If you look at reagan, watching politics in this period, he is as you say sort of singlemindedly focused on the Great Society. A famous moment in reagans life comes in october of 1964 where he kids a televised speech which we now call a time for choosing, and its a speech on behalf of Barry Goldwater but its a speech attacking Lyndon Johnson and saying that kennedyjohnson and vision of a government led utopia is a path to ruin for this country in the country needs to choose another path. We dont think about that but thats who reagan was speaking about there. And then in the coming years he begins his political career in california, he is someone who is much more interested in national and global issues than local politics. He finds a way to connect with people by nationalizing the race. What that means, starting in his First Political campaign to run against the Great Society. What he finds is governor pat brown who associate with lbj in california. Right. And reagan uses him as a standin for lbj. So the book tells the story up to landslides, lbjs famous landslide in 1964 which is the largest popular vote, margin in american history, and reagans landslide in his First Political race as governo governor in 196n which he won california by 1 million votes, just two years after johnson iconic little president had won the state by over a million votes himself. William buckley told me once when reagan was first emerging and nixon was looking at his run in 1968, nixon said to him, because he liked reagan, Barry Goldwater and people thought of at that point as a kind of belief on the Second StringBarry Goldwater or a more polished Barry Goldwater. And buckley said to nixon, can this actor possibly win . And nixon said, any man, anyone who wins the governorship of california by a million votes is a National Political figure, and thats it. Answers the question. The are a couple of other things i want to get at, which is something you all enjoy in the book, a very difficult thing, it tells two different stories and weaves them together. And you show us lbj and reagan at these very early Interesting Times in their career. I think a lot of us will be familiar with the general history of Lyndon Johnson of 1963. He is the Vice President who was stripped of all power. The study of the god who is powerless. What was fascinating to me was where Ronald Reagan won in 1963, what he was doing and where his career was. So if you ask the famous question of Ronald Reagan, where were you the day of the john f. Kennedy was shot, and my book begins the day after kennedy was shot, you find you somewhere hes not supposed to be. In the store that i knew before start working on this about reagan, he had an early in life movie an acting career, which in the 30s and 40s, which then turned into his position in the Screen Actors Guild and then through his work with the ge theater really became more alike about his passion for politics and his sort of removal from the hollywood scene. What i found when you ask that question, where were you a day that jfk was shot is that reagan is not what is supposed to be. He is back working as an actor. He had lost his job as a host of ge theater two years before, and he was 53 and looking toward middle age it wasnt at all clear what the next step for reagan was, if you want to be someone whos going to be a national star. Speak he was kind of washed up at that point. So what hes doing at that point is appearing in the kind of role that he frankly hated as the villain, a very dark remake of the artist hemingways the killers. Hes not evening particularly exciting or daring villain. Is a conniving and cowardice villain. Its the kind of part reagan hates but its the only work he can get and he takes the support of what makes his story in this period sort of remarkable is the rapidity of the turnaround. He goes from that place at the beginning to not just governor of california at the end, but really the face of conservatism and a National Figure who is getting tons of attention in the press and to some of people talk about as the president of the training and that happens in just three years time. Dimension that famous speech he gave her Barry Goldwater. Some people think it was made at the convention. It was not. It was reported later, having at the same this speech . Some people call it the speech as well. Reagan speaks with his tremendous rapidity which you dont identify in later years, very quickly, very forcefully thats a version of the speech he had been given for years when he toured the ge plant. But talk about the impact that he made on just an act of american politics and the funds that were raised, discovery by the right that this was a real megastar. To kind of walk us through the. What did he do that was so impressive . Well, if its okay i would like to go back even further, the beginning of reagans political emergence, which in a lot of ways is impossible i think is separate from his act in career. You look at reagans career in the 30s as a hollywood actor, and one of the things that he learned from that is to have a reference for public mood and public taste. An idea that public taste changes quickly. So reagan was a product of the scada system and he was in a lot of ways literally a product. They would churn out movies very quickly, and the i. T. Was you found a hit and replicated it again and again and again until the public decided it didnt like it anymore and then you have to become something else. When youre an actor, that is an incredibly sort of humbling experience because one moment you can be on the path to mega stardom, and the next you were done. So you really have a firm respect for what is the public thinking, thats a question you are thinking about a lot. In a lot of ways its better training for reagan as a politician, a National Politician