I just finished reading Game Change: Obama and the Clintons, McCain and Palin and the Race of a Lifetime (Harper 2010) , the recent bestseller about the 2008 election by John Heilemann and Mark Halperin.

The book is a highly readable and reasonably evenhanded account of the race, and is recommended. The authors state that the collapse of Lehman Brothers on September 15, 2008 “marked the start of an extraordinary ten-day period that would more or less decide the election.” This is likely true, although I think that the magnitude of the crisis itself, and its devastating effect on the incumbent party, was probably more decisive than any particular response of the candidates, for example, John McCain’s decision to suspend his campaign and go to Washington. I also believe that authors tend to underemphasize the overwhelming campaign finance advantage enjoyed by the Obama team.

Game Change is sprinkled with numerous interesting stories about the candidates. The book claims that many Democratic leaders were highly doubtful of Hillary Clinton’s candidacy and secretly encouraged Barack Obama to run, even in the face of the seeming inevitability of the former First Lady’s nomination. The authors also assert that John Edwards’s campaign was roiled by the candidate’s illicit relationship with an aide and his strategists were unsure what to do if he were successful in the primaries.

While the authors point out that Sarah Palin was able to present her convention speech flawlessly even when her teleprompter broke down, on balance they present a sharply negative view of her. They focus on Ms. Palin’s lack of knowledge of issues (perhaps understandable in light of her sudden entrance into the national scene), but also on her withdrawal into a type of funk when preparing for interviews and her vice presidential debate, a condition that made some campaign aides worry about her stability. Perhaps these stories are simply tales of campaign staffers with axes to grind, but they do need to be explained if Ms. Palin decides to seek high office again.

I cannot be the only reader of Game Change who marvels at how much things are different now in comparison with the events described in the book, mostly in 2007 and 2008. During the campaign, Barack Obama, with little experience and generally unknown by most voters at the beginning, managed to transform millions of people, particular young ones, into enthusiastic supporters. At his best, he exuded a postracial and postpartisan image, with promises to look beyond the ideas of either party and move to an era of “hope and change”.

But Mr. Obama’s presidency now seems removed from the heady days of the campaign. The economy remains in poor condition and unemployment high, but Mr. Obama seems focused on expensive and controversial programs (health care, cap and trade) favored by the political left. The country is probably as polarized as it was under George W. Bush, with most of the political energy now coming from Mr. Obama’s opponents, as demonstrated by the success of the Tea Party movement and the Scott Brown campaign in Massachusetts.

Presidencies, even politically successful ones, go through difficult periods. Bill Clinton lost both houses of Congress in 1994 before regaining his footing and pursuing a popular, more centrist agenda. Ronald Reagan had a very difficult 1982 before the economy started to improve and his popularity rebounded. For Barack Obama, the key to a rebound might consist of looking back to his 2008 successes in bringing people together and focusing on programs that tend to include rather than divide.