I loved Game Change.
Granted, I follow politics the way normal people follow
sports. I burned with envy when my
wife would come home from her job in Georgetown and report that she saw some
junior senator from a jerkwater state like New York at a restaurant. It killed me when my job status
prevented me from volunteering for my presidential candidate of choice. I’ve burned hours upon untold hours
debating the minutiae of American policy with fellow obsessives on internet
message boards. I read all those
Woodward books. This is my thing.
Game Change gave
me not just a peek, but an extended tour behind the curtain of the 2008 McCain
presidential campaign. Now, if you
take the time to read an obscure blog like mine, you’ve probably already read
about the HBO film’s remarkable performances, fair portrayal, and overall
quality. I agree, and I’ll be
shocked if Ed Harris and Julianne Moore don’t win at least Emmy
nominations. But my favorite thing
about the film was the sense it gave us of being caught up in tricky
decisions. It’s four days ‘til you
have to name a vice presidential nominee and you’re trailing an opponent who
seems unassailable: what do you do?
Your hastily vetted choice turns out to be wildly underprepared and may
be melting down: what do you do? You’ve allowed a measure of populism
and fear to enter your campaign, and it’s turning ugly and spinning out of
control: what do you do?
This stuff, the gap between ideals and actions, the
strategizing and counterstrategizing, are what makes so politics so
fascinating. Game Change brings the fascination home, and I loved every minute
of it. If you have HBO, see it
this month. If not, queue it
up. You’ll be glad you did.