The Candidate: What It Takes to Win - and Hold - the White House 1st Edition
| Samuel L. Popkin (Author) Find all the books, read about the author, and more. See search results for this author |
Use the Amazon App to scan ISBNs and compare prices.
There is a newer edition of this item:
$18.95
(67)
Only 1 left in stock (more on the way).
While plenty of political insiders have written about specific campaigns, only Popkin--drawing on a lifetime of presidential campaign experience and extensive research--analyzes what it takes to win the next campaign. The road to the White House is littered with geniuses of campaigns past. Why doesn't practice make perfect? Why is experience such a poor teacher? Why are the same mistakes replayed again and again?
Based on detailed analyses of the winners--and losers--of the last 60 years of presidential campaigns, Popkin explains how challengers get to the White House, how incumbents stay there for a second term, and how successors hold power for their party. He looks in particular at three campaigns--George H.W. Bush's muddled campaign for reelection in 1992, Al Gore's flawed campaign for the presidency in 2000, and Hillary Clinton's mismanaged effort to win the nomination in 2008--and uncovers the lessons that Ronald Reagan can teach future candidates about teamwork. Throughout, Popkin illuminates the intricacies of presidential campaigns--the small details and the big picture, the surprising mistakes and the predictable miscues--in a riveting account of what goes on inside a campaign and what makes one succeed while another fails.
As Popkin shows, a vision for the future and the audacity to run are only the first steps in a candidate's run for office. To truly survive the most grueling show on earth, presidential hopefuls have to understand the critical factors that Popkin reveals in The Candidate. In the wake of the 2012 election, Popkin's analysis looks remarkably prescient. Obama ran a strong incumbent-oriented campaign but made typical incumbent mistakes, as evidenced by his weak performance in the first debate. The Romney campaign correctly put power in the hands of a strong campaign manager, but it couldn't overcome the weaknesses of the candidate.
Customers who bought this item also bought
Editorial Reviews
Amazon.com Review
Amazon.com: Five Pivotal Moments from Incumbent Campaigns Additional Content from the Author Samuel L. Popkin, Author
While a challenger's presidential campaign can quickly adjust and adapt to shifting winds like a speedboat, an incumbent's campaign behaves more like a battleship, maneuvering slowly and making very large waves. Instead of a core inner circle calling the shots from a "war room," a president's re-election team must coordinate with White House staffers and the President's cabinet--all of whom have agendas difficult to change, control or coordinate.
The pivotal moments in incumbents' campaigns are policy moves that take months to plan before they're unveiled--and just as long to see their effects. Challengers offer talk about what they believe in, but the five classic moves outlined here show presidents making a credible commitment by paying a price.
Congress Overrides Truman's Veto of Taft-Hartley
Harry Truman's prospects for re-election in 1948 looked bleak. It didn’t help that unions viewed him as the "number one strike breaker" after he interceded in the railroad and mining strikes crippling the country. But when the Taft-Hartley Act came to his desk for his signature in 1947, Truman saw the opportunity to resurrect his candidacy. By vetoing Taft-Hartley--which outlawed secondary strikes, mass picketing and closed shops--Truman positioned himself as the last, best hope of the unions. The Republican-controlled Congress, which overrode the veto with support from nearly half of all Democrats, became an easy, visible enemy for Truman... and the unions. Without the financial support from unions in 1948, he would not have captured the normally Republican farm vote and countered Thomas E. Dewey's urban appeal.
Nixon Visits China
To this day, when Democratic strategists think about dramatic moves a president can make, they ask each other to finish the sentence "If only Nixon could visit China, only a Democrat could..." Nixon's surprising visit to China in February, 1972, was a key part of his re-election strategy. Senator George McGovern's pledge to end the Vietnam War and bring U.S. troops home immediately made Nixon look like an unadulterated hawk by contrast. The trip to China--a historic attempt to restore the relations with the Communist nation--made the rest of Nixon's foreign policy claims credible. It paved the way for Nixon to campaign on the goal of "Peace with Honor," centered on a commitment to a more principled end to the war.
