Game Change- Nuala Brennan

Nuala Brennan

1). Political vetting is important because when somebody becomes a politician they are constantly vulnerable to media attack. All eyes are on them and they have opponents trying to screw them up. It is necessary to vet somebody had give them a thorough background check so that you are sure they have no illegal or controversial past, and if they do, then that way you can plan accordingly for attack.  Palin was not properly vetted, so the campaign suffered.

2). When it comes to national political campaigns I think there is a 50/50 level of importance between career experience and popularity. If you don’t have any experience but are very popular you can do well at first, but then you will get yourself into trouble like Sarah Palin did. If you have a lot of experience, but nobody likes you and you are not charismatic, like Hillary CLinton, then you will also have trouble winning the respect of the public.

3). This question could go both ways. Donald Trump is not highly knowledgeable on many issues and he has help from his staff and it works for him, but Sarah Palin was also not knowledgeable about issues and this did not work for her. If you are manipulative like Trump and you can twist any situation to favor you, then no, you don’t need to be highly knowledgeable, but for pretty much everybody else it is smart and necessary to be knowledgeable.

4). People saw how dumb Palin was so now Trump doesn’t seem as dumb relatively. People are tweaking though, both of them are idiots.

5). Yes, if your state has a more diverse population and deals with larger issues then you are more qualified. This is why a New York or California governor would be more qualified than an Alaska or Oklahoma governor.

6). Yes, people associated the fact that she didn’t know anything with the fact that she was a woman so they expected more from her. Because Reagan was a man, people expected he already knew things.

7). For their own campaign, yes. They should have instead put her on shows that would not have talked about politics, and ones that would talk more about american lifestyle like the today show or ellen.

8). I think Donald Trump has a higher level of knowledge in terms of business because he is a businessman, and I think Mike Pence has more knowledge in more law-based areas because he is a politician in Washington DC and he knows how the system works better. I don’t think it’s a fair comparison but I don’t exactly know why.

9). For holding a position in congress it’s more important to know policy, econ, etc. but for a public role such as the president I think it is also important to know contemporary issues.

10). Why did Palin look like a good candidate from the surface?

Palin looked like a good candidate from the surface because she could relate to the american people. She had many kids, a kid with down's syndrome, a kid in the military, and was a working mother. A more relatable candidate is a more attractive candidate.

Game Change: Reyanna James

1. Why is political vetting so important?

Game Change definitely showed the importance of political vetting. It is incredibly important that a campaign have all the information about a candidate prior to them running. If this is not the case, the campaign can be blindsided and unprepared to recover once this information is leaked to the public. If Sarah Palin had been more thoroughly vetted, perhaps she wouldn’t have been picked to be McCain’s running mate and his campaign wouldn’t have been so destroyed by her lack of knowledge.

2. What is more important: “career politicians” with lots of experience or popularity when it come to national political campaigns?

In my opinion, experience is more important than popularity when it comes to national politics. I believe that a President should be qualified and have a career of working in service to the nation. However, recent political campaigns have shown that popularity is more important to the American people. Take Barack Obama for example-- Clinton and McCain had much more experience in government than him, but his charisma and celebrity allowed him to win the presidency.

Game Change: Elliot Davis

1. Why is political vetting so important?

Political vetting is so important because it allows you to understand your candidate, beyond what is just at face value. For instance, Sarah Palin was supposedly the picture perfect vice president. She was a republican, a mother, a governor with astronomically good approval ratings; everything was flawless. However, they essentially appointed her as a figurehead, rather than a representative. This isn’t to say that they didn’t expect her to take part in policy decisions, but that they appointed her because she looked good. This ended up yielding horrendous consequences, as she basically went rogue and decided to pursue a campaign completely separate from McCain’s. Her radical ideas even forced McCain to denounce many of the things that she said, specifically the ad hominem attacks on Obama. This proves that, without proper vetting, candidates that seem promising often end up being bad choices. Without Palin in the equation, John McCain probably would’ve had a much better chance beating Obama, and maybe even would’ve pulled out with a victory.

