Yeah, Michael Lewis is truly great.

So, this is Michael Lewis' exploration of the 1996 election through the lens of the Republican primaries, featuring some of the minor candidates, and also touching on a little about Clinton.

Lewis isn't a traditional political writer, and this work doesn't contain a great deal of political theory. Instead, it delves more into campaigning theory and is strikingly non-partisan. It offers a unique perspective on the election process.

I discovered this book by listening to old episodes of This American Life and having loved Lewis' Moneyball. While this book wasn't quite the page-turner that I found Moneyball to be, considering it's about a 12-year-old seemingly inconsequential election, it's astonishing to see the development of the current political climates from where things stood in 1996. This review is being written on election day 2008 between Obama and McCain, having just finished the book while in line to vote.

I would highly recommend this book to almost anyone. It provides valuable insights into the past and how it has shaped the present political landscape.

Those who are attracted to Dole’s vision of life in Russell, Kansas, truly need to spend a considerable amount of time here.

It turns out that there is a valid reason why ambitious individuals like Dole have been deserting the place in large numbers. While its fictional counterpart is growing in significance, the actual Russell has been slowly deteriorating.

A rather dismal local economic history could be chronicled from within any store on Main Street. For instance, the largest and oldest store, a department store named Bankers, where Dole modeled clothes, opened in 1881, a decade after Russell was established, beside the new tracks laid by the Union Pacific Railroad.

It thrived during the oil boom of the 1920s and the farming boom of the 1940s, reaching its peak in the 1950s when it stocked three full floors of dry goods. However, since then, the store’s business has been gradually declining. Now, it occupies scarcely one floor, with some of that space being used for the sale of Bob Dole paraphernalia.

Where there were once gardening tools, there are now rows of Dole buttons, stickers, T-shirts, and caps. The oldest family-owned business in Kansas will likely soon shut down due to a lack of business and a family member willing to reside in Russell. “I’d manage the place,” remarks one of the heirs, who lives in Kansas City, “but only if you put it on a truck and relocated it to another town.”

Rooting for American Presidential Underdogs

Has overexposure numbed the American public to indifference about Presidential elections? Or are more deliberate manipulations thwarting voter turnout?

No doubt the latest election cycle and continuing efforts to shape future voter participation suggest much has changed since Michael Lewis penned his 1997 “Losers” odyssey through the 1996 Presidential campaign. But just how much and why?

Every four years, American Presidential hopefuls put on a performance seemingly fulfilling Juvenal’s satirical observation almost two thousand years ago: pacify the public with “bread and circuses” so they forget to revolt against what they don’t like. Or in today’s world and terms about politicians, voters and the process, Lewis observed about Presidential campaigns: “The phenomenon is circular: the less sentient the electorate, the more easily it can be cynically manipulated; the more cynical the manipulations, the less sentient the electorate.”

The author’s focus on unsuccessful Presidential aspirants shows that more original, even extreme views and tactics seem to appear during the earlier stages of these campaigns with the run-up primaries than after the major party conventions. The quarterfinals and semifinals are often more interesting than the main event.

The major contenders – Bill Clinton and Bob Dole, even Ross Perot – get less attention in this yearlong diary because of not only the overwhelming media focus but also the packaging of the candidates and their positions by “the rented strangers” surrounding them.

To be sure, there are colorful depictions such as Lewis’ fondness for the adventuresome Morry Taylor or the elusive Pat Buchanan. Both espouse out-of-the-mainstream views and behavior such as Taylor’s unpublished, possibly prescient manuscript about what to do with lawyers and other ways to fix Washington.

Despite his wry comments about the contenders and process, Lewis does appreciate the few who show statesmanship qualities. You might read Chapter 11 and the Epilogue for a thoughtful portrait of the late Senator John McCain standing in stark relief to the pack surrounding him.

Twenty years later, the sound and fury of recent elections seem to have shaken off the public drowsiness to these contests. Have brash unfettered opinions amped by the media tapped into years of accumulating frustration with the election marketing process and woken a sleeping giant? Or has the American electorate become so large it is collapsing back into complacent indifference?

And will Lewis’ observations simply have been updated by more elaborate candidate and media performances to get so much from so many for so few?