Carter Fails to Rescue Iranian Hostages
Carter is an important reminder that an incumbent's bold moves can backfire badly. With the Iran Hostage Crisis entering its fifth month--and nothing but failed negotiations to show for his efforts--Carter decided to try to rescue the 55 Americans held in Tehran's American Embassy. The rescue attempt, dubbed "Operation Eagle Claw," was aborted when two defective helicopters forced the mission to turn back. Eight U.S. servicemen died, and Carter's administration suffered a very public failure. "If we had it to do all over again," Carter’s media advisor Gerald Rafshoon said after the election, "we would take the 30 million dollars we spent in the campaign and get three more helicopters for the Iran rescue mission."
George H. W. Bush Takes Lee Iacocca to Japan
Although Bush's January, 1992, state visit to Japan is now remembered for the vomit the jet-lagged president deposited in the prime minister's lap, the trip was already a debacle before that incident. Trying to prove that his foreign policy focus could pivot from security to jobs, Bush brought Big Three auto executives along to persuade Japan to import more American cars. The failing CEOs' salaries became the talk of the country; Lee Iacocca, Chrysler's CEO, was paid more than all the Japanese auto companies' CEOs together. The Wall Street Journal was so disgusted, they urged Bush to "Give Iacocca to Japan." And the day after the president's stomach problems, Johnny Carson joked, "If you had to look at Lee Iacocca while eating raw fish, you'd barf too."
Clinton Outmaneuvers Newt Gingrich
In December 1995, the Republican controlled house and senate sent Bill Clinton a budget that would let Medicare, in Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich's words, "wither on the vine." With the same pen LBJ used to sign Medicare into law, Bill Clinton vetoed their budget, forcing a government shutdown. After their brinkmanship backfired, the freshman congressman, George Stephanopoulos wrote, developed a "kamikaze spirit" and "became Newt's Frankenstein monster--and my best friends."
Infuriated by losing the budget battle, Republicans then sent Clinton two welfare reform bills so stringent that he had no choice but to veto them. Though former Senator Bob Dole, now the Republican presidential candidate, begged Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott not to send him something he could sign, Senate Republicans were now worried about their reelection prospects. A compromise bill went through and Clinton signed it in August, 1996. By restoring Clinton's centrist credentials, the Republican senate had sunk the Dole campaign. Said Dole strategist Tony Fabrizio, "they aimed the torpedoes at the hull and then started throwing water at it."
--Samuel L. Popkin
Review
"No one I know has more closely studied the link between the minds of voters and the machinery of Presidential campaigns than Sam Popkin. He's a scholar who has worked in War Rooms. A strategist who knows his history. In The Candidate, Professor Popkin teaches us what he's learned - the surprising secrets that separate winning campaigns from the ones that crash and burn." --George Stephanopoulos, Anchor and Chief Political Correspondent, ABC News
"Popkin is that rare academic who can write a fast-moving, punchy book that rescues political science from spreadsheets and algorithms and thereby makes it interesting and captivating. The Candidate is argumentative, opinionated, provocative and a great read for any political junkie or activist." --Karl Rove, former Senior Advisor and Deputy Chief of Staff to President George W. Bush
"The Candidate offers a deep dive into Presidential politics. Popkin tells us why so many 'inevitable' candidates fail, why incumbency can be as much a burden as a blessing, and why the presidency is often won or lost behind the scenes. Informed, opinionated, and smart. Must reading in 2012 and beyond." --Richard Thaler, co-author of Nudge
"Samuel L. Popkin has written a ground-breaking book, making use of his skills as a political scientist, his extensive experience in campaigns, and his prodigious archival research to produce a gold-plated analysis of presidential elections. His book, The Candidate: What it Takes to Win - and Hold -the White House, is not just a crucial document for campaign strategists, political reporters, and academics; it is a great read for members of the general public who will find it enlightening, refreshing, and a new source for understanding the world of high-powered politics. --Thomas Edsall, author of The Age of Austerity