2. Compare Sarah Palin’s level of knowledge to that of Mike Pence or Donald Trump...is it a fair comparison?

I believe that it is a very fair comparison, especially when talking about Donald Trump. Mike Pence is a terrible human being and his policy decisions are horrendous, but that shouldn’t be mixed up with intelligence. Pence is relatively smart, especially when compared to Trump. Trump, on the other hand, has had a rise very similar to Palin’s. Trump had almost no political experience, yet rose to the top of the ranks based on charisma and fear mongering. He didn’t need knowledge about politics because the audience he was appealing too had no knowledge about politics. This is similar to Palin, as she was appealing to those who were uneducated and fearful. The way that she gained supporters was by making illogical and unwarranted claims about Obama that generated terror among the general population. The only reason why Trump was successful and Palin wasn’t was because McCain had a very different audience in mind, and it was almost as if she was running against the candidate whom she represented. That is, Palin essentially attempted to take the presidency away from McCain by reconstructing policy positions, and this basically led the entire campaign to implode. 

Game Change- Zoe Lydon

Political vetting is extremely important while determining whether one is fit to run for office or not. It’s necessary for the sake of winning elections and for the sake of our country as whole. If people that are uneducated, unprepared, and not fit for office are elected to office, our government will not be properly run and our nation will suffer because of it. Political vetting is important for campaigns because if a party does not vet their nominee and the public exposes this, the party will most likely loose the campaign. This was shown when the McCain Campaign chose Sarah Palin to be Vice President without ensuring she is politically knowledgeable. She ended up contributing significantly to John McCain loss in the election. Political vetting is important to make sure the people we elect to office will do their job properly.

A POTUS or VPOTUS should not solely rely on staff for information because they were elected to provide opinions, guidance, and make decisions about political issues, and if they are uneducated on issues they can’t do that properly. It also extremely deceiving  to the public if a nominee pretends to well educated, when really only their staff is. It is morally wrong for someone unfit for office to pretend to be fit. To make logical decisions and represent our nation accurately the president must be able to answer questions and prove their knowledge about political and social issues. Currently our POTUS is unfit for office and should be more knowledgeable rather than rely on his staff.

Game Change- Ethan Hawker

4. The Republican party had high hopes for John McCain, as he was pretty moderate and a war, hero, so he was well liked. Sarah Palin ruined his campaign, and set him up for failure. After Obama won he initially had very positive reviews and the country was in support. Like with most presidents, as time went on he lost much of his support. After 8 years many people on both sides wanted change. Electing Clinton would have meant the same thing for the next 4 years. Good or bad, Donald Trump meant change. Trump promised to fix the problems many believe were created by Obama, (despite whether to not it was actually his fault.) To those who did not like Obama, any change was good change.

3. Although it is important to have a good staff that is well informed and able to prepare you, it is a politician’s job to be informed as well. Using your staff as a reason for not being educated on a matter is no excuse. If you plan on having one of the most important jobs in the country, you should be able to name a supreme court case, know about world conflicts, and understand how the economy works.

Game Change-- Lauren Davis

Question 1: Political vetting is really important because if your candidate doesn't know what they're talking about, they can put you and your campaign in the toilet. This person is also your successor if something goes wrong, so they need to be able to do everything that you can do. Vetting is also important because you need to make sure that you're compatible with the person you'll be working with. You need to be able to agree on certain things and balance each other out.

Question 5: I do think that some states are more qualified because there are some states that simply aren't as involved in foreign policy as others. Washington DC is way different than Montana because their issues are completely different. Someone who was the Governor of a place like Alaska or Wyoming doesn't have the experience, the relations, or the problems that states like New York, DC, Illinois, and California have,

Game Changer-Bronson Engel

1. Political vetting is very important because first of all you need specific requirements in order to run for a government official such as, being a U.S. citizens, living in your district for an x amount of years. All of these requirements are very important and without political vetting then the government would not be able to determine which candidates pass of all the requirements. Second of all we need to do a background check to determine that there are no criminal records against the candidate so we do not have a criminal running a part of the government. Third of all for example the head of education has never had any experience with public schools and therefore through vetting we were able to find that and we should have not let her become that because she is not experienced at all.

8. When comparing Sarah Palins level of knowledge with that of Donald Trump I believe that they are both intelligent people just like other politicians but how they carry themselves and there levels of finesse are lower than those of other politicians. Any other politician when asked a question that they are not educated about they ask themselves a different question that they know, they answer that then they look intelligent in front of the media. But Sarah Palin and Donald Trump when asked questions that they are not educated about they say whatever comes to their mind and therefore they look uneducated.

