She was not THAT dumb - Game Change (2012) Discussion

[–] TStopprd 12 years ago

You would think! But watch this video when someone asked her about Paul Revenre's ride and she totally babbles some stupid answer about he was warning the British the American's were coming. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oS4C7bvHv2w

Yep she is THAT dumb.

reply

[–] michaeljn1980 12 years ago

Palin was right.
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/peter-roff/2011/06/06/sarah-palin-was-right-about-paul-revere

reply

[–] stilavictor 12 years ago

I read the whole article but didn't find anyplace in it where Palin's assertion that Revere was riding to warn the British was corroborated. Please point that out.

What I did see was a skillfully written editorial designed to validate Palin, but that never actually validates her, but just appears to.

"Palin recently said that Revere, as part of his famous ride, warned the British that they would have a fight on their hands if they tried to seize the caches of arms and ammunition that the colonists had hidden at places like Lexington and Concord.

I would ask this of the author of the commentary, but since you brought it up I'll ask you; Please provide something that actually confirms that Paul Revere was riding to warn the British.

reply

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] krisdl 11 years ago

Um isn't this what you mean

"Revere’s own record of that fateful night includes statements that buttress Palin’s argument that he, Revere, did warn the British that they were, by marching on Lexington and Concord, asking for trouble."

reply

[–] stilavictor 11 years ago

Revere’s own record of that fateful night...

This is the author saying that Paul Revere said he warned the British. But where exactly did Revere say this? Where is the actual quote from Revere's 'record'? Where is the footnote, or a link, or even a verifiable reference?

Someone obviously attempting to defend Palin wrote an article claiming that Revere warned the British, and Palin supporters jumped all over it. But where is the documented source of Revere's supposed admission?

Among other claims attempting to validate Palin, I've even read that Revere was captured by the British, and that he spilled his guts to them about the colonists' plans and warned them that "they'd have a fight on their hands", and so therefore Sarah Palin was correct!

There are so many pro Palin articles trying to defend her by declaring facts not in evidence, but I haven't seen one that actually provides proof.

Please let me know if you find one.

reply

[–] ProfessorFate 11 years ago

Here's the actual quote:

"He who warned uh, the British that they weren't gonna be takin' away our arms, uh by ringing those bells, and um, makin' sure as he's riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that we were going to be sure and we were going to be free, and we were going to be armed."

Paul Revere's ride was to warn the colonists that the British were coming. He did not ring any bells or fire any warning shots. It was to alert the colonists to come out and get ready to fight the British.

Revere's Ride was made famous in a poem by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, which itself was not totally accurate. For example, there were actually three riders who warned of the British landing, not just Revere.

The real point is that the facts of Revere's Ride are readily available in any decent elementary-level US history book, but Pailin didn't do the research and got up there are started rambling and got it wrong.

"Push the button, Max!"

reply

[–] priscilla-hopkins 11 years ago

What makes that worse is she had attended a presentation about Paul Revere THAT DAY and hadn't absorbed what she was told

reply

[–] Spacer1 11 years ago

LOL!

reply

[–] amnesia_vivace 7 years ago

Coming pretty late to the party, but Revere's own journal doesn't say "warn" specifically, but he was captured and questioned at one point in the night, and told them that there would be 500 colonials waiting for them when they came ashore. Not long thereafter, the first shots were fired, which he said seemed to alarm the British quite a bit, and they let him go not long after that, but without his horse.

reply

[–] Sober-Friend 9 years ago

She is a stupid woman. She is the leader of the morons

reply

[–] secondeye-387-711216 11 years ago

People criticize politicians for being idiots, but then they're the ones that place such a high value on off-the-cuff comments like "I can see Russia from my house." as being a determining factor for one's intelligence.

