I know absolutely nothing. That's how I feel about the 2008 campaign after reading through approximately half of "Game Change." For example, I had absolutely no idea how childish the campaign got. Seriously, an argument between Trippi and Penn over how many times each other mentioned cocaine? I couldn't help but think to myself: "This is completely ridiculous!" I had absolutely no idea that caucus-goes and human voters everywhere could not empathize with Hillary Clinton, almost to the point of denouncing the fact that she possessed any emotions at all. Thus came the Iowa likability tour, and all that jazz. But really, why was that necessary? From what I saw four years ago, I remember a greatly determined woman, someone whom I perceived would get the job done, would slug America's problems in the collective jaw. Moreover, it seems to me that people equally crucified Hillary for her stoniness as well as her shows of emotion, such as her "breakdown" in New Hampshire, with which the media pummeled her mercilessly and senselessly.
This is why I hate the media. One: it destroys people that, sometimes, don't deserve to be destroys. Two: it distorts the facts for the people's pleasure, warping the news to satisfy America's craving for entertainment.
Furthermore, I was particularly taken with Edwards spiral into an electoral black hole. The massive train wreck of Rielle Hunter resurfacing to attack Edwards incessantly sucked me in, particularly because, again, I had absolutely no idea of those events. I remember the announcement, and thought, "What a horrible guy!", and move on. But I could not fathom that Obama was using Edwards as a tool all along, using him to siphon away Clinton votes, quietly manipulating the race while at the same time grinning from ear to ear, proclaiming change. Indeed, throughout the book, I saw a new side to Obama, an ugly, haughty side that I never considered.
I guess this is what it comes down to, in terms of political races and stuff: the straight-forward candidates never win, because the media twists their arms around and around until they cry "MERCY!!!" and drop out. The slick candidates hide in the shadows and stab the overt ones, and each other, stealthily in the back.
And then there's Newt Gingrich. Anyone in favor of proclaiming the moon the 51st state? A think yes.
After reading the book I thought the same thing as Ben.. I really had no idea what truly went on during that election. Half of the things mentioned in the book that "went viral" or "totally changed an election" I never had heard of... Yes, I heard of Rielle Hunter, but not all of those gory details. I barely knew Edwards was running. Clinton's campaign seemed almost doomed from the start, and the way it is portrayed, her victories seem like flukes. Bill Clinton's handling of himself and the way he ruins Hillary's race is ridiculous, and I thought that the author made an interesting comment when he said that before Clinton started spouting off about Obama, he was almost as popular as the Pope.. Anyways, because I barely paid attention to that race at the time, this book has given me a lot of insights into the racea as well as politics in general. I'm definitely going to continue reading it even though it's not required for class. Good call Mr. Kenny!
Politics I use to think it was a very complicated system. Now I know how its like a kid running for Prom Queen and trashing the other candidates and complaining about how no one like them. Its sad how much its become a beuty or celbrety contest. However this is proof that i could become president, so look out for mr running soon. But in all seriousness the politics and the childishness of how they work is overly laughable.
Overall, I thought that the book was very entertaining and fun to read, but not very informative. The authors intention to try to explain why the election went the way it went was completely from a social point of view and the numerous scandals, what about the actual politics? After having read this book I don't actually know what happened during that election. I think that the book is basically a summary of every tabloid and gossip magazine from that time. All the candidates sort of came across as... Obama the new proud loud kid, Hillary the somewhat privileged yet strong and independent candidate, and Edwards a plain fool..But I would recommend reading this book to anyone who wants to understand the social aspect of politics. I just wish that the country and 21st century election were more concerned with the candidates ideas and plans rather than their latest scandals.
I agree with Ben's post, but I also think Charlotte poses an interesting point. I feel like the book talks mainly about social reactions, such as Hillary's social disadvantage. The book talks about why Hillary did not have a chance to win because of her lack of emotion, not her political experience. However, this is mainly due to the social nature of modern campaigns. Candidates want to make themselves up as celebrities, so they can appear on television and speak directly to an audience of celebrity obsessed Americans. Tabloids and entertainment news receive ridiculous viewership, so appearing popular and gregarious to people on the shows they watch is a great campaign. I understand the book's social focus in this modern era.