in the 1950s when politics are changing so much, then is johnsons great as a legislator. Because johnson, a master legislator who we all know so much about and this sort of legislation with the legislative process inks uphold existing relationships and the legislative maneuvering. He is not nearly as attuned in his Prior Experience to the presidency asked about public mood shifts and that you Pay Attention to. Also the mastery of television, of the great communicator. Roosevelt had done it on the radio and reagan thought he could do it visually. And poor johnson is at least aware that there is this moment where you really do see television taking control of the country. One of the first things i did in researching this story with the go back, like i said i begin the day after the kennedy assassination and watch that footage from the days after the kennedy assassination but try to keep my eye and affect the camera on johnson. Its impossible to do. Hes the president of the united states, but the pictures of the kennedy family, the kennedy funeral procession, and the country grieving are so much more compelling than anything you see a johnson, that he really even though he is the leader of the free world at that point is for a while in my figure. And to me that was really enlightening to understand about johnson because it creates in him this real challenge of how do you refocus the story so that you as the president are the league and you are the center of attention, while honoring this incredible event that the country has gone through. Thats a remarkable accomplishment of his in the early days of the presidency to be able to pull that off by positioning itself as the steward of john f. Kennedys legacy. But the problem that is exposed their of television having its own mind in a lot of ways is a recurring one for johnson, and hes aware of the. He knows that jfk was much better at television, that its this new powerful force in our politics, and he struggled to keep up with it. Hes constantly getting advice from his aides about how to do better, and you really feel sorry for him when you read some of these memos that were written to me about it because its always speak more quickly. No, no, no. Speak slower, you know . Where different classes, try a podium. No, no, no. No podium. And then always its but dont think about it after hes been given 20 different views of what he should do. It mustve been frustrating because in person he was an extraordinary charismatic figure, probably more than the others. You know when you see celebrity in real life, the reaction is he so much more than i thought . With the johnson its opposite. People who had seen him only on television were consistently surprised when they saw him in person because he was tall and than they thought, he was better looking, more intelligent, and do so much more captivating. He did have that ability, as others have written about really, look at someone and see their soul. And i think one of the reasons that television doesnt work for johnson is johnson interpersonal relationships are so much about control. When he looks at you he is in essence trying to understand you and control you. And in television when you are appearing there and the people who are out there are anonymous and unseen. You cant have that kind of control. So someone like reagan whos been doing this his whole life, essentially stranding himself in front of the camera is much more powerful in the emerging media, and you really do see that shift in politics were some with johnsons skill set is not an inherent disadvantage to someone like reagan. What about, you mentioned in the old studio, during world war ii, they were all profitable. This is a great intimate of the day. That when someone like Ronald Reagan was a contract actor gets script how quickly . How good is he taking the scripts and absorbing it anyway a professional actor doesnt . You never heard complaints about Ronald Reagan professionalism. I think he was very good at it. He is frustrated in his career because he thinks his career is constantly being mismanaged in relation to this force he reveres, which is publicly. He thinks the studio bosses taken out of the limelight and they put them back when the countrys tastes have changed. Thats so important for reagan as hes looking at this rapidly changing Political Landscape of the 1960s. He doesnt just put himself forward and say, these are my ideas about limiting government and this is what the country should follow me right now. He waits for the right moment Wayne Johnson and the democrats in washington have essentially overpromised for government and loss of credibility. And thats the moment you see reagan finally willing to enter the arena as a politician himself. Thats not an accident. Reagan is incredibly practical when it comes to his own selfinterest and the sort of care of his own future. He really does wait for a moment when its plausible the country would give them a chance as a conservative candidate. Lets talk to reagans ideology. Lbjs i think we did. Hes been in washington in early days reaction is a favorite of Lyndon Johnson and gives a target of rayburn, came to the old buddhist osha through the house of representatives and that goes to the senate. Hes a new deal liberal. Reagan began as a new deal liberal and then became Something Different to how did that happen . And when did it start . Theres a couple things. Reaganesque, has a famous phrase. I didnt leave the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party left me which really resonates he said that would . When he was running in the 70s and 80s. That begin to resonate with the people we begin to think of as reagan democrats. In reagans case it is somewhat misplaced because what that implies is they said exactly the same place and the party to