The people are the idiots that enable these horrible political decisions by not being smart, educated, or unbiased voters. It's a mega popularity contest. "He just SEEMS presidential!" "He's just a cool guy!" Those are the things I heard most from Obama supporters, and I'm sure Palin supporters weren't much more steadfast in their logic.

reply

[–] gumbs-519-211366 11 years ago

Well if you say "I can see Russia from my house." as a joke or something, I guess you are right; it is not a determining factor for one's intelligence.

Now, if you say it with that look in you eyes, like you can actually see the Russians!!! and even worse, calling them "Next-Door Neighbors" in another interview referring to that issue.... Come on, you gotta admit there's something wrong..

reply

[–] zaphod-53 11 years ago

People criticize politicians for being idiots, but then they're the ones that place such a high value on off-the-cuff comments like "I can see Russia from my house." as being a determining factor for one's intelligence.

What I find funny about that is that Sarah Palin never actually said that. That was Tina Fey.

The closest that Sarah Palin had come to that statement was a line to the effect of 'There are places in Alaska where you can see Russia.' That was it. She was not calling if foreign policy, either.

reply

[–] marjoriem 10 years ago

You are right, she never actually said you could see Russia "from her house."

She said Russia was just across the strait from Alaska, that you could see Russia from some places in Alaska, and that Alaska bordered on two foreign countries. That what the movie showed her saying, as a matter of fact. The movie did not at all misrepresent her in this.

It was in response to a question from Couric about whether she thought she was ready to be president in terms of her abilities in foreign affairs.

There was certainly an implication that this gave her some special expertise in forreign affairs.

Couric then asked her straight out to if as governor of Alaska she had ever herself engaged in any diplomacy with foreign countries. She gave a vague answer, "Oh yeah sure we had trade missions."

I don't think Palin is dumb. I think that, at least as of 2008, she was ignorant rather than stupid. And in the Couric interview she had not yet mastered the technique of turning the issue away from the question towards what she wanted to say -- which she showed so brilliantly in the debate with Biden.

reply

[–] marjoriem 10 years ago

You are right, she never actually said you could see Russia "from her house."

She said Russia was just across the strait from Alaska, that you could see Russia from some places in Alaska, and that Alaska bordered on two foreign countries. That what the movie showed her saying, as a matter of fact. The movie did not at all misrepresent her in this.

It was in response to a question from Couric about whether she thought she was ready to be president in terms of her abilities in foreign affairs.

There was certainly an implication that this gave her some special expertise in forreign affairs.

Couric then asked her straight out to if as governor of Alaska she had ever herself engaged in any diplomacy with foreign countries. She gave a vague answer, "Oh yeah sure we had trade missions."

I don't think Palin is dumb. I think that, at least as of 2008, she was ignorant rather than stupid. And in the Couric interview she had not yet mastered the technique of turning the issue away from the question towards what she wanted to say -- which she showed so brilliantly in the debate with Biden.

reply

[–] Amoebabadass 10 years ago

Hey I can't stand Palin either but to be fair she never said "I can see Russia from my house" she said "You can see Russia from Alaska".

Tina Fey doing an impression of Palin is where the from my house comment came from.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I'm doing God's work... because the bastard's too lazy to do it himself.

reply

[–] BoardBoss 10 years ago

Yes, and people still are stupid enough to say that Palin said that.

reply

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] AarOnHisBox 10 years ago

May I ask if so many of you stupid *beep* *beep* think you are so smart and are trying to quote Sarah Palin that you don't *beep* quote her correctly and put the word LAND in your *beep* quotes. She said you could see Russian LAND from Alaska.

No real difference except you idiots are putting your quotes in quotation marks, not referencing that you are paraphrasing and probably think you are half-intelligent even though just based on the conversation so far I cannot believe that any of you don't realize that Sarah Palin truly makes George W. Bush seem like a *beep* scholar and has to be one of the dumbest vice-presidential candidates in the last 50 years

And I don't hate her either. She seems like an adequate small town Alaskan mayor who definitely would have been brought up on charges had she have jumped ship as governor.