"All political junkies should have this book next to the TV remote so they can watch Popkin's ideas play out in real time during this campaign season and the general election. Too bad for the GOP candidates that they can't read this book until May. Highly recommended." --Library Journal
"No one I know has more closely studied the link between the minds of voters and the machinery of Presidential campaigns than Sam Popkin. He's a scholar who has worked in War Rooms. A strategist who knows his history. In The Candidate, Professor Popkin teaches us what he's learned--the surprising secrets that separate winning campaigns from the ones that crash and burn." --George Stephanopoulos, Anchor and Chief Political Correspondent, ABC News
"The Candidate offers a deep dive into Presidential politics. Popkin tells us why so many 'inevitable' candidates fail, why incumbency can be as much a burden as a blessing, and why the presidency is often won or lost behind the scenes. Informed, opinionated, and smart. Must reading in 2012 and beyond." --Richard Thaler, co-author of Nudge
"Samuel L. Popkin has written a ground-breaking book, making use of his skills as a political scientist, his extensive experience in campaigns, and his prodigious archival research to produce a gold-plated analysis of presidential elections. His book, The Candidate: What it Takes to Win--andHold--the White House, is not just a crucial document for campaign strategists, political reporters, and academics; it is a great read for members of the general public who will find it enlightening, refreshing, and a new source for understanding the world of high-powered politics." --Thomas Edsall, author of The Age of Austerity
"Popkin is that rare academic who can write a fast-moving, punchy book that rescues political science from spreadsheets and algorithms and thereby makes it interesting and captivating. The Candidate is argumentative, opinionated, provocative and a gre
"Sam Popkin is a leading political scientist and someone who has worked inside presidential campaigns over many years. He brings the discipline of an academic and the eye of a practitioner to the question of what makes some candidates successful and other not." --Dan Balz, The Washington Post
"No one I know has more closely studied the link between the minds of voters and the machinery of Presidential campaigns than Sam Popkin. He's a scholar who has worked in War Rooms. A strategist who knows his history. In The Candidate, Professor Popkin teaches us what he's learned--the surprising secrets that separate winning campaigns from the ones that crash and burn." --George Stephanopoulos, Anchor and Chief Political Correspondent, ABC News
"The Candidate offers a deep dive into Presidential politics. Popkin tells us why so many 'inevitable' candidates fail, why incumbency can be as much a burden as a blessing, and why the presidency is often won or lost behind the scenes. Informed, opinionated, and smart. Must reading in 2012 and beyond." --Richard Thaler, co-author of Nudge
"Samuel L. Popkin has written a ground-breaking book, making use of his skills as a political scientist, his extensive experience in campaigns, and his prodigious archival research to produce a gold-plated analysis of presidential elections. His book, The Candidate: What it Takes to Win--and Hold--the White House, is not just a crucial document for campaign strategists, political reporters, and academics; it is a great read for members of the general public who will find it enlightening, refreshing, and a new source for understanding the world of high-powered politics." --Thomas Edsall, author of The Age of Austerity
"Popkin is that rare academic who can write a fast-moving, punchy book that rescues political science from spreadsheets and algorithms and thereby makes it interesting and captivating. The Candidate is argumentative, opinionated, provocative and a great read for any political junkie or activist."--Karl Rove, former Senior Advisor and Deputy Chief of Staff to President George W. Bush
"[A] valuable aspect of The Candidate is [Popkin's] insistence that what matters above all else is the team, and especially the immediate supervisor of that team, the chief of staff...convincing." --Michael Tomasky, The New York Review of Books
"The Candidate is an insider romp through American politics -- and a guide to the presidential elections of 2012." -- The Globe and Mail
