Landslide: LBJ and Ronald Reagan at the Dawn of a New America

by Jonathan Darman

The liberal and the conservative. The deal-making arm twister and the cool communicator. The Texas rancher and the Hollywood star. Opposites in politics and style, Johnson and Reagan shared a defining to set forth a grand story of America, a story in which he could be the hero. In the tumultuous days after the Kennedy assassination, Johnson and Reagan each, in turn, seized the chance to offer the country a new vision for the future. Bringing to life their vivid personalities and the anxious mood of America in a radically transformative time, Darman shows how, in promising the impossible, Johnson and Reagan jointly dismantled the long American tradition of consensus politics and ushered in a new era of fracture. History comes to life in Darman's vivid, fly-on-the wall storytelling.
From Johnson's election in 1964, the greatest popular-vote landslide in American history, to the pivotal 1966 midterms, when Reagan burst forth onto the national stage, "Landslide" brings alive a country transformed--by riots, protests, the rise of television, the shattering of consensus--and the two towering personalities whose choices in those moments would reverberate through the country for decades to come.

Genres: History, Politics, Nonfiction, Biography, Presidents, American History, American

561 pages, Kindle Edition

First published January 1, 2014

About the author

Jonathan Darman is a journalist and historian who writes about American politics and the presidency. He is the author of the forthcoming BECOMING FDR: THE PERSONAL CRISIS THAT MADE A PRESIDENT. It is the story of how sudden illness and recovery remade Franklin Roosevelt's character, creating the man who could lead his country through the Depression and World War II.

His book LANDSLIDE: Lyndon Johnson and Ronald Reagan at the Dawn of a New America chronicled a thousand transformative days in the 1960s through the eyes of two iconic American presidents.

As a former national political correspondent for Newsweek, Jonathan covered the presidential campaigns of Hillary Clinton, John Kerry and Mitt Romney and wrote extensively about other major figures in national politics and media. He covered the 2004 presidential campaign for the magazine’s special election project, which garnered the National Magazine Award for Single Topic Issue. Jonathan has also appeared frequently as a commentator on politics and presidential history on broadcast television, cable news and public radio.

Jonathan is a graduate of Harvard College where he studied American history and literature. He lives in Brooklyn and the Hudson Valley.

Learn more at jonathandarman.com

Reviews

[Jill H. · Rating 4 out of 5]

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!!

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

[Conor Ahern · Rating 3 out of 5]

So, I guess the premise of this book was that both LBJ and Reagan saw themselves as fatidic heroes in trying times, but rather than save the nation as each set out to do, they overpromised and oversimplified, kindling the passions of modern partisans unproductively. Their opposite messianic narratives are ones we know well: Reagan's, that government is the bane of freedom and enemy of prosperity; and Johnson's, that government checks the baser instincts of man and is the only force potent and restrained enough to inaugurate peace and prosperity. It's an intriguing premise, but one that mostly just bookends the bulk of the book, which seems to be a narrative of the psyches leading these men to the presidency and the internal tribulations that rankled their ambitions.

In other words, it was informative, but it perhaps overpromised.

I liked this book, and it sure as hell made me want to read an unbiased book about Reagan, much as this will probably earn me the same stinkeye on the subway that I reserve for people wearing "Make America Great Again" hats (or really any red hats these days). I'm both more impressed with LBJ (my god he accomplished a lot!) and more jaded for learning of his machinations (the idea that Democrats had to embroil the nation in Asian land wars with Communists just to parry claims that they were Red sympathizers strikes me, albeit in hindsight, as so ridiculous and so sad, given the toll it took on our country and on the browner peoples of the globe; and it makes me admire Obama that much more for undertaking healthcare without a rattling saber. And the way LBJ treated that loyal gay aide was really shameful), and disgusted and intrigued by Reagan (he used to be a New Deal Democrat? And why are we talking about Mike Pence calling his wife "mother" when Reagan called Nancy "Mommy"? *shudder*).