Get your facts straights you idiots. None of you are smart when you try to correct others and then make errors.

reply

[–] tedmccarron 9 years ago

No, AarOnHisBox, YOU'RE the idiot here! What charges would she have been brought up on? She did absolutely nothing wrong. In fact, earlier in her career she gave up a lucrative high-energy job to expose corruption in her own party. The Democrats at that time praised her as being an honest and brave Republican for that. But once she began her VP run the demonization began. They tried to find dirt and corruption in her but couldn't, so they played the faux stupidity card instead. While they bent over backwards to make her look dumb, they never criticized Obozo for dating that there were 57 states, that Europe was a country, or for pronouncing "corpsman" as "corpse-man" twice in one speech. There's definitely an agenda here.

reply

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Hollywoodwhore99 9 years ago

SHe was too.

reply

[–] grumpy_otter 12 years ago

There's no way she didn't know who the Axis powers were in WWII, every child in America grows up learning about that. That's fifth grade history for Christ's sake.

I teach college history. I offer a basic US History knowledge quiz for extra credit, and fewer than half pass it.

With questions like:

How many US senators are there?
Which ocean is on the east of the United States?
Who is the Vice President?

I think you'd be amazed. I have no problem believing Palin didn't know who the axis powers were.

reply

[–] samd51 12 years ago

Wow now I do agree fully with my left wing friends on that one: education is the most critical thing our nation needs and our number one problem. But I think as an elected official she had to be smarter than that. Comparing college students to a governor isn't really comparing apples to apples.

reply

[–] grumpy_otter 12 years ago

http://imgur.com/r/atheism/Uoua1

Being an elected official is no guarantee of being well-educated.

That whole "I can see Russia from my house" thing is a perfect example. She did not say that originally--it was John McCain's wife who said "She can see Russia from her house" as an endorsement of her foreign policy "expertise." But then Palin, instead of jokingly dismissing it as hyperbole, ran with it as though it made any kind of sense.

I do not think knowledge is Palin's strongest asset.

reply

[–] MdmBadenov 11 years ago

I don't know if you're talking about something else...I had not heard anything that Cindy McCain said about Sarah seeing Russia from her house. What Palin said, actually, was a person can actually see Russian land from a certain point of Alaskan soil, which is true. There's this one spot on the farthest most point of those islands off Alaska's coast where you can see some land mass that's on Russian soil...mountains or high hills. The fact that has nothing to do w/ qualifying someone who lives in Alaska for foreign policy experience, but the point remains Palin never said she could see Russia from her house. It was Tina Fey who said that on SNL in a skit w/ Amy Pohler. It was funny...I laughed. But it wasn't Palin who said that.

reply

[–] grumpy_otter 11 years ago

Yes, I recall Palin saying that. But the whole thing got started by Cindy McCain. Palin was asked about seeing Russia because of what mccain had said, and acted like it was a perfectly plausible claim to being an expert on Russian politics.

Your remark about Tina Fey was my basic point--the whole "I can see Russia from my house" thing was started by Cindy McCain. Palin never said those exact words--but she went along with it. She even made some ridiculous claim about Alaska being the first line of defense against Russia.

reply

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ChristmasStan 10 years ago

America loves morons

1) George W Bush
2) The Kardashians
3) Honey Boo-Boo
4) Jessica Simpson
5) Justin Bieber
6) Duck Dynasty
7) Kelly Ripa
8) Sarah Palin

To name a few

reply

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Mart-13 9 years ago

Justin Bieber is Canadian.

reply

[–] Hollywoodwhore99 9 years ago

I said "America loves Morons" not "Americans that are morons"

reply

[–] Hollywoodwhore99 9 years ago

I said "America loves Morons" not "Americans that are morons"

reply

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] cuchelo1 12 years ago

But I think as an elected official she had to be smarter than that.

