesting comparison with the presidency of Lyndon Johnson and the rise of Ronald Reagan in the 1960's. Both had similar ambitions, yet both viewed obtaining these goals in a very different way. The strengths and flaws of both of these men are richly detailed. I'd like to thank the History Book Club for the opportunity to obtain and read this book. An enjoyable experience!

(In compliance with FTC guidelines I received this book free through the History Book Club on Goodreads)

Thank you David

LOL Martin. Solid review.

I'll be posting my shortly as I just finished the book.

As part of my agreement to read and participate in the book thread, here is my review of the book:

I read this book as part of the Goodreads HBC.

First off, thanks to the HBC for allowing me to read this and discuss the book as we went week by week into the book.

Secondly, thank you to Jonathan Darman for pulling me out of the black hole that was the 60's and 70's in politics and sparking my interest in this period. As a self taught history buff, this was on period that I had completely neglected in my studies and I now have an interest in soaking up some reading from this period. I've already bought books by Kissinger, Richard Goodwin and Caro to further study these decades.

I gave the book 3 stars but I'm fairly picky on my ratings. This was a good book. Not great, but certainly worth the read and I would recommend it to both fans of Reagan and LBJ, to both conservative and liberal alike.

I was certain this book would completely come from the liberal perspective and be much more pro LBJ and negative toward Reagan. I was wrong. I thought Darman did a great job of showing the reader the human side of both men and the myth which surrounded both. I probably disagree a bit with the perspective on Reagan but Darman was certainly fair in my opinion.

The book raises more questions for me though then it provides answers. For example, why is the voting public so finicky in their elections? Why do we see such drastic different results in a matter of two years? This question is still being asked today and really Darman could write this book about today's politics and not the early to mid 1960's. We've seen Obama win two presidential elections, the first one easily yet we've seen him (or more so the Democratic party) get hammered in mid term elections. Not much has really changed.

The question or theme of the book in my opinion is "are candidates over promising or under delivering?" Well, that question is only answered in the minds of each individual voter. The public probably falls prey into believing too many of these promises. At the same time, world events derail many utopian dreams of our presidents. LBJ and "W" seem to be two of the bigger victims with Vietnam and 9/11. But even Obama is experiencing world events he thought were in the rear view mirror, or heading that way, when he took office. Obama has made the same mistake W made in the "Mission Accomplished" fiasco when he declared Al-Qaeda on the run.

Presidents seemingly will never live up to expectations, whether liberal or conservative. Maybe the checks and balance system is the cause and that is probably a good thing. No one man can topple the country, no matter how bad of a leader he is in the end.

I might have gone off topic a bit here but I enjoyed the book and it has led my to more questions then answers in our country's history at this point. That, however, is a good thing. More exploration to pursue in finding these answers.

Read the book; it's enjoyable and thought provoking.

I thoroughly enjoyed reading this book. Darman's description of the personalities of these two men was very insightful for me. Especially concerning LBJ, I now have a different view of him than I did as a teenager during the mid '60s. Brought back memories of those turbulent times also. Great book.

In compliance with FTC guidelines I received this book free through the History Book Club on Goodreads.

This was a very interesting book bringing me face to face with a major portion of key US history. I had little understanding of this era prior to reading Landslide. Most of what I had read of the late sixties centered around the Vietnam War rather than the political atmosphere at the time. I found it very interested to read about these two great men and the men of history surrounding them. LBJ was my first president, I was a baby and toddler during his presidency, but he was my first president. Reagan became president in the first election I in which I was of voting age. While I did not always agree with the conclusions of the author he does present the lives of these two men in a very interesting manner and draws the readers attention to the overlap and parallels between these two presidents.

I received this book free on Goodreads in exchange for a fair review.

3.5 stars

All in all, an informative read about LBJ and Reagan and how one was able to capitalize on his landslide victory for the White House and how the other one didn't. I wanted to read this book because I have a terrible gap in my knowledge of Presidents Johnson and Reagan. Darman did nice job of providing insight into each man's rise to power and why Reagan was successful in maintaining his popularity throughout his Presidency and Johnson was not.