Like so many pre-2016-Election books, this one ends on a hopeful note that seems almost comical in hindsight. This is literally the last paragraph of the book:

The problem for today’s political system—and it is an existential one—is that people no longer believe those myths. To fix its broken politics, today’s America needs new stories. Or, perhaps it just needs a new version of an old one: the shared version that Johnson and Reagan discarded in the course of their 1000 days. The old consensus vision of Roosevelt and Kennedy contained lasting wisdom that today’s leaders would do well to adopt. In that world view, politicians had to be deeply realistic and humble when making promises for the future. For they knew that the future never turned out exactly the way it’s going to. But they also had to have the courage to tell people that though government would never be able to solve all of its people’s problems, it had a sacred obligation to try. That old vision could serve America well in an often frightening new century. The answer to our problems may come from a leader who brings such a simple message. It is a message that neither Reagan nor Johnson had much use for, but that the story of both of their lives confirms: what lies ahead of us is not the certain promise of utopia, but the infinite possibilities of life itself.

*Sigh* One can hope we'll sober up before it's too late.

All in all, an informative and interesting book, even if it was more underappreciated historical summary than anything else.

[Kressel Housman · Rating 5 out of 5]

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.

[Sera · Rating 3 out of 5]

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.

[Michael Griswold · Rating 4 out of 5]

I picked up Landslide by Jonathan Darman because Lyndon Johnson and Ronald Reagan are not two presidents who are often linked together. I want to be very clear in this review about what the book is and is not.

Landslide is primarily set in the 1960’s and begins with the Kennedy assassination and Lyndon Johnson assuming the presidency. Darman does a great job within these first two chapters of positioning LBJ and Reagan as powerful men with ambition for days who were plagued by shadows. LBJ appeared consumed by at once busting out of the mythicized shadow of JFK, while not appearing to publicly degrade him. Reagan meanwhile had to bust out of his public persona as a Hollywood actor, and later break away from the radical wing of the Republican Party personified by Barry Goldwater.

We get this very contradictory portrait of LBJ as this man who had experienced great successes such as the Great Society and Civil Rights, but was prone to bouts of gloomy pessimistic sadness even during successful periods.. On a personal level, he viewed himself as a great president, yet could never break out of the shadow of his predecessor, no matter how much legislation he passed. By 1966, his gloom piled up as Vietnam threatened to consume his entire presidency and his large Democratic majority in Congress had been washed away, derailing his hopes for the ultimate vision of the Great Society.

Ronald Reagan appears almost phantom like in the shadows of LBJ’s presidency, slowly picking up steam during speeches throughout the country against the excesses and wastes of The Great Society. This is the vision of Reagan until the final seventy or so pages when we see the LBJ version of society crack and fray and Reagan rise to become the governor of California. This book is primarily set in the 1960’s and talks about the Johnson Presidency and Reagan’s rise from actor to political heavyweight.

I would now like to talk about what this book is not. Although Darman talks about Johnson and Reagan representing two visions of what America should be, he only briefly touches on the Reagan presidency in the last 20-30 pages of the book. Darman would have been better served to go into the same detail for both presidencies to better the argument. However, it would’ve probably been an 700-800 page text, if he had done that. He also talks about both parties struggling to move beyond the powerful visions these men cast. I would’ve liked to have heard more of that discussion as it seems particularly relevant to today’s political climate.

A masterful look at how one presidency gave rise to another.

[Martin Zook · Rating 3 out of 5]

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…

by Jonathan Darman

[Jason · Rating 2 out of 5]

I have mixed feelings regarding this one, partly because I was so anxious for it to be released and secondly because I felt sort of let down by parts of the book itself.

For starters let me just state that the author's idea for the topic for this book was amazing. The fact that he utilized the rise of Ronald Reagan in his nascent youth was a bit off-putting for me. As of late I have developed an entirely new respect for the presidency of Lyndon B. Johnson and so to me major portions of this book were simply fascinating. A lot of the LBJ portion of the book deals with his development of his so called "Great Society" of domestic social programs. An even bigger part of the LBJ story deals with his response to what was originally just a crisis halfway around the world but would soon morph into the biggest and most brutal war this country has ever taken part in: the Vietnam conflict.

The Reagan portions I felt were quite bland in general, but they held my interest enough that I was able to finish the sections. After all, this book just deals with Ronald Reagan starting his career in the political arena after having been in Hollywood for years. We have years to go to get to the plateau of the "Great Communicator" still. At the time of the events in this book, those days are decades away.

In conclusion, I think the author could have just focused entirely on LBJ instead of bringing Reagan into the mix. All in all, I think this book is quite uneven with the LBJ sections far outweighing the Reagan ones. I still would encourage you to read this story. As much as I believe it to be a story that every American citizen needs to know, I think you might find better versions of it elsewhere. I'm not saying I hated this book, I just think that it skims the surface not probing deep enough to get to the real heart of the entire story. If anything, this book would be a good jumping off point for ones further study into the years of the Johnson administration and the original rise to prominence of one of the most beloved leaders of American History.

ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED IN 2014.

[William Walker · Rating 4 out of 5]

The basic theme of this book is that during the mid-sixties, the consensus politics of Roosevelt-Kennedy was replaced by a partisan model focused mainly on myths … Johnson’s liberal/progressive myth of the Great Society that poverty was to be fought as a war to be won by the federal government and its replacement - Reagan’s conservative myth that all problems of society were caused by the federal government. In 1964, Johnson had an approval rating in the 80% range, saw passage of the Civil Rights Act, Medicare, OEO, and on and on, won the 1964 election by a massive landslide, and read the obits of the conservative movement at a political force. In late 1966, Reagan was elected Governor of California by a landslide, the Democrats got clobbered in the election and Johnson’s approval rating was in the toilet. Darman offers his analysis of what happened in a manner that will undoubtedly alienate liberals for his portrayal of Johnson and likewise alienate conservatives for his portrayal of Reagan (although, on balance Reagan does come off a bit the better of the two). I would guess that this book will be especially enjoyed by those like me who lived through the era and first experienced a political awareness.

[Michael · Rating 5 out of 5]

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.

[Bentley · Rating 4 out of 5]

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

[Rick · Rating 4 out of 5]

I received a copy of “Landslide: LBJ and Ronald Reagan at the Dawn of a New America” by Jonathan Darman (Random House, 2014) at a Random House Library Program at my local library. Random House was trotting out all of its coming attractions and handing out ARCs, and I snagged this one. This was a very nice read…especially if you are 60-ish and/or a fan of politics. Let me explain.

The narrative focuses on the two named characters during the period late-1963 (assassination of JFK) through early-1969 (when LBJ walked off the Washington DC stage). When I picked up the book I thought it a confusing time period – certainly a big time for LBJ but not so much for Reagan (RR)…and I thought the pairing of Johnson and Reagan a bit strange, but the more I read the more I understood the connections.

For LBJ it was a period of struggling with his self-worth…how he achieved the presidency (going from Master of the Senate to second banana to unelected president), how he never could shake off the ghost of the Kennedy’s, how he went from the landslide re-election of 1964 to losing the House two years later, how his Great Society became unfulfilled, how civil rights impacted his term, and how Vietnam became his legacy. For RR it was a time of finding himself…how he was pretty much jobless in California, how he began to have an interest in politics, how he reinvented himself for his greatest role, how he steered a path between conservative and moderate, and how this period set the stage for his presidency a dozen years later.

In all fairness the book is probably 60% LBJ and 40% RR, but it still was a delight to read. If you are 60-ish you lived through that time, and the tale is a wonderful dissecting of that narrow period and the political chess moves in American politics of the two main actors. If you enjoy politics you’ll enjoy this book. Darman’s scrutiny of the period is much in the genre of “Game Change” by Heilemann/Halperin – the in-depth look at politics and the political intrigue of the 2008 presidential race. Landslide is political analysis at its best.

When LBJ was elected in his own right in a landslide in 1964 the powers-that-be thought it the beginning of a long liberal period in politics. Yet two years later RR was elected governor of California on the basis of his being the change factor (much like Obama years later). LBJ and RR form the magnetic poles of the story. The narrative also brings in the Kennedy/Camelot myth, Mayor Richard J. Daley, Barry Goldwater, Martin Luther King, Lady Bird Johnson, Jackie and Bobby Kennedy, and many other characters. There is an Epilogue and Afterward to close the circle on all the primary characters. It is a good period piece. Highly recommended.

[Hunter Jones · Rating 5 out of 5]

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.

