'Game Change’: Could Sarah Palin portrayal affect the 2012 election?

The HBO movie ‘Game Change’ details the troubles that Sarah Palin went through in 2008 – which could affect the way a VP candidate is chosen and even President Obama’s reelection chances.

Phil Caruso/HBO/AP
Julianne Moore portrays Sarah Palin (l.) and Ed Harris portrays Arizona Sen. John McCain in a scene from 'Game Change,' a film premiering Saturday at 9 p.m. on HBO.

The HBO movie “Game Change,” detailing the private anguish and very public failures in the 2008 GOP presidential campaign, may not change many viewers’ minds about the film’s central character, Sarah Palin. But, say some observers, the two-hour docudrama has the potential to affect both the 2012 election and our larger political culture – from the way a vice-presidential candidate is chosen to President Obama’s reelection chances and the way young women view running for political office.

As is usually the case with media portrayals, particularly with controversial figures such as Ms. Palin, viewers will see the film through their own lenses, says John Pitney, professor of American politics at Claremont McKenna College in California. “To Palin haters, it confirms that she’s a dolt. To Palin supporters, it confirms that Hollywood is biased against Republicans in general, conservative Republicans in particular, and Sarah Palin most of all,” he says via e-mail.

Still, he outlines a way in which the film could have an impact. He writes, “It serves as a reminder of the trouble that Palin encountered in 2008. So when the eventual GOP nominee – probably Mitt Romney – picks his running mate, he’s going to be extra careful to find someone who is fluent in public policy issues.”

If he considers someone with only limited experience, such as Gov. Susana Martinez (R) of New Mexico, or Sen. Marco Rubio (R) of Florida, he says, “his team will subject that person to the political version of ‘Jeopardy.’ ”

The devastating grilling over issues like Palin’s wardrobe and verbal gaffes sends a chilling message to the next generation, says Barbara O’Connor, director emeritus of the Institute for the Study of Politics and Media at California State University, Sacramento. “This absolutely sends the message, ‘Do not run,’ to young women,” she says, adding, “This shows them they will be treated differently.”

The professor says she has noticed a growing reluctance among her female students “to even consider” political involvement. They see many women politicians subjected to a double standard when it comes to family and clothing issues, she says.

A film like “Game Change,” portraying the behind-the-scenes pain the then-governor went through as she moved from the wilds of Alaska into the national spotlight, will only serve to reinforce young women’s doubts and misgivings about participating in the body politic, she adds.

But perhaps the most unexpected potential result of replaying the 2008 campaign is the message it could send to the independent, undecided voter in the current presidential election. This is the group that both Republicans and Democrats most desire to sway as the election nears.

A film like this, detailing the inner workings of the GOP campaign that helped usher Barack Obama into office four years ago, “could serve to remind some voters who cast their ballot for him back then that they made the right decision,” says Republican strategist David Johnson, who worked on Sen. Bob Dole’s 1988 presidential campaign.

“Game Change” reveals, in particular, the doubts that GOP candidate John McCain had during the campaign – not to mention the conflicts and disarray within his ranks over the growing problems ushered in by Palin’s spot on the ticket.

“They may well realize that they made a choice for the safer candidate back then,” says Mr. Johnson, “and in some slight but important way, that could serve to reinforce the idea that continuing with Obama is still the safer choice.”

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to 'Game Change’: Could Sarah Palin portrayal affect the 2012 election?
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Elections/Vox-News/2012/0310/Game-Change-Could-Sarah-Palin-portrayal-affect-the-2012-election
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe