Rating: 
Summary: A reader form Princeton, Il
Review: 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.
Rating:
Summary: Simply put
Review: 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.
Rating:
Summary: The New Standard for Political Books
Review: In a previous review, I noted that "The Boys on the Bus" set the standard for political books. What It Takes exceeded that standard, and set a new one. In this reporting of the 1988 Presidential election, Richard Ben Cramer presents THE authoritative review and analysis of the candidates, the nominee, and the eventual president. This book is not for the faint of heart. At over 1000 pages, this book makes "Truman" seem like a Cliff's Notes review of a presidency. What the length does provide is ubelievable insight into what made the candidates tick, and why they were successful, or unsuccessful, in conveying their story and message to the American people. For those who want to know, this is the one book to read.
Rating:
Summary: The One Campaign Book To Read
Review: 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.
Rating:
Summary: The One Campaign Book To Read
Review: 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.
Rating:
Summary: "What it Takes" to write the perfect political book
Review: 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.
Rating:
Summary: "What it Takes" to write the perfect political book
Review: 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.
Rating:
Summary: The DEFINITIVE account of american electoral politics
Review: 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.
Rating:
Summary: Required reading for anyone who votes
Review: This epic tale of the pursuit of the 1988 Presidential Nominations is the best book ever written about the unique breed of men who seek our highest office. Cramer focuses on George Bush and Bob Dole on the Republican side and Gary Hart, Joe Biden, Dick Gephardt and Michael Dukakis on the Democratic side. Instead of giving us a campaign diary or obsessing over the minutiae of the candidates strategies, he provides virtual biographies of each man & an intimate portrait of why each of them wants to be, and is in position to be, President of the United States. As one of the other reviewers said, if every American voter had read this book, Bob Dole would be President now, following the second Bush term. More's the pity...
Rating: 
Summary: Interesting and Very Readable
Review: This is a very good book that delves into the type of personalities that "have what it takes" to climb to the top ranks of presidential contenders. Focusing on the Democrat and GOP hopefuls in 1988, Cramer paints a devastating portrait of the personalities of the ten or so aspirants. Along the way, he provides a good snapshot of modern presidential politics. What is revealed are hard driven men, who are willing to sacrifice all other concerns to their political ambitions. Although Bush, Gore, Dukakis, Hart, Biden, Dole and the others have very different life stories and personalities, they are very similar in their focus, drive and ego. This book provides biographical sketches of each as well as an insiders view of their 1988 campaigns. Knowing Delaware's Biden a little, I would say that he captures at least that character fairly accurately. The only complaint with this book is that Cramer takes great liberties with his characters in telling their stories. He can not know what they were thinking exactly during all the vignettes he paints, yet he writes as if he were the central character and he had intimate knowledge of conversations, feelings and dialogue. Cramer also draws many conclusions from the life portraits of his characters. This style is not unenjoyable, but one should be forwarned that the author writes in the "gonzo" journalism style that sounds more authoritative than it could possibly be. This is the type of writing that makes these types of books difficult to rely on as historical sources, but can present an interesting story. What it Takes is very readable and enjoyable.
| 