The downside of this book was that the author failed to use citations, and thus, the reader was often confused about whether something was fact or simply the author's opinion. Couple this issue with the editorializing that Darman does from time to time in the book, and it's clear that this book is not a scholarly piece of work, thereby making its contents to some extent unreliable.

In light of the foregoing, this book will likely not appear on history buff's "must read" lists, but for what it is, a book that reads like a lengthy magazine article, it helped to fill the void at least in this reader's Presidential knowledge.

P.S. There's also some cool stuff about Kennedys and how manipulative they were (especially Jackie!) when it came to JFK's legacy. These snippets alone earned the book an additional 1/2 star.

In his first book Newsweek journalist Jonathan Darman compares the landslide elections of Lyndon Johnson and Ronald Reagan and details the undercurrent issues that faced America during their political careers. In Landslide: LBJ and Ronald Reagan at the Dawn of a New America, Darman details LBJ's presidency from the time he took office after Kennedy's assassination and his eventual landslide for his full term election. He also reviews Reagan's move from Hollywood actor to political soundboard for the Republican party, to his rise as California governor in his own landslide election during LBJ's tenure in office.

I enjoyed the book to the point that I knew little about LBJ but remember Reagan as president and was able to get some in-depth knowledge about both men and their journey to the presidency. I expected more of a compare/contrast scenario between the men, but felt like the book was really more about Johnson and Reagan was thrown in for an occasional thematic contrast.

I also learned a bit about Lady Bird Johnson who seemed to be LBJ's confidant and champion. She was quite a lady. Darman briefly mentioned Nancy Reagan and never showed how she may or may not have been that same support system for Reagan.

All in all, I enjoyed the book and plan to read more on LBJ. I wasn't a big fan of his before, but have a better respect for him, while my thoughts on Reagan see him more as the actor playing a politician than the politician I thought he was.

In compliance with FTC guidelines, please note that I received this book for free through the History Book Club on Goodreads.

Thanks everybody so far.

Folks who were part of the free book offer - please start preparing your independent review and please post it on this thread (no links) - also make sure to add the disclaimer.

https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

Reviews need to be done by everybody on this list. As the review is done I will strike through your name on this list.