go large to the left. Thats not really reagan. Ranking is i think someone who is drawn to extremes. In his youth the new deal and roosevelt are appealing to them because it is, it stands for something. It is a compelling cause, a cause of the little man, and he identifies with that. In the postwar period as he for a number of personal and political reasons becomes interested in what he sees as a perilous threat to the communist conspiracy, the Democratic Party is no longer a natural place for him. Theres too much contradiction and complexity. The right with its pretty unified anticommunism is a much more clear place for someone with reagans dramatic sensibility. Anthat i think really thats wht draws them there. What about the impact of his hollywood days, not as an actor, but as a leader at one point of the Screen Actors Guild, union strike and also ideological divisions that emerge in what was raking in all of the . So reagan is in a lot of ways you see the reagan who emerges as a candidate and as a governor and a president. He is someone who is pretty good in those days at finding exactly where the metal is an intimate up there. As Screen Actors Guild president , he is concerned about the infiltration of communists in hollywood, which pushes him more to the right and to become more compassionately anti passionately anticommunist but at the same time a strong defender of factors. I think there is that combination of high principle and tactical pragmatism in reagan which makes him so effective as a politician in the 60s, when he actually decides to run for governor of california, something i spend a lot of time talking about, hes so conscious of being different from goldwater as some of because goldwater had lost right, which for reagan was a horrible thing to do. For others, to go out and take a short stint of principle would be a noble thing to do. For reagan who is again focused on what does the public want and how do i connect to the public, the whole point is winning. So in goldwaters campaign in 1960 for reagan is a strong supporter. He appears on goldwaters behalf in california and in the bloody primary with nelson rockefeller, and after goldwater got a victory there, reagan said to the crowd, we need to make love to democrats because we dont want to win a convention. We want to win an election and thats exactly what the crowd didnt want to hear. They booed him for saying that but that same idea is what he takes them after the goldwater dispute with his position himself as the candidate. He goes and presents himself as a unity candidate to the Republican Party of california and he says he will only accept their nomination if he is convinced that they can accept them as a unity candidate. And what that does is in a certain sense say to the conservatives, dont force me to prove myself to you. Because otherwise i just wont run. That means he can spend a lot of time when hes running for the nomination thinking about how he can connect. Its an interesting lesson as we think about the Republican Party of the day were Ronald Reagan is consistently held up as this sort of ideal that no one can live up to because of his perfect conservative record. Reagan in that period was quite focused on winning. And how much did Richard Nixons loss, when he ran for governor of california against pat brown in 1962, thats the one that seems to have ended his career. He came to new york as a lawyer and thats what he said you wont have nixon to kick around anymore. How closely did reagan followed nixons campaign and what lessons might have drawn from the . If you were to look in 1964, which is where spent a lot of time in the book you would think that pat brown whos run for governor for an unprecedented third term as a democrat had a good shot. He had an easy victory over nixon who was a figure he was far more as we move to the center at the point then was reagan. And hugely National Figure. So pat brown can defeat that guy, but what are his chances against this actor was never held any kind of office whose associate with what brown himself called the crowd in the united states. You would think pat brown has a pretty good shot, and the book actually begins with the johnson and brown talking the day after johnsons landslide victory in 1964, and johnson and brown are sort of reviewing the results. And johnson is saying, and brown makes some noise but i dont from going to run from it might be hard. And johnson that i dont want you anything about that. Youre going to be a run and its going to be a shoe in, is the implication. The other thing to talk about in passing that day, at browns instigation is the three counties in california that johnson happen to lose in this otherwise landslide national election, at browns has to johnson, you lost san diego which he knows johnson will understand the san diego is associate with hardline conservatism. And you lost the smallest town in the state and then he says, and you lost Orange County. I dont know whats going on there but ive got the Orange County publisher coming in and well figure it out and ill report back to you. Johnson does any tension to that, which is understandable. He just won this huge victory, but actually its that little piece of information that probably has more importance for the future of johnsons legacy in this country than anything. Because what we see now in the defection of voters in places like Orange County who are white, suburban, middleclass, children of democrats and probably a lot of them former democrats themselves, toward a conservative like goldwater shows them by billy of the concert movement in the later part of the 20th century which is what does so much to sort of abuse johnsons legacy. Briefly, what argument are they making when they in effect abandoned the Democratic Party that listed the parents lifted t