[Brian · Rating 4 out of 5]

Landslide covers the time form the assassination of President Kennedy to the end of the LBJ presidency with a brief look at the rise of Reagan. The book focuses on how the assassination of Kennedy and the success in passing the LBJ legislative program in the form of the Great Society transformed the country leading to one of the great landslide victories in modern political history and setting the stage for the rise of Ronald Reagan. It should be noted that the landslides here are the 1964 win for LBJ and the 1966 win for Reagan in CA not the 1980 presidential win. The cult of Reagan born out of the viewpoints of Goldwater and the hubris of LBJ that led to his downfall over Vietnam are well covered. These two towering figures are dissected very well by Darman and this book provides a great political analysis of one of the most important times in modern American history. Darman also does a good job of shying away from the cult of Kennedy’s “Camelot” and putting into place the JFK civil rights record and the likely failure of any legislation passing before 1964 with the tactics Kennedy was using.
For those who are political junkies they will find this book a great read with new information and thoughtful analysis. It is skewed a little bit more towards LBJ with the author having a distaste for Goldwater/Reagan. Only a few points during the book did I feel like the author was on a soapbox and wishing he would get back on target. In most cases though the coverage is very well done and the pros and cons of each man are presented. Well worth the time for those interested in US History, politics or the rise of media in the United States.

[Adam · Rating 5 out of 5]

Lyndon Johnson's dream of a "Great Society" would find itself diametrically opposed with Ronald Reagan's "Morning in America" supply-side economics in 1981. How does a no-nonsense career Congressman succeed legislating domestic issues with the specter of an assassinated President and the heavy burdens of the Vietnam war burdening him while in office? How does a b-list actor break into the establishment of his political party and in time become the archetype of the modern era of Conservatism?

This book is not necessarily a profile of the Reagan years in contrast to the Johnson years but rather the rise of two outsiders who find themselves in the highest office. "Landslide" explores the roots of their belief systems, how they both overcame individual adversities, and the cross section of history both had in the 1960s (namely in the 1964 Presidential election). This book profiles in depth the struggles of the Johnson Presidency but also the political rise of Governor Reagan who was a planting his roots as a Presidential hopeful. Important figures such as John F. Kennedy, Robert Kennedy, Barry Goldwater, Richard Nixon, Joseph McCarthy, and Martin Luther King Jr. all play major roles in the narratives Johnson and Reagan had on their paths to power.

The spirit of both President Johnson and Reagan loom large over contemporary affairs in 2017 whether we are cognizant of it or not. It is through their visions of America and examination through the lens of history that have directly shaped our lives and allow us to decide which political ideology may hold the best path forward.

[Katy · Rating 4 out of 5]

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.

[Mike · Rating 3 out of 5]

Enjoyable, but ultimately left me unfulfilled. Darman is a terrific writer who is certainly engaging in the way he presents the stories of the tumultuous era of LBJ and Reagan. In a larger sense, though, I felt that he was too beholden to a thesis that didn't play out successfully. In putting LBJ and Reagan as opposite ends of a spectrum, he makes a claim for causality that the briskness of his pacing doesn't make clear. Rick Perlstein is in the process of making the same argument far more successfully and it's taken him four books and thousands of pages to pull it off. Don't get me wrong-I enjoyed my time reading Darman's account, but I find the era so fascinating that I kept wanting him to dig deeper rather than racing through these amazing months and years.

[Tim Brown · Rating 4 out of 5]

Appearances can be deceiving. In 1964, Lyndon Johnson was at the top of the world, and conservatives in the mold of Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan appeared finished. By 1966, Johnson was on hard times, and Ronald Reagan launched his political career with a landslide win in the California gubernatorial election. The rest is, as they say, history.

[Nate Reynolds · Rating 4 out of 5]

I was given this book as a gift a few years ago and I’m glad I finally decided to pick it up. In addition to serving as a great overview of the politics of the 1960’s, Landslide takes a refreshing approach to its genre by avoiding a few cliched pitfalls that usually plague presidential biographies. First, it avoids being overly repetitive by telling a story with two different main characters - Lyndon Johnson and Ronald Reagan - flowing like a television show with ongoing subplots on an inevitable collision course. Secondly, and somewhat inversely, it avoided being too grand in its scope by constraining its timeframe to the one thousand days between Kennedy’s assassination in 1963 and the midterm elections of 1966. The necessary biographical details before and after that window were briefly and concisely provided, hardly bogging the story down. Finally, and most impressively, it avoided framing its biographical subjects as heroes, or even as great men. Darman depicts Johnson and Reagan as ambitious and well-intentioned, but not much more. Reagan comes across as an empty opportunist and charlatan, while Johnson appears a neurotic and egotistical false prophet. Altogether, the story of these two men becomes a fascinating origin story of the partisan politics which still haunt America. Many people today wonder how the Republican Party - the eventual party of Donald Trump - was once the party of Abraham Lincoln. It’s an important question, and this book provides an indirect yet powerful answer. Reagan and Johnson transformed the two major American political parties into the institutions they are today, with new coalitions of voters, policy priorities, and abrasive rhetoric (much of which has not changed). At the very least, they served as leaders during a transformative era of American history, an era which this book accounts in riveting detail.