1. Bentley - moderator- Metro NYC - COMPLETED REVIEW - I enjoyed the book very much and a special thank you to the author and to Random House.
2. Jerome O - Pennsylvania COMPLETED REVIEW - Thank you Jerome for completing your t's and c's - I hope you enjoyed the book.
3. Kathy H - Idaho - COMPLETED REVIEW - Thank you Kathy for completing your t's and c's - I hope you enjoyed the book.
4. Jill H - backup mod - West Virginia - COMPLETED REVIEW Thank you Jill for completing your t's and c's - I hope you enjoyed the book.
5. Bryan Craig - backup moderator - Virginia - on list - address verified - ON THE MAP - RECEIVED BOOK - reminder sent about doing review
6. Teri B - Texas - COMPLETED REVIEW - Thank you Teri for completing your t's and c's - I hope you enjoyed the book.
7. Francie - Georgia COMPLETED REVIEW - Thank you Francie for completing your t's and c's - I hope you enjoyed the book.
8. John C. - South Carolina - on list - address verified - ON THE MAP - RECEIVED BOOK
9. David S. - Nebraska COMPLETED REVIEW Thank you David for completing your t's and c's. I hope you enjoyed the book.
10. Peter F - NYC - COMPLETED REVIEW - Thank you Peter for completing your t's and c's - I hope you enjoyed the book.
11. Cary K. - Wisconsin - - COMPLETED REVIEW - Thank you Cary for completing the t's and c's - I hope you enjoyed the book.
12. Sarah K of Virginia - on list and verified - ON THE MAP - RECEIVED BOOK
13. Sera (V) of Pennsylvania - COMPLETED REVIEW - Thank you Sera for completing your t's and c's - I hope you enjoyed the book.
14. Steve of New Jersey - - COMPLETED REVIEW - Thank you Steve for completing your t's and c's - I hope you enjoyed the book.
15. Kressel - New York - COMPLETED REVIEW _ Thank you Kressel for completing your t's and c's - I hope you enjoyed the book.
16. Dave - Ohio - on list - address verified - ON THE MAP - RECEIVED BOOK
17. Brian S - Pennsylvania - on list - address verified - ON THE MAP - RECEIVED BOOK
18. Hunter S. J. - Georgia - COMPLETED REVIEW Thank you Hunter for completing your t's and c's - I hope you enjoyed the book.
19. Jim W of Michigan - on list - address verified - ON THE MAP - RECEIVED BOOK
20. Helga of South Carolina - COMPLETED REVIEW - Thank you Helga for completing your t's and c's - I hope you enjoyed the book.
21. Mark L. of Utah - on list - address verified - no book yet - ON THE MAP - RECEIVED BOOK
22. Ann D of Nebraska - on list - address verified - ON THE MAP - RECEIVED BOOK
23. Vincent B of New York City - on list - address verified - ON THE MAP - RECEIVED BOOK
24. G. Dan P. of Georgia - on list and address verified - ON THE MAP - RECEIVED BOOK
25. Albert Colbert of Arizona - on list - address verified - ON THE MAP - RECEIVED BOOK
26. Holly Heilig-Gaul of California - on list - address verified - ON THE MAP - RECEIVED BOOK
27. Valerie Neer of California - on list - address verified - ON THE MAP - RECEIVED BOOK
28. Rebecca J of Ohio - on list - address verified - ON THE MAP - RECEIVED BOOK
29. Lewis Codington of Tennessee - COMPLETED REVIEW - Thank you Lewis for completing your t's and c's - I hope you enjoyed the booK.
30. Cheryl Stillwell of Ohio- on list - address verified
31. Christopher G of Florida - on list and verified - ON THE MAP - RECEIVED BOOK
32. Justin Poe of Ohio- COMPLETED REVIEW Thank you Justin for completing your t's and c's - I hope you enjoyed the book.
33. (Stan) W of Colorado - on list and address verified - ON THE MAP - RECEIVED BOOK
34. Scott A. of West Virginia - on list and verified - ON THE MAP - GOT BOOK
35. Mary D of California - on list and verified - ON THE MAP - RECEIVED BOOK
36. Lore spar of Florida - on list and verified - ON THE MAP - RECEIVED BOOK
37. J. Tappe of Hawaii COMPLETED REVIEW - Thank you Jack for completing your t's and c's - I hope you enjoyed the book.
38. Tomi of Arkansa - on list and verified - ON THE MAP - GOT BOOK

Michael from Canada and Martin did not get the free book offer but purchased the book and did reviews.

Although I'm a lover of history, I don't tend to like politics and often get confused by the issues...(Yes, you're right. You're also right... Wait, how can they both be right?!?) However, the author has done a wonderful job of unpacking the individuals being discussed (their views, their personalities, their strengths and weaknesses, some of the culture and feel of the time periods involved), and does so in an easy to read, chatty way that makes the book very enjoyable to read. The similarities and differences between Johnson and Reagan are fascinating to encounter, and the author was very imaginative in bringing these two presidents together in a book in a way that I would never have thought to do. There were, however, occasions when I felt the author was too dogmatic or read too much into events and personalities than one can realistically do.

All in all, a very well written, interesting book.

Four stars.

I would very much like to thank Random House for the offer of this book free through the History Book Club on Goodreads.

Thank you Lewis

I received this book from the publisher (Random House) via the History Book Club on Goodreads.

"Landslide" is a great conversation in the differences and similarities of these two presidents. The ups and downs of both men, and how their lives intersected, made for great reading. It is a fascinating journey into how these men rose and fell during the turmoil of the 1960s including assassinations, an unpopular and costly war, and social unrest at home all while adjusting to a new phenomenon called television news that was appearing everywhere trouble was seen.

I'm not one that seeks out presidential biography/profile books, but I loved this one. Throughout the book I felt as if I were watching the events unfold live; the author was very good at capturing the readers attention and illustrating how things unfolded while presenting events in a tone that changed to match these varied events.