It’s your vote…make the effort to make it count every time.

It is really very funny. Reading about it is quite interesting as I wasn't alive during that time. It's like opening a door to a different era and getting a peek into the happenings that took place long ago. The stories and events described seem almost like a fascinating adventure. It makes me wonder what it would have been like to experience those moments firsthand. Even though I wasn't there, the way it is written makes it come alive in my imagination. I can picture the scenes and the people involved. It's truly a captivating read that keeps me engaged from start to finish.

The experience truly made me miss the mid-90s.

That era was filled with a unique charm and a sense of simplicity. The music of the mid-90s was diverse and full of energy, with various genres emerging and captivating the hearts of many. The fashion was also distinct, with trends that defined the decade.

Technology was advancing, but it still had a certain warmth and authenticity. People used to communicate more face-to-face and build deeper connections. The movies and TV shows of that time were entertaining and often left a lasting impression.

Looking back, the mid-90s was a period that I hold dear in my heart. It was a time of growth, exploration, and unforgettable memories. And this particular experience has reignited those feelings, making me long for the days gone by.

Michael Lewis is indeed an outstanding writer, and there is a great deal of remarkable writing within this book.

However, in this particular work, Michael dedicated an excessive amount of the book to covering an obscure businessman who had no realistic chance of securing the Republican nomination in 1996.

It seems that if Michael Lewis had opted to focus on a different Presidential Election, he likely would have crafted a more captivating and engaging book.

Perhaps a different era or a more significant political race would have provided him with more compelling material and allowed him to showcase his writing skills in a more vivid and exciting way.

Nevertheless, despite this criticism, the book still contains many elements of Lewis's excellent writing, and it may still hold some value for readers interested in the subject matter.

I have an intense love for everything that Michael Lewis writes. I am slowly but surely making my way through every single piece of work he has produced. This particular piece is a review that is not only thoroughly entertaining but also manages to take the incredibly dull 1996 Clinton-Dole presidential election and make it engaging. It really struck a chord with me as it reminded me so vividly of the 2012 Obama-Romney election.

Lewis has a writing style that is effortlessly easy to read, which makes it a joy to delve into his works. He also possesses a sharp and keen insight into the interesting aspects of life. He has this remarkable ability to bring out the funny and entertaining elements that often go unnoticed in our daily lives. What's more, he is always honest and uncompromising in his views, yet he never comes across as rude or offensive. His writing is a perfect blend of entertainment and thought-provoking analysis.

I highly recommend this review and all of Michael Lewis's works to anyone who is looking for an engaging and enjoyable read. You are sure to be captivated by his unique perspective and writing style.

As an unashamed Michael Lewis enthusiast and someone who has devoured most of his published works, I was taken aback to discover that I had never heard of his book on the 1996 elections. I came across it only after Ezra Klein mentioned it as one of his favorite books in a podcast interview with Lewis (highly recommended).

The book is structured as a chronological diary, with Lewis following aspiring Republican candidates and then the eventual nominees across the country to caucuses, conventions, and other campaign events. At first glance, this might seem like a lazy attempt to turn a series of musings into a published work. However, once I started reading, the format made sense, considering the relatively mundane day-to-day nature of a presidential campaign. In such a campaign, scandals can dominate the news cycle, "momentum" is often an illusion, and both the micro and macro aspects of the election process are easily forgotten.

In the book's introduction, Lewis recounts the remarkably low stakes of the 1996 US Presidential Election. The United States was in a state of "autopilot": steady (but not spectacular) economic growth, no major conflicts or international crises, and a relatively uneventful first term from President Clinton, despite the efforts of his adversaries to expose misdeeds and scandals. In short, it was a comfortably numb state of affairs.

Lewis begins in the early stages of the Republican primary, introducing us to obscure characters whose names have been lost to history (Alan Keyes, Bob Dornan, Lamar Alexander, Phil Gramm), as well as individuals who elicit a "yeah, I think I know who that is" in 2019: Pat Buchanan, Steve Forbes, and the eventual nominee, Bob Dole. Lewis struggles to portray Dole kindly (or at all) throughout the book.