[Alan Zundel · Rating 3 out of 5]

Big government or small government?

Or are you sick of having politics defined by that tired debate?

In his recent and very engaging book, Jonathan Darman argues that the U.S. public has grown increasingly disenchanted with our two dominant national “myths.” One is the liberal myth that government can solve our most serious social problems, the other is the conservative myth that government is the source of our problems.

If the people are losing faith in both of these myths, is there an alternative way to frame the story of where we’ve been, where we are, and where we should be heading as a nation?

The liberal myth

Darman paints an illuminating portrait of U.S. national politics over the course of about two years in the mid-1960s, a pivotal time framed by Lyndon Johnson’s landslide election as President in 1964 and Ronald Reagan’s landslide election as governor of California in 1966.

The story starts with Johnson’s succession to the Presidency after Kennedy’s assassination in November of 1963. The growing myth of Kennedy ’s Camelot of wise and noble intentions cut tragically short was interfering with Johnson’s attempts to take leadership of the nation. Johnson cleverly appropriated the myth by taking on the role of the man who would fulfill and exceed Kennedy’s policy agenda as a tribute to the fallen leader.

Johnson announced that government would declare a “War on Poverty” and usher in “The Great Society,” and produced a down payment in the form of the historic Civil Rights Act of 1964. Enthusiasm for an activist national government ran high and carried Johnson into his crushing defeat of Republican Barry Goldwater in the Presidential election of November 1964.

The conservative myth

Meanwhile Ronald Reagan, his Hollywood career fading, was becoming a popular speaker on behalf of the conservative cause. He shaped the standard conservative skepticism of government into an optimistic story of national salvation by freeing individual creativity from government shackles. After Goldwater’s defeat wealthy California Republicans turned to Reagan as a well-known and well-liked national figure to put a fresh and appealing face on their party.

Although the Johnson administration continued its streak of legislative landmarks—the Voting Rights Act, Social Security, Medicare, federal aid to education—social unrest in the form of inner city riots and campus anti-war protests was making the voters nervous. The promise of a Great Society seemed to be dissolving into a society breaking apart at the seams.

Reagan traveled California and the nation arguing that the source of the problems was the government itself, blinded by the misguided belief that we have the knowledge or ability to re-engineer society. His 1966 overwhelming victory over California governor Pat Brown, a politician closely associated with Johnson, took the wind out of the sails of the liberal myth.

Disillusionment

The epilogue of Darman’s book is the most interesting chapter, tracing out the continued competition between the two myths over the next several decades and bringing us to our present political stalemate, in which fewer and fewer people believe in either myth.

I am old enough to have traveled this political journey as it played out. I came of age in the 1970s, aligned with the progressive wing of liberalism which assumed that casting out the militarism that got us into Vietnam would be sufficient to revitalize the liberal agenda. This hope was badly battered by Reagan’s election and re-election to the Presidency in the 1980s.

Then the voters had the chance to become disillusioned with the conservative myth as supply-side economics produced record budget deficits and de-regulation led to a savings-and-loan crisis. Democrat Bill Clinton capitalized on this disillusionment by promising a “third way,” but only succeeded in further disillusioning progressives and antagonizing die-hard conservatives with his attempts to straddle the middle.

Conservatives had a second chance with George W. Bush, but the disastrous invasion of Iraq and the 2008 collapse of the financial system helped further the exodus of voters away from the Democratic and Republican parties to “independent” or “third party” voter affiliation. (I have been among them.)

The result has been that the two parties are left to the shrinking groups still upholding the two myths, with political stalemate at the national level and much of the public losing interest in politics altogether.

A new national story?

Darman suggests that perhaps what we need now is a new story that is actually an old one, one in which politicians have to be “deeply realistic and humble” about making promises for the future, but are also obliged to tell the people that the government has a “sacred obligation to try” to address our current problems.

In my opinion, that’s not a very coherent or inspiring message and is unlikely to re-engage voters’ attention. What we need is a new story of what the government’s role in society should be, one that engages our collective imagination and gathers political will to guide government decisions. I doubt if either the Democratic or Republican party is capable of producing such a new story, tied as they each are to the fading myths that continue to define them.