Senator Sylvia Allen (R-AZ) said the Earth is 6,000 years old (while advocating mining for uranium- an element used in dating the Earth's age) and Congressman Paul Broun (R-GA) said Earth is about 9,000 years old and evolution is a lie straight from the 'pit of hell'. And he's a doctor, sitting on the House Science Committee, of which Representative Todd Akin (R-MO) is also a member. You might remember Akin's comments about 'legitimate rape'. Lest you think it's all Republican officials who are invalidating your claim, the aptly named former Congressman Anthony Weiner (D-NY) proves that no matter how many times people are caught with their pants down, nobody believes it will happen to him, and that's just plain stupid.

"Falling feels like flying... until you hit the ground."-Tom McRae

reply

[–] stilavictor 12 years ago

Wow, those shockingly stupid elected officials are truly scary cuchelo1! 'Legitimate rape', OMG!

Lucky for America that nobody that dim ever made it into the oval office either! (Except W. Bush)

reply

[–] Marlo9 11 years ago

" But I think as an elected official she had to be smarter than that. Comparing college students to a governor isn't really comparing apples to apples. "

You're disturbingly naive. Most elected officials imbeciles who are just smart enough to support the agendas of the corporatists who fund their campaigns.

reply

[–] afobisme 11 years ago

yes she is that dumb. apparently HBO interviewed mccain's campaign advisors and assistants before doing this movie.

never underestimate how dumb/ignorant people can be. that's one thing that i've learned in the past couple of years watching the GOP base. it does sound kind of crazy that she did not know who was responsible for for WTC terrorist attack though, but it doesn't surprise me that much.

reply

[–] blitzhard56 11 years ago

I teach college history. I offer a basic US History knowledge quiz for extra credit, and fewer than half pass it.

With questions like:

How many US senators are there?
Which ocean is on the east of the United States?
Who is the Vice President?

What does the second question have to do with history?

reply

[–] grumpy_otter 11 years ago

I took the questions straight from the pool of questions given on the US citizenship test. I just chose some of varying difficulty.

A basic knowledge of geography (what is the longest river in the US? is another question) can be helpful in understanding history. For example, understanding the western coastline and the lack of many natural harbors can help one understand the settlement patterns there. And the fight over Oregon territory.

reply

[–] babybates 11 years ago

I wouldn't be amazed at all. All anyone has to do is watch "Jaywalking" on the Leno show once in awhile. He asks similar (simple) questions (like "who is the Vice President") of college students all the time. At least half of the time they get it wrong or just laugh - like it's cute to be an idiot.

reply

[–] pleckbo 10 years ago

Hey grumpy_otter! I know you from the Jackie Brown board and am watching Game Change right now and came to check the board out, hit to respond to your response, and didn't even see that it was you until I started responding, lol

Anyway, yeah, I have no problem believing the ignorance of many Americans, some of them quite smart and quite knowledgeable about a few or even a great many things, but totally lacking in things we might think are essential. I have a good friend, total science gal and smart as all get out, but I often have to fill her in if things come up like major parts of U.S. history before 1990. Someone may think it unacceptable to not know Cornwallis surrendered at Yorktown, but it's better to fill them in than say something to the tune of 'wow, everyone knows *that,' which only serves to build higher walls.

reply

[–] clarence-8-848653 11 years ago

The worst of Palin quotes and video is being saved for a rainy day if ever she runs again. The thing is now that she won the lottery and got millions to do nothing she probably has time to keep up with current events and heaven forbid, read a book or two. I,m sure she'll never get stumped with those gatch'a questions like..."what are you reading". She had about a grade nine civics level understanding of the world. now she is probably much better. She is too proud to come clean with what she didn't know and that will sink her if ever she tried to run...Thank her God.

reply

[–] transmentalist 11 years ago

She was not shown to be "dumb"; she was shown to be "ignorant," in the sense of not knowing everything a VP candidate should know, and more importantly not knowing what she was supposed to know.

Look at how many posts on this very message board defend her by saying things like, "well I don't even know [blah blah] and I doubt most people know it." Not knowing those things is the norm.