Among this pool of uninspiring professional politicians, one candidate stands out in the eyes of the story-starved Lewis. On a whim (legend has it that one of his factory-floor employees urged him to run), Maurice "Morry" Taylor, the millionaire CEO of the now-absorbed tire manufacturer Titan Tire, was confronted with the question that prods the most ego-driven among us: "why not me?" Before long, he put his own name in the running to represent the 1996 Republican Party as the heir to his billionaire businessman predecessor, Ross Perot.

Unlike most businesspeople-turned-politicians (and fiscal conservatives), Taylor's preoccupation with "managing the government like a business" went beyond simply balancing the Federal Budget. Employing a tactic revived by Trump in 2016 (though actually carrying it out, in Taylor's case), Taylor funded his own campaign. In the absence of "rented strangers" (Lewis' term for the campaign staff that surrounds a candidate and president), he spent more than $6 million of his own funds on a series of innovative (and questionably illegal) stunts to rally the vote: running $5,000 raffles in early-election districts, flooding potential supporters with free swag, and holding a rally of over 6,000 motorcyclists at a party organized for the Republican Party.

Taylor's irreverence and ingenuity didn't end with his electioneering. His ideas were far removed from those of his Republican competitors, whom he claimed were just as poisoned as Clinton's Democrats and the broader two-party centrist system. Some of Taylor's ideas were sensible and down-to-earth, such as implementing term limits (one) for all politicians, advocating for more States' rights and a smaller government, simplifying the tax code, and removing money from politics. However, others, which Lewis and Taylor's enthusiastic (but small) electorate tended to favor, were entertainingly implausible. These included putting a 10-year moratorium on law schools (to prevent lawyers from entering the DC fray), closing all embassies around the world ("international business is done over the phone and fax"), and shutting down the Pentagon (and turning it into a hotel for visiting Representatives and Senators, who would no longer be able to maintain a separate home away from their district). Ironically, Taylor's brutal and symbolic approach to cost-cutting at the White House is reminiscent of the extreme cost-cutting currently underway in Mexico under newly-elected President Andrés Manuel López Obrador.

As the campaign drones on and the more entertaining candidates make way for the purposefully staid Dole vs. the incumbent Clinton, the book loses much of its momentum, and Lewis visibly struggles to maintain the narrative all the way to the end of the election. At this point, Lewis introduces many readers to Senator John McCain of Arizona, who was then on the campaign trail for Dole. McCain, along with Taylor, emerges as one of the few figures unscathed by Lewis' cynical and honest take on politics. (An aside: Lewis' recounting of McCain's humility, open candor, and heroics as a POW for over 5 years only serves to further highlight Trump's deplorable treatment of McCain in his final months.)

The 1996 election, and Lewis' coverage of it, touch on certain issues that have proven prescient and have come to the forefront as Trump has risen to power. These include a visit to the Mexican border, where Lewis marvels at the mass of Mexican hopefuls doggedly risking it all to reach the US, as well as meetings with incipient morals-based Evangelicals and their faith leaders in Colorado Springs.

Lewis grows increasingly frustrated with the minimal ideological space between the two candidates in their attempt to win over centrists, and with the broader two-party system in general. His most pronounced contempt is reserved for the "rented strangers" and pollsters, the career servants of the political class, who shape the opinions and image of the mainstream candidates to broaden their appeal to the largest possible population, often muddying their appeal and held views beyond recognition in the process.

Lewis comes away more or less disgusted with the entire political class (excluding McCain and a cameo from Green Party candidate Ralph Nader), and closes the book with a call to action for a reform of campaign finance and the broader influence of money in politics. This is a similar (and hopefully not entirely hopeless) call to action that we've heard from Bernie Sanders and others over the past decade or so.

Given Lewis' soft re-entry into politics writing this past year with The Fifth Risk (reviewed here: https://ethanphirsch.com/2019/02/10/f...), which essentially calls for sanity and basic competence in politics, it is incredibly entertaining to see a younger Lewis provide a much more unhinged and inflammatory take on politics. He vacillates between Republican and Democrat, Dole and Clinton, seemingly on a whim, ultimately casting his vote for Nader and his reputed $5,000 presidential campaign. Given the massive, 24-person Democratic Party Primary, as well as Trump's continued bloviating from the White House, one wishes that a less reformed Lewis might return for one more bite at the apple.