The events that influenced both men in this book have made me curious to learn more about this time period, making my reading list double as my curiosity in many subjects has been piqued.

I highly recommend this to all history readers interested in either of these men or the 1960s as a whole.

Thanks Cary - glad you liked it and enjoyed your input.

In compliance with FTC guidelines, please note that I received this book for free through the History Book Club on Goodreads.

I really enjoyed this book and enjoyed the Live aspect of Regan and LBJ. I realized many similarities as well as differences that were not quite that apparent to me in past readings and living through the Regan era.

The book was very easy to read and did not drag on or belittle points that historical works often do. Points were made, especially on how LBJ took things personally and then the author moved on.

After reading through the book I went online and dug into their backgrounds more and listened in on LBJ's info as told by Ed Bearss during one of his lectures. I would have been interesting to have been able to witness LBJ's actions first hand, and the author did a great job in bringing words off the page to portray each man in and out of office.

Highly recommended

In compliance with FTC guidelines, please note that I received this book for free through the History Book Club on Goodreads.

I very much enjoyed Landslide: LBJ and Ronald Reagan at the Dawn of a New America by Jonathan Darman. Darman's background is in journalism and he has put it to good use in writing a very interesting personal portrait of two leaders with very different views of the role of government in American life. His book contains numerous anecdotes, extensive background information on the times, and a writing style that keeps the reader engaged throughout. It was difficult to put down.

Darman has chosen to write a narrative history, describing primarily the first 1000 days in LBJ's presidency, which coincided with Ronald Reagan's first serious appearance on the national political scene.

This gives his book a focus, but he seems primarily interested in contrasting the utopian ideals of both men, and since the political careers of these actually overlapped very little (Reagan became president 17 years later), this diametric contrast of the two men sometimes seems a bit forced.

Where as LBJ saw an expanded government role as the best answer to the nation's most serious social problems, Reagan saw it as a force destroying America's democratic fiber.

I agree with Darman that these opposing myths have had a very harmful effect on American politics. This book leads to very interesting discussions of how the myths have helped poison modern political life. It is well worth reading.

Bentley wrote: "Chef wrote: "I really enjoyed this book and enjoyed the Live aspect of Regan and LBJ. I realized many similarities as well as differences that were not quite that apparent to me in past readings a..."

Done

Thanks Chef

This was a free book from Goodreads History Book Club and Random House.
This was a double biography of LBJ and Ronald Reagan dealing mainly with the 1000 days after the assassination of JFK. The title comes from both men having huge "landslide" election victories. I think that Jonathan Darman did a good job fleshing out the main actors and those closest to them and the times around them. I learned a great deal about LBJ's depressive personality and Reagan's entry into politics.
I think the book could have been better in a couple areas. First, I felt that Darman occasionally tried gimmicks in his delivery that fell flat. One instance was in a chapter about Reagan. The author used a screenplay style to illustrate how Reagan viewed LBJ as President. I felt it was a distraction and superfluous. His writing style is good enough not to need tricks.
The second was an overdoing of the dawn of a new America. I did not feel that he made the connection between the late 60s and the "Reagan Revolution" of 1980. I felt Darman had glossed over the post-Vietnam, Watergate and stagflation of the Seventies effect on Reagan getting elected. I also felt that (and this is coming from an admitted non-fan of Reagan) Darman could have done a better job with his anti-Reagan bias. Comparing and contrasting these two very different individuals is difficult enough with out the occasional jab skewing things.
Other than those few areas, I think Darman did a good job with the subject matter and it was a good read and I learned about an era I wasn't that familiar with.

I would like to thank Random House, Goodreads, the History Book Club and Bentley for the opportunity to read and discuss Landslide.

This is an interesting book that traces the rise of Reagan and the downfall of LBJ. It would be interesting to have more of Nixon in this book, and in the end, the connection between LBJ and Reagan doesn't always come together, but overall, I'm glad I read it.

In compliance with FTC guidelines I received this book free through the History Book Club on Goodreads