I know absolutely nothing. That's how I feel about the 2008 campaign after reading through approximately half of "Game Change." For example, I had absolutely no idea how childish the campaign got. Seriously, an argument between Trippi and Penn over how many times each other mentioned cocaine? I couldn't help but think to myself: "This is completely ridiculous!" I had absolutely no idea that caucus-goes and human voters everywhere could not empathize with Hillary Clinton, almost to the point of denouncing the fact that she possessed any emotions at all. Thus came the Iowa likability tour, and all that jazz. But really, why was that necessary? From what I saw four years ago, I remember a greatly determined woman, someone whom I perceived would get the job done, would slug America's problems in the collective jaw. Moreover, it seems to me that people equally crucified Hillary for her stoniness as well as her shows of emotion, such as her "breakdown" in New Hampshire, with which the media pummeled her mercilessly and senselessly.
ReplyDeleteThis is why I hate the media. One: it destroys people that, sometimes, don't deserve to be destroys. Two: it distorts the facts for the people's pleasure, warping the news to satisfy America's craving for entertainment.
Furthermore, I was particularly taken with Edwards spiral into an electoral black hole. The massive train wreck of Rielle Hunter resurfacing to attack Edwards incessantly sucked me in, particularly because, again, I had absolutely no idea of those events. I remember the announcement, and thought, "What a horrible guy!", and move on. But I could not fathom that Obama was using Edwards as a tool all along, using him to siphon away Clinton votes, quietly manipulating the race while at the same time grinning from ear to ear, proclaiming change. Indeed, throughout the book, I saw a new side to Obama, an ugly, haughty side that I never considered.
I guess this is what it comes down to, in terms of political races and stuff: the straight-forward candidates never win, because the media twists their arms around and around until they cry "MERCY!!!" and drop out. The slick candidates hide in the shadows and stab the overt ones, and each other, stealthily in the back.
And then there's Newt Gingrich. Anyone in favor of proclaiming the moon the 51st state? A think yes.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteAfter reading the book I thought the same thing as Ben.. I really had no idea what truly went on during that election. Half of the things mentioned in the book that "went viral" or "totally changed an election" I never had heard of... Yes, I heard of Rielle Hunter, but not all of those gory details. I barely knew Edwards was running. Clinton's campaign seemed almost doomed from the start, and the way it is portrayed, her victories seem like flukes. Bill Clinton's handling of himself and the way he ruins Hillary's race is ridiculous, and I thought that the author made an interesting comment when he said that before Clinton started spouting off about Obama, he was almost as popular as the Pope.. Anyways, because I barely paid attention to that race at the time, this book has given me a lot of insights into the racea as well as politics in general. I'm definitely going to continue reading it even though it's not required for class. Good call Mr. Kenny!
ReplyDeletePolitics I use to think it was a very complicated system. Now I know how its like a kid running for Prom Queen and trashing the other candidates and complaining about how no one like them. Its sad how much its become a beuty or celbrety contest. However this is proof that i could become president, so look out for mr running soon. But in all seriousness the politics and the childishness of how they work is overly laughable.
ReplyDeleteOverall, I thought that the book was very entertaining and fun to read, but not very informative. The authors intention to try to explain why the election went the way it went was completely from a social point of view and the numerous scandals, what about the actual politics? After having read this book I don't actually know what happened during that election. I think that the book is basically a summary of every tabloid and gossip magazine from that time. All the candidates sort of came across as... Obama the new proud loud kid, Hillary the somewhat privileged yet strong and independent candidate, and Edwards a plain fool..But I would recommend reading this book to anyone who wants to understand the social aspect of politics. I just wish that the country and 21st century election were more concerned with the candidates ideas and plans rather than their latest scandals.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Ben's post, but I also think Charlotte poses an interesting point. I feel like the book talks mainly about social reactions, such as Hillary's social disadvantage. The book talks about why Hillary did not have a chance to win because of her lack of emotion, not her political experience. However, this is mainly due to the social nature of modern campaigns. Candidates want to make themselves up as celebrities, so they can appear on television and speak directly to an audience of celebrity obsessed Americans. Tabloids and entertainment news receive ridiculous viewership, so appearing popular and gregarious to people on the shows they watch is a great campaign. I understand the book's social focus in this modern era.
ReplyDelete