I've been reading this for a few weeks and finally finished. Team of Rivals came up during the Presidential campaign last year of course, but it fits in with the kind of stuff I've been reading for the past few years so I ordered a copy. It starts with Lincoln early in life, but starts to get interesting as he begins participating in politics, not always winning. He encounters some of those rivals fairly early on, and it's interesting (if hard to imagine) how able he was to ignore some pretty miserable behavior from people. As the book reached coverage of the Civil War I realized that I have neglected to find a really good book on the topic, the only other real reading I've done on it was about Ulysses Grant - interesting, but not the same as solid coverage around the event. Anyway, as Lincoln took office he did make a conscious effort to get the people that could get things done, even if they had slighted him (or worse) in the past.

It's interesting that many of his rivals (Stanton, Seward) came to see Lincoln as a great man, but others (Salmon Chase) never really did, even though Lincoln ended up putting him on the Supreme Court in spite of Chase's continuing efforts to undermine him. It was really a lesson in keeping your eye on the ball (or as I say, playing my game), but still - I haven't come close to the kind of discipline that would have been required to keep those guys around in the beginning. Another part that struck me was that Lincoln was continually frustrated with his generals until someone reminded him that he was the Commander In Chief, and that it was not just ok but expected for him to have an active voice in the war. Eventually he made changes, and more changes, until finally he had Grant and found someone willing to take risks to win. To me that's Leadership 101 - if you're in charge, solicit input, then decide. It ain't a vote!

I do see that the rivals had somewhat of a moral dilemma. They thought he was fundamentally wrong in many cases. Is the right thing to do leave because you disagree? Stay and try to argue/persuade? Both are honorable approaches, but to me under mining a leader is wrong. Bad men, or just sure that they were right and doing what they thought had to be done?

Of course you know how it ends, with Booth assassinating Lincoln just as the war was done. Lincoln barely had time to savor the prospect of a country to be united once again when life ended. As you read the story from start to finish you see just how open the White House was at the time, Lincoln with at most a single bodyguard and people coming to stand under his window to hear him speak. Sad that the world had to change from that, but realistic too - we don't want a world where the one in a billion knucklehead decides to set our path for us, after having done nothing to earn the right to do so.

It's not a fun read, but it was educational, and gave me a deeper appreciation of Lincoln and of how hard it is to make really hard decisions. Did I take away the right lessons? Read a copy and let's talk about it.