"All political junkies should have this book next to the TV remote so they can watch Popkin's ideas play out in real time during this campaign season and the general election. Too bad for the GOP candidates that they can't read this book until May. Highly recommended." --Library Journal
"Sam Popkin is a rare breed-an accomplished academic and practitioner, who understands politics from outside and in. In The Candidate, Popkin shares his keen insights into campaigns, why they win, and why they don't. It's must reading for any student of the game."--David Axelrod
Featured in Survival: Global Politics & Strategy
"Sam Popkin is a leading political scientist and someone who has worked inside presidential campaigns over many years. He brings the discipline of an academic and the eye of a practitioner to the question of what makes some candidates successful and other not." --Dan Balz, The Washington Post
"No one I know has more closely studied the link between the minds of voters and the machinery of Presidential campaigns than Sam Popkin. He's a scholar who has worked in War Rooms. A strategist who knows his history. In The Candidate, Professor Popkin teaches us what he's learned--the surprising secrets that separate winning campaigns from the ones that crash and burn." --George Stephanopoulos, Anchor and Chief Political Correspondent, ABC News
"The Candidate offers a deep dive into Presidential politics. Popkin tells us why so many 'inevitable' candidates fail, why incumbency can be as much a burden as a blessing, and why the presidency is often won or lost behind the scenes. Informed, opinionated, and smart. Must reading in 2012 and beyond." --Richard Thaler, co-author of Nudge
"Samuel L. Popkin has written a ground-breaking book, making use of his skills as a political scientist, his extensive experience in campaigns, and his prodigious archival research to produce a gold-plated analysis of presidential elections. His book, The Candidate: What it Takes to Win--and Hold--the White House, is not just a crucial document for campaign strategists, political reporters, and academics; it is a great read for members of the general public who will find it enlightening, refreshing, and a new source for understanding the world of high-powered politics." --Thomas Edsall, author of The Age of Austerity
"Popkin is that rare academic who can write a fast-moving, punchy book that rescues political science from spreadsheets and algorithms and thereby makes it interesting and captivating. The Candidate is argumentative, opinionated, provocative and a great read for any political junkie or activist."--Karl Rove, former Senior Advisor and Deputy Chief of Staff to President George W. Bush
"[A] valuable aspect of The Candidate is [Popkin's] insistence that what matters above all else is the team, and especially the immediate supervisor of that team, the chief of staff...convincing." --Michael Tomasky, The New York Review of Books
"The Candidate is an insider romp through American politics -- and a guide to the presidential elections of 2012." -- The Globe and Mail
"All political junkies should have this book next to the TV remote so they can watch Popkin's ideas play out in real time during this campaign season and the general election. Too bad for the GOP candidates that they can't read this book until May. Highly recommended." --Library Journal
"Sam Popkin is a rare breed-an accomplished academic and practitioner, who understands politics from outside and in. In The Candidate, Popkin shares his keen insights into campaigns, why they win, and why they don't. It's must reading for any student of the game."--David Axelrod
Featured in Survival: Global Politics & Strategy
About the Author
Samuel L. Popkin is Professor of Political Science at the University of California, San Diego. He has also been a consulting analyst in presidential campaigns, serving as consultant to the Clinton campaign on polling and strategy, to the CBS News election units from 1983 to 1990 on survey design and analysis, and more recently to the Gore campaign. He has also served as consultant to political parties in Canada and Europe and to the Departments of State and Defense. His most recent book is The Reasoning Voter: Communication and Persuasion in Presidential Campaigns; earlier he co-authored Issues and Strategies: The Computer Simulation of Presidential Campaigns; and he co-edited Chief of Staff: Twenty-Five Years of Managing the Presidency.