The value of this book does not lie in the content itself, but rather in the perspective it offers.

Lewis adopts the point of view of an uninterested voter, placing greater emphasis on the characters within the race rather than the race itself.

Interestingly, when one looks at the same topics, issues, and themes 27 years later in the current Republican primary, it lends even more significance to the book.

However, I must admit that at times, I found myself tempted to skip pages.

This could perhaps be attributed to the fact that the book's focus on characters might not always hold the reader's attention as strongly as a more in-depth exploration of the race itself.

Nevertheless, it is important to note that the unique perspective provided by Lewis still makes this book a valuable read, as it offers insights that might otherwise be overlooked.

Overall, while the book may have its flaws, its value lies in the different way it makes us view political races and the characters involved.

The original article seems to be a bit too dated. It might have been relevant in the past, but in today's context, it lacks the necessary freshness and relevance.

To make it more engaging and up-to-date, we could consider adding some current examples and references. For instance, we could mention recent technological advancements or social trends that are related to the topic.

Another way to expand the article would be to provide more in-depth analysis. We could explore the implications of the dated information and discuss how it has changed over time.

By doing so, we can create a more comprehensive and interesting piece that will appeal to a wider audience.

Overall, it's important to keep in mind that the article needs to be updated to reflect the current state of affairs and provide valuable insights to the readers.

I LOVED THIS BOOK SO MUCH.

I had completely forgotten just how incredibly good Michael Lewis is at taking a subject that, on the surface, seems nominally boring and infusing it with an abundance of wit and humor. He has this remarkable ability to unpack what's truly going on. I've always been a bit befuddled by political campaigns, but Lewis manages to get right inside the campaign machinery, talk to the people directly involved, and really get to the heart and soul of the matter.

The subject of this book is the 1996 Presidential Election. He was assigned to write dispatches from the road, in the style of Hunter S. Thompson for the New Republic. However, instead of focusing solely on Bill Clinton and Bob Dole (the President and the Republican frontrunner), he quickly realizes that their campaigns are rather lackluster and boring, and in fact, essentially the same, as Clinton had co-opted much of Dole's platform as a moderate incumbent.

Anyway, Lewis decides to spend his time with the most interesting Republican candidates, who happen to be the biggest longshots. I already had a certain liking for John McCain, but Lewis shares a number of anecdotes about him that would make just about anyone (unless you're some kind of heartless monster) a huge fan. McCain comes across as one of the only truly principled people in Washington.

Lewis is a relatively low-key and bemused reporter. He's hardly trying to dig up dirt on anyone. Mostly, he's just happy to observe these guys and their staffs going about their business. He spends a significant amount of time simply bouncing around the country, trying to figure out where to go next.

I adored a book that allows you to see behind the curtain, and this one uncovers the rot in politics that we're still dealing with today. As you read it, you can see where the cracks were beginning to show even 20+ years ago. It doesn't feel dated in the slightest. Moreover, it'll introduce you to Morry "The Grizz" Taylor, a guy I don't recall from the campaign but who I'm now 100% a fan of. It also presents Pat Buchanan, Alan Keyes, and Bob Dole in a much more nuanced and human light.

This is the kind of book that makes you eager to go and read everything else that the writer has ever produced.

Solid presidential campaign reportage from the 1996 campaign, similar to "Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail", offers a fascinating look into the political arena.

While the focus is often on the winners, it is the losers who can provide some of the most interesting insights. In the 1996 campaign, there were several candidates who did not come out on top but still left their mark.

Interestingly, there were also some parallels to the 2012 race. For example, issues such as the economy, healthcare, and foreign policy were prominent in both campaigns.

The strategies and tactics employed by the candidates also had some similarities. Additionally, the role of the media and public opinion played a crucial role in shaping the outcome of both elections.

By examining the 1996 campaign and drawing parallels to the 2012 race, we can gain a better understanding of the ever-evolving nature of presidential campaigns and the factors that influence their outcomes.