To me, Palin, the real Palin, summed it up by telling Charlie Gibson how she accepted the VP candidacy "without blinking." She honestly thought it was a virtue to accept such a challenge "without blinking." I'd guess a good portion of posters on this board would agree with her, as would a good portion of the population at large.

The problem is this: she's wrong. You HAVE to "blink" before taking on a responsibility that large. You have to think about it and honestly evaluate your qualifications. If you're not up to snuff, you have to take steps to educate yourself and prepare properly.

reply

[–] grolaw 11 years ago

Ignorance is a state that might be able to be changed, given the nature of the ignorance and the circumstances. If one is ignorant of a neurosurgical procedure and one is a neurosurgeon then, given the circumstances one might be able to familiarize oneself with the procedure and then perform the procedure on a living patient. Contingencies are the nature and complexity of the unknown procedure and the window of time remaining before the living patient requires the surgery - and, that one is a properly trained and licensed neurosurgeon.

Ignorance of a neurosurgical procedure by an experienced neurosurgeon is entirely different than ignorance of a neurosurgical procedure by an experienced trash hauler.

Stupidity is the inability to discern the difference between the level of ignorance manifest in a trained neurosurgeon and an experienced trash hauler when contemplating the ability of either to familiarize themselves with the neurosurgical procedure.

Sarah Palin is unable to ascertain any limits to her ability to deal with her ignorance. That is the definition of stupidity. A person has to know their limits. Sarah steadfastly refuses to recognize her limits. QED: Sarah is THAT DUMB!

reply

[–] LosGanjales 11 years ago

'A person has to know their limits.' so true.. i think it's hard to describe palins character... i'm not a psych too, but i think she just has to much money, which makes her think that she is IT. there must have been a lot of cameras around her (in the past) which made her think she is popular and people acutally are interested in her. i'm not living in the usa, and i think no one in my country takes her serious, of course it's nice to hear from her every now and then, but who doesn't like a good laugh?!

but maybe it's just the whole family, everybody is helping her (with nice words..) and nobody is telling her how she appears to other people. maybe because they don't care, because they are really dumb or they just like the money that mommy gets...

so, i won't say she is dumb, i don't know her personally and i think if i would be on tv, there would be many people who think i'm dumb too..

i guess it's really about the people around her who encouraged her to the wrong moves, these are the real dumb people.

like the ones who made bush jr. president, he was a smart guy, yes a smart guy, who else had such a lazy ass job like him with all that benefits?!

reply

[–] transmentalist 11 years ago

I don't think Bush was remotely as dumb as he acted - he just learned early on that the Ivy League background wouldn't sit well with his base. Problem was, he'd been acting the part of a dumb hick so long that it stuck.

Palin acts the part of the beauty queen: all eyes on her, everyone around her an adoring fan. It's easy in that mindset to decide whatever you know is "good enough."

reply

[–] isiscloud 11 years ago

There is a difference between dumb - not smart - and ignorance, the willful neglect to become informed.

In many Republican circles, education, and showing that you've had education is considered elitist (as I'm trying to spell it). She went to a couple of community colleges, but never completed college. Neither did Steve Jobs, Jeff Bezos, nor Bill Gates, but that didn't stop them from pursuing knowledge.

I don't know if she's dumb, just wanted to appear dumb, but she certainly appeared ignorant, but it appealed to a huge section of the U.S. that still thinks education and getting an education is only for the rich, and have been told that knowing things is for "East/West-Coast Liberals." I guess William F. Buckley (East-Coast Conservative) didn't get the message.

It definitely showed that there wasn't real preparation for the debates beyond "zingers" and talking points, kind of like teaching to the test rather than actually thinking about the issues and understanding the problems that face people that don't fit her view of the U.S. outside of Alaska.

reply

[–] davidsmith666999 11 years ago

You took scenes too literally. It clearly states that some things had been dramatized.

Her being pointed out that Germany was the antagonist of WWI and II was a comedic and dramatized moment to show that she wasn't even close to being up to speed on foreign policy.