Product details
- Publisher : Oxford University Press; 1st edition (May 4, 2012)
- Language : English
- Hardcover : 360 pages
- ISBN-10 : 0199922071
- ISBN-13 : 978-0199922079
- Item Weight : 1.34 pounds
- Dimensions : 9.3 x 1.3 x 6.4 inches
- Best Sellers Rank: #3,107,247 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
- #3,193 in Political History (Books)
- #3,781 in Elections
- #3,919 in Government
- Customer Reviews:
About the author

Samuel L. Popkin is Professor of Political Science at the University of California, San Diego. He has also been a consulting analyst in presidential campaigns, serving as consultant to the Clinton campaign on polling and strategy, to the CBS News election units from 1983 to 1990 on survey design and analysis, and more recently to the Gore campaign. He has also served as consultant to political parties in Canada and Europe and to the Departments of State and Defense. His most recent book is The Reasoning Voter: Communication and Persuasion in Presidential Campaigns; earlier he co-authored Issues and Strategies: The Computer Simulation of Presidential Campaigns; and he co-edited Chief of Staff: Twenty-Five Years of Managing the Presidency.(Photo Credit: Rebecca Webb)
Customer reviews
Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.
To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.
Learn more how customers reviews work on AmazonTop reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
The author sets forth the traits that candidates need to be successful. He asserts that a prospective president must be part monarch, part visionary, and part CEO, and the candidate must also have a strong team of advisers and staffers. Popkin looks at the different problems that candidates running as incumbents, challengers, and successors have to face, and notes the differences between running as a governor, senator, general or hero, and vice president.
Popkin closes by offering his opinion on whether our very long presidential selection process if beneficial or harmful. Anyone remotely interested in presidential politics would enjoy "The Candidate."
Top reviews from other countries
A politics professor and former Democrat party campaign consultant (from McGovern through to Gore), Samuel Popkin has sought to expose the arcane and often dark arts of US presidential campaigning in The Candidate. The results are fascinating. Here are just a few windows into this bizarre parallel world. In analysing historical campaigns, Popkin makes the seemingly obvious, but usually overlooked, point:
"Candidates would be better off by examining losers. General William Westmoreland, commander of the American forces in Vietnam, explained to reporters why he had not read any books written by French generals after their devastating defeat there. "They lost", he explained. And so did we." (p5)
This is in part because of what he articulates (by appropriating the great Barbara Tuchman's brilliant description of military campaigns) as `the unfolding of miscalculations.' (p6) Quite how those miscalculations have unfolded is instructive - which is why he focuses on the failed campaigns of apparently `inevitable' candidates: George H. W. Bush in 1992, Al Gore in 2000, and Hillary Clinton in 2008. The reasons for each failure were complex and mixed but all are revealing.
EGO PARADOXES
You have to be pretty sure of yourself to want to preside over anyone else, let alone the most powerful nation on earth. Some are instinctively distrustful of all politicians precisely because of this. But here's the paradox:
"The central existential problem for a presidential candidate is: How does someone with enough ego and audacity to run deal with their personal weaknesses? Stuart Stevens was a media specialist for George W. Bush in 2004 and 2008, and directed strategy for Mitt Romney during the 2012 primaries. One of his favourite axioms for candidates is "If you don't enter this process humbly, you will leave it humbly." But how can anyone asserting they are the most qualified to lead the nation acknowledge that someone else might know more about some parts of the job than they do?" (p52)
This is perhaps another way of putting Enoch Powell's famous dictum that "all political careers, unless cut off in mid-stream, end in failure". (He was in fact describing the career of Joseph Chamberlain, but, as things turned out, he could equally have been referring to his own career.)
And then if they do reach the Oval Office, it is inevitable for them to become insulated; the bubble of privilege, of acolytes, of being the centre of a royal court. (Remember how after ten years in No 10, Tony Blair suddenly found himself in the real world and unable to work his mobile phone?) How can it not? But it's worse than that. For all too often the ego plays tricks with the interpreting of events, especially of successes.
"Once a new president is in power, he forgets that voters who preferred him to the alternative did not necessarily comprehend or support all of his intentions. He believes his victory was due to his vision and goals; he underestimates how much the loss of credibility for the previous president helped him and overestimates how much his own party supports him." (p145)
Of course, as someone once said (attributable to all kinds of wits) if you can fake sincerity, you've got it made. Even one of the founding fathers was onto this.