Game Change Miles Lynn

Miles Lynn

3/16/17

Ap Gov’t/Politics

Game Change

Why is political vetting so important?

• It is important to do because knowing who you are getting one you hire a candidate is crucial to your election. It is the same reasoning behind doing background checks for job, because people want to know what your history is. When you're running for office your life becomes an open book, and everyone is going to be looking into your past. No one would want someone with a checkered history, so they deny or expect based on the life you’ve lived. Without vetting, all types of people would become candidates for positions, who maybe, have a terrible past and no one would know, until it got uncovered by the media. It would look very bad for everyone in that campaign. That is way vetting is important.

#5

I agree that governors of some states are more “knowledgeable” or “qualified”, because, specifically with Alaska, someone from there is going to be very different for someone in the main 48 states. Different meaning, thinking wise, they are very far away from the mainstream of everything. So someone who lives here, and deals with the problems every day, to someone who lives far away from the area, and doesn’t deal with it much is going to seem less “qualified” or “knowledgeable”. Now I don’t think that means they shouldn’t be taken seriously, all I am saying is someone that lives in Alaska or Hawaii wouldn't necessarily be as qualified or knowledgeable.

Game Changer Ben Baker-Katz

9. It is very important for elected officials to know and understand history, economic policy,
international relations. However, that is not the world and country we live in. The campaign advisor in the movie said that he wished the country would "elect the next Jefferson or Lincoln, but it doesn't work like that." As is evidenced by Donald Trump, all that matters is being in touch popular culture and contemporary issues. Knowing and understanding the important issues is what should matter most, and what everyone should look for when they vote. But unfortunately, that is not the case anymore.

7. Absolutely!! The campaign should never have let her into an interview at all. They knew that she was clueless, but she could memorize speeches really well. If they had just had her do speeches all the time, everyone would have continued loving her the way they did at the beginning. If they had done this, they probably would have put up a much better fight against Obama.

Ethan Mitzen - Game Change Reflection

3. Does a POTUS or VPOTUS need to be highly knowledgeable about all issues associated with their offices or should they rely on the staffs to provide information to answer questions?

A POTUS or VPOTUS does not need to be highly knowledgeable in ALL areas, but they should be fairly knowledgeable in all areas and highly knowledgeable in several key areas, such as economics and international relations. For example, a POTUS or VPOTUS should have a basic idea of how health insurance works, but they do not need to be an expert in healthcare policy since advisors can fill the gaps of their knowledge. However, more pressing and immediate issues such as international relations require a higher amount of knowledge. If a POTUS is meeting with a world leader, they should have a pretty good understanding of how their actions will be viewed by that country and by other countries. Advisors can help with this knowledge, but without a solid basis of knowledge there is too large a possibility for unforced errors with immense consequences.

5. Do you think that governors of certain states are more “qualified” or “knowledgeable” about national politics and foreign policy than others? For example, does Sarah Palin’s career as governor of Alaska make her too far removed from the epicenter of national political activity to be taken seriously?

Yes, I think that governors (and other state/local level officials) are more qualified/knowledgeable about national politics/foreign policy than others. The mayor of South Bend or the governor of Kansas have less experience with the way that the majority of the population is. Governors of states with more urban centers (such as California, Illinois, Texas, and Pennsylvania) are more knowledgeable in national policy than governors of states with less urban centers (such as Missouri, Arkansas, Alaska, and Wyoming) because their constituents more closely represent that of the nation as a whole. As far as foreign policy, large industry centers (such as California) have more experience than agricultural states (such as Idaho) because officials from those states have more experience with trade policy. Border states (such as Texas, New York, and Minnesota) give their officials more experience with foreign policy than non-border states (such as Kansas, Tennessee, and Utah) because they feel the effects of other nation’s policies more. While officials from isolated states have less experience, they are not necessarily too far to be taken seriously. For example, Bernie Sanders is from a fairly irrelevant state but he is very knowledgeable in health and tax policy, among other areas. Contrarily, Bruce Rauner is the governor of Illinois, a relevant state, but he is not knowledgeable in any subject areas and therefore is irrelevant.