[.ca] The Making of the President, 1960 (ISBN 1568491433)

From Amazon.com:
Students of politics and political reporting should cheer: This too- long-out-of-print classic is coming back. The book and the campaign it covered are throwbacks to an era more and more citizens, increasingly mired in sound-bites and tabloidism, are at least subconsciously desperate to resuscitate. You'll be amazed at how knowledgeable (and sometimes even wise) both White and the candidates he covers--Kennedy and Nixon--seem. Yes, it was too good to be true, but what a nice idea.

This should be in paperback:
I hope this landmark book will be released in paperback because it is a classic which should be popularly priced. This book covered the primaries through the election. The documenting of the importance of the West Virginia primary and others may have been the beginning of the end of the convention system of selecting nominees with the subsequent switch to to the primary system. Today, the convention is just a show. Nothing important is decided there. The 1960 Democratic convention was one of the last to have any excitement as there was a spontaneous rally for Adlai Stevenson to be nominated a third time. However, the outcome was not seriously in doubt as Kennedy emerged from the primaries as the clear favorite. This was the campaign that featured the Nixon-Kennedy debates. Additionally, the issue of religion surfaced as Kennedy was the first Catholic to run since Alfred Smith. The book is enthralling and is a true classic. I read it when I was thirteen and have reread it a couple of times as an adult. I recommend it.

Political Classic...:
One of the best, and incredibly influential. What we know today about Kennedy was not probably available to White, and nobody would have dared to put it in print at the time anyway. White's books on the '64, '68, and '72 campaigns are just as good, and though long out of print are readily available and cheap at any used book store. Classic stuff!

One of the best books about American politics ever written:
This book has long been considered to be a classic among political buffs and those who have any interest in how the American political system works, or once worked. Theodore White (1915-1986), who was once described by TIME magazine as the "godfather of modern political reporting", created a whole new way of covering presidential campaigns with this pulitzer-prize winning book. Unlike previous reporters who simply covered each aspect of a campaign (buildup, primaries, conventions, and the fall campaign)without seeing the whole, White saw all of these events as simply parts (or chapters) of a whole (or book). White spent most of 1960 traveling with all of the candidates, from lonely campaign stops in the Wisconsin and New Hampshire primaries (where sometimes just a handful of people greeted the candidate he was covering), to the excitement of Election Night 1960, which was the closest presidential election night of the twentieth century (if you discount the 2000 Bush-Gore race). White is a marvelous writer, and his descriptions of the personalities, the behind-the-scenes maneuvering, the feuds and strategies that make up a presidential campaign set the standard for a whole new generation of political reporters. I do have one problem with the book, and that is White's obvious bias towards John F. Kennedy. In his memoirs White admitted that he gradually lost all objectivity when it came to JFK and that he came to idolize Kennedy, to the point that he was actually writing some of his campaign speeches - a gross lack of professionalism for a journalist. On the other hand, White also admitted that he strongly disliked Richard Nixon and had deliberately set Nixon up as the "villain" of the book, just as he made Kennedy the "hero". As a result White often leaves out damaging information about JFK (any mention of Kennedy's womanizing, vote-buying in the West Virginia primary, or vote-stealing in the general election were left to later historians to write about). Poor Nixon, on the other hand, is looked at very critically by White - in White's version Nixon makes so many mistakes (and Kennedy is so perfect) that you wonder why the election was so close. In fact, the legend that Kennedy's brief Presidency was a kind of modern "Camelot" started with this book. However, White's skills more than make up for this weakness, and the "Making of the President 1960" should be required reading for anyone who is interested in the great game of American politics.

Help - I'm stuck in the 60's (and loving it).:
Name the two greatest years in history? 1968 and 1968. But 1968 didn't just happen and if you read this great book you'll start to get a feel for Dick Nixon, LBJ, et al, and how it all came crashing down in 1968. It is one of the most revealing, comprehensive, enjoyable history books I've read. I also challenge you to read Chapter One of the next "The Making of the President 1968" and put it down. This first chapter (1968) is one of White's all time best.

A Landmark:
If you want to understand what is happening in the closing stages of this campaign, then read Theodore White's Making of the President 1960. I was drawn to this book because of the parallels between these two very close elections featuring a cast of characters in many ways similiar: the dull but experienced Vice President running on peace and prosperity versus the more charismatic challenger who argues that American can do better. Who will win? Just like 1960, it's sure to go down to the wire. In particular, White's accounts of the early primaries and the balloting at the Democratic Convention were completely engrossing. 1960 may have been the first modern election in that it was ultimately decided by television, but Campaign '60 started out much differently than the media-driven spectacles of today. White artfully goes behind closed doors and shows how the well-oiled Kennedy organization's battle of personal persuasion won them just enough delegates to seize the nomination. White's account of the Kennedy victory confirms the truth that the skill with which a campaign is waged has much more to do with victory and defeat than deterministic generalities like "peace and prosperity" or "are you better off than you were 4/8 years ago?"