"Ben Franklin considered humility an important virtue but confessed he could not "boast of much success in acquiring the reality of this virtue; but I had a good deal with regard to the appearance of it." He learned to avoid acting as if his mind were made up by avoiding words like "certainly", "undoubtedly" and "positively", and instead used words that suggested he was interested in hearing what the other person had to say, like "it appears to me," or "if I am not mistaken", or "I imagine."" (p269)
Which leads onto the next point...
CAMPAIGN GEAR-SHIFTS
It is stupidly easy to expose any but the most steadfast politicians for flip-floppery. It's much harder for candidates themselves to spot it. Throughout the book, Popkin elaborates on what he distills into 3 essential types of campaign: Challengers, Incumbents, and Successors. What happens all too often is that candidates fail to adjust to different types if they have been successful at one.
"Early in the second debate-preparation session, the subject turned to Reagan's simplistic energy policy. "Listening to Gov. Reagan," Carter said, "I was reminded of myself four years ago. I've been in the White House now for almost four years as president, and I've learned to appreciate more and more a statement that H. L. Mencken made, that `for every difficult question there's a simple answer: easy, glib and wrong.'"
No one in the room saw the deep irony of what he was saying. When Carter compared Reagan's simple and naive claims to his own statements in 1976, he was criticizing Reagan for using rhetoric that Carter had used successfully when he was a challenger." (p137)
Or take this hilarious assessment of Gore 2000, running as a successor, but often campaigning as a challenger:
"Gore emphasized that he was fighting for "the people against the powerful", but never explained why a governor like Bush, someone outside the corrosive environment of Washington, was on the other side. The columnist Michael Kinsley paraphrased Gore's message as "You've never had it so good, and I'm mad as hell about it. Keep the team that brought you this situation, and I'll fight to take back power from the evil forces that have imposed it on you." Trying to brag about the economy while attacking economic royalism was not impossible, Kinsley added, "But why juggle three tennis balls and keep a saucer spinning on a stick at the same time if you don't have to?"" (p236)
In other words, if you don't know what you are seeking to do, it's inevitable that you won't succeed at doing it.
CONVICTION PREPARATIONS
But if campaigning is all about presenting one's best side and downplaying Achilles' heels, it's clear why so many in public life appear to lack substance or integrity. For all too often they DO lack substance or integrity. People-pleasing must be the primary means if power is the only end. So I was glad to see that there are those on the inside who actually do seek to test that. For without bottom lines, there can never be substance.
"After working with five Republican presidents, Stu Spencer concluded it was inconceivable that anyone could be president who didn't know what he stood for well enough to know when he was about to compromise himself. He worked with potential candidates to see whether they knew where they stood:
You test them. You take an issue and you ask them, "Where do you stand on this issue?" Once they tell you, you start playing devil's advocate. You start working them over, coming at them. ... If you can move them... you know that they don't have a very hard-core value system. .... [You know they have values if] at the end of they day they still smile and say, `All well and good, but this is where I stand."" (p238)
Finally, it's not just convictions that get tested. It's the commitment to the process itself
"Mike Piazza was one of the greatest catchers in baseball history. A few years after he retired, a reporter asked the twelve-time all-star if he missed playing major league baseball. "You never lose the desire to play," Piazza told her, "but you lose the desire to prepare to play."
George H.W. Bush still wanted to be president in 1992... [he] had lost the hunger and drive to prepare. He believed he was entitled to remain president on the basis of his international efforts." (p188)
Piazza's line is a good one - and is a salutary warning for all. Just replace the verb `play' with whatever is most relevant (e.g. perform on stage, cook a meal, preach a sermon, etc etc), and there's the rub. Of course, things have gone seriously awry if we're our preparations are honed for ruthless competition in some of these spheres. But how many of us just coast on past apparent successes, assuming things that were will always be? Don't lose the desire to prepare to play.