Instead we need a way to break open the two-party system so that other voices and other stories might develop from the “third” parties or new parties, with the hope that one such story will win a wider following. What that story might be is impossible to tell until there is a realistic opening for a hearing.

I fear that continued disillusionment and stalemate can only lead to disaster, as the Bible said long ago:

“Where there is no vision, the people perish.” (Proverbs, 29:18)

[Jacob Harrison · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book claims that it will describe Johnson and Reagan’s visions for government in the 60s and detail their respective rise to power but really doesn’t. In fact for a book with Reagan in the title he is barely even in it, except for the author to make cheap shots at him hinting that he was a racist for talking about “states rights” in his 1980 campaign for president. Out of eleven chapters Reagan is the focus of three, and Johnson the others. There are many chapters that have seemingly nothing to do with them or their visions for government.

The author is very clearly left wing which I usually wouldn’t have a problem with as I’ve read many books by left wingers, my problem with this one is that he makes history fit his opinion as opposed to letting history be history. He also doesn’t cite very much which leads me to believe (amongst others who have reviewed this book as well) that this book is largely just his opinion. He seemingly scorns and mocks people who share Reagan’s view that government should be kept minimized. Of course this shouldn’t be a surprise considering he writes for Newsweek magazine and covered the John Kerry and Hillary Clinton presidential campaigns of 2004 and 2008, so we all know he’s a liberal media hack.
In the end this book is just not very well written. I’ve read many books by Democrats and liberals that I’ve thought we’re good, like Lawrence O’Donnells book “Playing with Fire”. O’Donnell is one of the most partisan liberals in media but he still can write a good book, and for the most part would let the history be history. This author Jonathan Darman has a deep seeded resentment for the GOP and wants history to share his opinion which is why most of this book is speculation.

I’m not very hard to entertain when you write a book about American politics/history in the 1960s but this book was a chore to read through. I only finished it so I could feel good writing a bad review afterward, I may as well have just sat down and read the Democrat Party platform one hundred times because that’s what reading this book felt like.

[Justin Poe · Rating 3 out of 5]

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.

[Stacey Jones · Rating 5 out of 5]

I was enthralled by this book from the very first page and feel the prologue is a wonderful stand-alone essay on the pivotal change that author Jonathan Darman observes occurring in American politics during the Johnson presidency: The transition from practical politics on both side of the aisle regarding what can actually get done, and extreme rhetoric that widened the gap between the political parties in America and brought us our current political climate of grid-lock and brinksmanship.

I love presidential biographies and histories, so my husband and I went to hear Darman at the Arkansas Literary Festival in April, where we bought a copy. I was riveted in that discussion, and the book didn't deliver less.

Darman moves between Johnson's sudden ascent to the presidency after the Kennedy assassination and Reagan's emergence as a national political figure during the same time. Not only are they both part of this rhetorical shift in politics, but they are also natural foils for each other. The book reads like a novel in which both men are heroes and anti-heroes, portrayed with razor-sharp clarity in readable, yet sophisticated prose.

Johnson, Darman posits, traded on the Kennedy legacy to ensure his own credibility and viability as rightful president, but the Kennedy legacy was much more nuanced and less accomplished than Johnson could use. Reagan, emerging on the fringes of the right wing of the Republican party, used extreme rhetoric to advance his own political career, and then backed off it as he came to the middle. Johnson knew Vietnam would be his undoing; Reagan obsessed over the Communist threat and the Democrats' soft handling of it.

On page 318, Darman writes about what Johnson's ambitious language and promises to the American people are doing to his administration over time: "But if enough time goes by and the skies still do not open, the power of uncertainty starts to work against the myth maker. ... [The people] are more anxious than ever, and now they are angry, too, angry at the man who offered them false prophecies and grand promises. Both fear and hope depend on an uncertain future. The man who seeks to profit from uncertainty with seductive, hopeful promises is ultimately vulnerable to the ungovernable force of human terror."

It's that kind of interpretation and insight, along with the thorough and readable reportage, that make this book something very special. I did not want to put it down and read it every minute that I could until I turned to the last page. I'm recommending it to everyone. It was a fascinating examination of Twentieth Century American politics at what I know see as a very pivotal time.

[Alger Smythe-Hopkins · Rating 3 out of 5]

Both excellent and disappointing.

