Another liberal hack job...... - Game Change (2012) Discussion

[–] Niv-1 12 years ago

Yes I agree because of the scene where a doctor is secretly hired to observe palin at a bbq because everyone in the campaign like Wallace and Wallace and Schmidt are viewing things like the catatonic stupors? That as VP? Why have that and risk it for VP? I don't understand this movie! A doctor secretly hired to observe palin? And then all the stuff after the stuff after the debate where she is impossible and can't be told to do anything except one thing that the campaign soon regrets?

reply

[–] plasticmojo 12 years ago

Did you or did you not watch Palin during the 2008 campaign? She did her own hack job. Anybody else is just expanding on her self-mutilation.

reply

[–] ggmuwolves07 11 years ago

Steve Schmidt has said that this movie was like an out of body experience for him. He is one of the ones that gave a lot of information for the book. I have no idea how you don't believe some of this is true if you watched her during that campaign.

reply

[–] ggmuwolves07 11 years ago

A quote from Steve Schmidt, played by Woody in this movie: "Ten weeks of the campaign are condensed into a two-hour movie. But it tells the truth of the campaign. That is the story of what happened."

http://articles.latimes.com/2012/feb/18/entertainment/la-et-gamechange-20120218

reply

[–] JackSparrow92 11 years ago

Nicolle Wallace (portrayed by Sarah Paulson in the movie) has also confirmed that the movie was accurate for the most part. She's described it as "highly credible", stated that it "captured the spirit and emotion of the campaign", and that it was "true enough to make me squirm".

Both Schmidt and Wallace have been active in Republican campaigns for years. Wallace spent eight years working for the Bush administration.

reply

[–] Artdoag2 11 years ago

Liberal hack job? HA!
Game Change shows Republicans at their finest, for example:
1) the McCain's team being creative, honest, and decent
2) Palin displaying her motherly love and dedication
3) Palin's well received shout-out to Hillary Clinton (the "18 million cracks" comment)
4) McC and P tearing up the campaign trail winning fans
5) McCain and Palin, well, mostly McCain,

Oh, and btw, just cuz someone disagrees with a topic dont mean they have a problem : )

reply

[–] Niv-1 11 years ago

This movie shows McCain and Schmidt agree to have a doctor secretly observe palin for insanity at the Arizona bbq rather than remove her from the ticket! That's not good! And she becomes impossible and McCain says "she might turn on me!" indicated he became afraid of her. SO weak and pathetic McCain was. Palin was defined as insane.

reply

[–] tedmccarron 11 years ago

What this movie doesn't show is Schmidt and Wallace deliberately sabotaging Palin's campaign. In the book Going Rogue Palin describes in great detail how they, especially Wallace, brought a hostile Katie Couric in over and over again at the worst possible times without warning Sarah to make her look as bad as possible. It would be as if an Obama staffer had brought Hannity or Limbaugh around dozens of times to Obama to grill him without warning. Of course she's going to sound bad. I truly think Schmidt was being paid off to get these awful ambushes done.

Also, since Schmidt and Wallace so readily lent themselves to the making of this Palin-bashing movie without a single word of negativity towards Obama or any Democrat it becomes obvious which side they were really on the entire time.

reply

[–] Zach126 10 years ago

Deliberately sabotage their own campaign? I don't think so. Even if they hated Palin (and who could blame them?), they would still be inclined to help Palin look her best so that their real boss - McCain could win the presidency. Also Couric & Gibson are REAL journalists who who ask fair & legitimate questions unlike those 2 bozos you mentioned who are wannabees & who have a right wing extremist agenda. So go right ahead & keep drinking the kool aid if u want but in reality, Palin & McCain only have themselves to blame for their loss.

reply

[–] Niv-1 10 years ago

Wallace hated palin so much she has announced she didn't vote for McCain because it would have meant palin vp and possibly president. But why didn't Schmidt and Wallace use all their influence to have her removed from the ticket. They had the doctor who followed her around when everyone was talking about palin going insane who announced she "wasn't half bad FOR" reason x and y but why even get to that point? Just say to the press "everyone is fearing for her sanity and mental health and McCain has to remove her from the ticket. This was not foreseeable and no one had any reason to expect the vp nominee would develop severe mental problems like catatonic stupors." Then have mark Wallace say publicly what he saw along with Nicolle wallace and Schmidt and the. Announce mike huckabee or Marilyn musgrave or Mary fallin the vp nominee.

reply

[–] tedmccarron 10 years ago

Palin was vindicated on May 6, 2015 when Wallace admitted on The O'Reilly Factor that she screwed up badly and that Palin was "rightfully" angry with her for the way she set up the hostile leftist media interviews with her.

reply

[–] Niv-1 10 years ago

When wallace was on Lettermans show she said something very similar but it was all about Wallace assuming palin wasn't stupid and ignorant. That she was at fault for not checking her knowledge more. She used the newspaper example. Like Wallace was half joking about being bad at her job because she didn't brief palin on the names of some newspapers or news magazines.