All in all, a fascinating read. Definitely worth the time.
There is an old saying in the UK, "Oppositions don't win elections, governments lose them" and in essence this is the basis of the book, how people lose elections. The author examines the failed campaigns of Carter, George HW Bush, Gore, and Hillary Clinton and explains in great detail how and why they lost. In essence, Poplin puts forward the thesis that they were bad campaigners and so lost elections. I feel the analysis is broad and sweeping and especially in Gore's case questionable. Gore lost by losing Florida by a few hundred votes, in a State controlled by Jeb Bush and with a Rep Secretary of State who decided which votes counted and which did not. To apply Popkin's analysis in the way he has to such a situation is I think somewhat misguided.
For me this is an interesting "history" type book, but the analysis used needs a lot of refining if it is to succeed in its premise of explaining how to pick the winner in an American election and what it takes to hold onto the White House. Its not a bad book but having read it, I could not recommend it, if you are looking for what the title promises.
In a year of presidential election in the US this book is obviously well timed. Popkin takes a number of past campaigns - Hilary Clinton, Al Gore, Truman and Bush senior - to illustrate examples of how different scenarios work. The thing I liked most about this book is that Popkin takes us step by step. A chapter on the theories behind 'Challengers' is then followed by an illustrative chapter on the campaign of Hilary Clinton for the Democratic nomination in 2008. This pattern is followed by 2 chapters on Incumbents, theory and then George Bush snr in 1992 as the illustration, and then Successors, theory again followed by Al Gore in 2000. There are extra chapters on the theories and experiences of building successful political campaign teams and some really insightful stuff on if the US political system actually works. I didn't find any of the chapters a let down and if anything I relished moving through the novel as Popkin weaves a really good thread through the whole book.
The interesting thing, as anyone with a memory of politics in the US will see, is that Popkin chooses to concentrate his examples on those who were unsuccesful in their campaigns. This makes it all the more useful as it shows that even those people who were seen as sure-fire winners can be undone by poor preparation, a weak support team or just plain stupidity. By showing where these failures occured it allows Popkin to write in a way that really drives his ideas and theories home. He obviously also talks about what the winners did right but I think, and this book reinforces it, politics and success in it is often more about not dropping the ball and letting your opponents make mistakes. And hence why Popkin talks about the shortcomings of a political system that seems to encourage this.
Throughout the book there are fascinating anecdotes and stories written from experience. They are told with humour and a pace that keeps everything moving along. The reader is drawn in and made to feel like they are party to insider secrets and now in-the-know. It really is an engaging book that could so easily have been a dry and dull exercise had the writer not been able to deliver it in the way he has.
I think this book deserves to be widely read. It is enjoyable, insightful and really quite eye opening. If you are looking for some real insights into political campaigning then this book will definitely hit the right spot.
This is a very well written, researched and referenced book and it does carry weighty praise from both sides of the aisle. It takes a critical eye at all campaigns and doesn't simply focus on the flaws of the failed bids, but also how their competitors made mistakes too. Throughout Samuel sets out his central views on what key focuses a campaigner needs to truly win both their party nomination and then the office of President.
For me, this is an interesting book to studiers of political science though would not be a read for those who prefer fiction bestsellers. It is quite open and accessible and added to my other reading of some of the campaigns. The flow of the book is good and keeps a readability well balanced with the need to put across serious points. On the critical side, I felt that sometimes part of the story was missing and wondered whether there had been some selective fitting of the evidence to the theory. I also did particularly find myself feeling that there was some evidence that confused my understanding of what a candidate should do and thus blurred my view of the effectiveness of Samuels advice.
And maybe that was my lesson from this book, no matter what advice candidates are given, the ultimate success comes from within each person. But as this was more my reflection rather than anything posited I felt it appropriate to give this book a strong 4 stars.