The parallel story approach to history is incredibly difficult to pull off, and Darman comes very close to success here. The flaw is that he keeps the threads apart far too long, and is more interested in demonstrating that the 1964 presidential landslide for Johnson was an ideological flip-side to Reagan's 1966 surprise landslide in the California governor race than connecting the two as two side of the same coin.

There are lessons to be drawn from comparing the political careers of these two men, especially since Reagan's rise was as a populist outside challenger to the career politicians of his time, be they Johnson, Goldwater, Brown, or Nixon. Reagan's rise in American politics is the story of the anti-authoritarian rejection of the technocratic experts that dominated the scene from the turn of the late 19th century until the 1970s. If Nixon was the last of the true technocrats, then it was his failure as a president coming on the heals of the collapse of the Johnson administration that destroyed people's faith on the power of government well applied to do good. Johnson essentially created the conditions for Reagan's success.

That is not the story that captures Darman's attention here though. What we have is a carefully reduced retelling of the best parts of Caro's four-part biography of Johnson occasionally interleaved with bits and pieces of the Reagan legend puffed up with some mild revisionist analysis pointing out that . So this means massive amounts of detail on the daily workings of the Johnson White House (and the obligatory mentions of his crass nudism, his anxiety attacks, his callousness towards his staff) interrupted by Reagan thinking about going into politics while taking a job introducing Death Valley Days instead. When Reagan does move onto the political scene it is by riding a conservative wave begun by Goldwater, which is depicted as an organic conservative backlash.

As a digest version of their lives this book is extremely satisfying, but the connection between the two men is shallow and largely unexamined.

[Dave · Rating 3 out of 5]

14. Landslide LBJ and Ronald Reagan at the Dawn of a New America by Jonathan Darman by Jonathan Darman Jonathan Darman
Finish date: February 23, 2015
I received this book free through the History Book Club and Random House.

This book focuses on the years after JFK's assassination, particularly on the presidency of Lyndon Johnson and the early political career of Ronald Reagan, both of whom had some of their best and worst times in the 1960s. The difference is that one was on the rise, the other on the decline.

Ronald Reagan was at the bottom around 1963, finding it hard to get acting jobs and uncertain of what to do next. By 1966, he was California's governor and a bright light for conservative Republicans. LBJ, however, rose to the presidency through tragedy, but then won a landslide victory in the 1964 election. He accomplished much, pushing through legislation on civil rights, Medicare and other issues important to him and the Democrats. But after such a heady start, Vietnam and urban riots dragged him down to the point where he chose not to stand for reelection. Very different trajectories.

Darman tells these two stories in a balanced and very readable way. I think he might be stretching the point a little to say that these two men in this decade marked "the dawn of a new America." A lot happened between Reagan's governorship and his Presidency. There was Watergate, relative moderates like Gerald Ford, a more liberal administration from Carter, and a whole bunch of economic ups and downs. Some of these, like the price of oil, couldn't have been handled well by any president, liberal or conservative.

It was interesting to see how early Reagan got started in politics. I wasn't aware of all his stumping for candidates as early as 1963-64. And it was equally surprising to see just how quickly things imploded for LBJ. I enjoyed the book very much, but I think the subtitle (probably provided by the publisher) is a bit of oversell.

[Helga Cohen · Rating 5 out of 5]

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 free copy of this book from the publisher through the History Book Club on GoodReads.

[Paul Wilson · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting overview and comparison of the two most consequential presidencies of the last 50 years. Most of the LBJ stuff has been covered in other works (I am NOT obsessed with him, Kelly!) "Mutual Contempt" is the go-to source for RFK/LBJ shenanigans, and Caro is the go-to author for all other LBJ information; the LBJ sections felt more like an abridged Caro biography.

However, the book's overarching theme is the height of American liberalism (Johnson's landslide over Goldwater) and its ultimate decline with the rise of conservatism through Reagan's ascent from failed actor and fringe, right-wing character to California's governorship. The perceived failures of the Great Society, which was ultimately undone by the Vietnam War, and Reagan's highly-regarded presidency (although not by everyone), are responsible for both parties' shifts to the right during the past 50 years. Party realignment is one of the most strangely fascinating topics in history, but most people probably find it boring. I could ramble on this topic forever (I'm strange), so I'll just quit now.

