...in that press statement regarding Bristol's pregnancy. The woman even told Sarah she would do it, then it was still in there. I don't blame her for asking to be fired. I know the filmmakers manipulatively placed that moment in there to illustrate how demanding and difficult Palin was being, but I can't say I blame her in this instance.
Can someone explain to me why that was still in there?
I think they all thought they had gotten this inexperienced mom from Alaska who they could control, dress up and make her say clever things. When they made that statement they thought they could just apologize to her and tell her it was a mistake. This is where they find out - in the movie also, and we find out too - that Palin is controlling and want things her way. Their manipulation didn't work. Later on she refuses all their manipulation attempts and they lose the election as they are now a split party - Republicans and Tea Party. But, the clever thing is, there is actually a scene before that where we discover that their attempts on controlling her would not work. She lies to them and tells them she will do whatever they tell her to do in their vetting of her. But then later on she says that she is not afraid of the limelight, because God willed it all to happen. This is the scene where they should have been aware that they had lost her and the election. She is not afraid of anyone or anything because she sees herself as a God chosen individual. At the second to last scene one of the campaign managers says this: they could not control her because she didn't need their adoration. In actuality she needed her towns peoples adoration and her families adoration. While Obama and McCain needed the countries adoration. This was the miscalculation - promoting a peoples person to be a country leader.
shareI've worked campaigns for thirty years. More than once the final edit doesn't cross the right desk to be in the final published copy or in the TelePrompTer. I took the scene as showing how unforgiving Palin was.
shareSome may have taken that as Palin being demanding, controlling, unwilling to compromise (or forgive). And maybe that was the directors intent, idk. All of those things she may well be, but in that specific instance I think she was absolutely justified in her reaction AND wanting Maria gone. She made it very clear she did not want to send that message. It wasn't just some minor editorial oversight. It was directly against her own principles.
shareI'm probably wrong about this, but I got the sense that someone higher up than Maria made her keep the line in, which was why nobody wanted to make the call to fire her.
share