Most interesting insight: Reagan hated "The Killers," which began filming the day before JFK's assassination, which is odd because it's one of his few movies that is highly regarded. The movie is worth a look, because Reagan plays a lowlife gangster who slaps Angie Dickinson around (who was one of JFK's many mistresses). Reagan always wanted to play the good guy, it seems. Also, Lee Marvin showed up on set partied out everyday with a 7-Up bottle full of vodka, but was able to perform his acting duties without fail. Lee Marvin was a cool dude.

Even if you hate politics or don't know who Lee Marvin is (KELLY!), this book is enjoyable as the tale of one man's descent coupled with another man's rise.

[Teri · Rating 4 out of 5]

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.

[Brian Sandor · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a free book through Goodreads History Book Club and Random House.

This book is a double biography of LBJ and Ronald Reagan mainly in the 1000 days after the JFK assassination. The title comes from both politicians having huge "landslide" victories in their elections. The author does a good job fleshing out the main actors and those closest to them and the times around them. Learned a good deal about LBJs depressive personality and Reagan's oratory being effective, in part, due to nearsightedness.
I think the book could have been better in a couple areas. The first was that Darman occasionally tried gimmicks in his delivery that fell flat. One instance was in a chapter on Reagan. He 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 argument in the afterword. I didn't feel that he made the connection of the late 60s to the "Reagan Revolution" in 1980. I felt he glossed over the post-Vietnam, Watergate and the Stagflation Seventies effect on Reagan being elected. Darman also needed to tone down his anti-Reagan bias a bit. Comparing and contrasting these two very different individuals is hard enough without the occasional jab skewing things. This is coming from an admitted non fan of Reagan.
Other than those few areas, I think Jonathan Darman did a good job with the subject matter and it was good read and I learned about an era I wasn't that familiar with.

[Ann D · Rating 4 out of 5]

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.

[Trevor Seigler · Rating 4 out of 5]

In the mid-Sixties, America was at a crossroads. Two competing visions for what she could be as a country divided her citizens, and in time one vision would be utterly discredited by realities like the Vietnam War and the reactionary response to the Civil Rights movement, while the other would ride into American history as a myth forever associated with the man who used it to win the White House in 1980. In detailing the thousand days that unmade Lyndon Johnson and made Ronald Reagan, Jonathan Darman shows us how modern America came to be.

Admittedly, "Landslide: LBJ and Ronald Reagan At the Dawn of a New America" isn't exhaustive in its profiles of both men, but it does a good job of putting them in the context of the time discussed; from the horrific aftermath of JFK's assassination in 1963 up to Reagan's run for the governorship of California and LBJ's dramatic midterm defeats in 1966. Using that narrow window of time, Darman skilfully interweaves how each man, fueled by his own insecurities and desires, crafts his competing vision for what America could be, and how to make that happen.

Thrust into leadership by the death of John F. Kennedy, Johnson (a longtime denizen of the corridors of power in DC) came into his new role with the mission of making Kennedy's dual concerns (civil rights at home, containment of Communism abroad) his own. Reagan, a former B movie actor, was struggling to remain in the spotlight in a post-WWII world and gradually drifting away from his Democratic roots. Both men would change to either meet the moment or be found lacking; all it would take is a push one way or the other. Johnson sought to bring peace, prosperity, and justice to all of America's peoples, but he was often his own worst enemy. Reagan aspired to do more than walk onto a set and read lines fed to him from a script; in time, he'd prove malleable to efforts to temper his conservative rhetoric in order to win higher office.

Johnson and Reagan are the focus, but Darman puts the history of their country during those tumultuous years in a wider context. He argues that LBJ had no other inclination than to fight both a war on poverty and a war in Vietnam at the same time. He shows Reagan as a man who gradually comes to believe his own myth-making abilities (and judging by how large Reagan still looms in our collective memories, he was successful in getting many to believe them as well). Ultimately, neither man's vision is the best way to govern America; Darman argues almost too dangerously something akin to a centrist message for the way to make America great. But his central point about the myths of the Great Society and of Reaganomics is still valid, and worth keeping in mind as we look at yet another election cycle that presents us with two epic, mythic views of American life and what that looks like.

Lyndon Johnson and Ronald Reagan never ran against one another for higher office, but they did compete for the soul of America. Neither man had all the answers for what ails us (though I would argue LBJ was closer than Reagan was to some real, honest solutions). Both men would be defined by their times, and how they are remembered today has something to do with how they conducted themselves during the years profiled here. "Landslide" is a very good, if flawed, look at that period and at the two men who, in many ways, defined American political life from that time to our present day.