My personal favorite was when she had to be explained the difference between The Queen and Prime Minister. Was it a dramatization or reality? Lets hope dramatization.

I don't know exactly how ignorant she is (was) on history or foreign policy. But, as this movie pointed out (as well as yourself) she was not ready to be VP, and if McCain were elected, she'd have been a heart beat away from holding the highest office in this country. Look at how Obama has aged over the past four years. Throw that onto a 72 year old with health problems, and you have a 50/50 chance that she could have been President.

reply

[–] afobisme 11 years ago

i think sure, there are some things that were made up.. but for the most part, yes.. she is that dumb/ignorant.

the filmmakers were able to interview mccain's people, and probably not sarah's.. so it's probably a bit bias towards mccain and against sarah a bit.. but i think she was that ignorant.

reply

[–] MdmBadenov 11 years ago

For the record, the film was based on Steve Schmitt's book, "Game Change". Schmitt is the one played by Woody Harrelson. He simply told the story as he saw it, and he was front and center. The thing about the Queen of England vs. the prime minister was right out of Schmitt's book, so unless he made up everything, the Sarah Palin you saw in the movie is the real Palin. I think the person who said she's not dumb, but ignorant, hit it on the nose. I don't think she's dumb, although I doubt she's bright. I would guess she is of average intelligence, but poorly educated and too lazy intellectually to make herself learn much outside the immediate circle surrounding her. That's called willful ignorance and I would say that sums it up pretty good.

reply

[–] davidsmith666999 11 years ago

It's true, this is from Schmitt's POV. Now the Queen bit is even funnier. : )

It's common for ordinary citizens to feel that anyone in politics should know about world events. But, that's not true. A good case in point is Carolyn McCarthy whose husband was killed by the LIRR Shooter (many years ago). She's just a soccer mom (homemaker) who wanted to change gun laws. So, she ran for congress and won.

Sarah Palin would probably fall into that category. She saw things she wanted to change in Alaska and went about it in the best way she thought possible.

These two women (and most others in small time government) don't know much about world politics. They probably don't care unless it affects them or their constituency. Most of these people are happy with their roles. They really do just want to keep their home states safe and prosperous. While it seemed ridiculous that Palin knew nothing about foreign policy, I wasn't shocked. The main problem was, she just wasn't qualified, and neither she or anyone in the McCain campaign knew it. Which is actually pretty scary.

reply

[–] ldwaynethompson 11 years ago

Very simple answer to a simple question......yes, she is that dumb. ......and she continues to prove that point every day.

reply

[–] tonner4 11 years ago

I agree with your take on this. Especially congress-persons and even governors are primarily concerned with 'provincial' politics, not foreign policy. So it doesn't shock me either that she didn't know foreign policy.

But to not know Germany/Axis Powers in WWII? At that point, maybe you shouldn't be in politics in any capacity. Ordinary citizens may be stupid to think all politicians know foreign policy. But they should at least be afforded the expectation that politicians who have achieved governorship know rudimentary American history, especially that of the modern era.

McCain's campaign did know pretty quickly that Palin wasn't qualified. But they needed a rock star. That was the pivotal message. The American people need that or we don't pay attention.

At the end, the night before the election, the Rick Davis character says something like, 'Movie star charisma, that is what it takes to win elections now days. Obama's got it and Sarah Palin's got it".

Politicians are a reflection of us. It is scary that Palin wasn't qualified and that McCain's people knew it. What is even scarier is what that says about the American people.

reply

[–] Niv-1 11 years ago

The couric interview destroyed palin with all but the extreme narrow base of the republican party though! Obama was a rock star to independents and broad numbers of voters while Palin's extreme stupidity and ignorance disqualified her to most voters. McCain needed a rock star not just to 10 or 20% but 50 plus percent like Obama was. It Would have been right to remove her for her stupidity and then destroy her even to the base by revealing her nervous breakdown and catatonic stupors

reply

[–] ruttiger 11 years ago

Not Schmitt's book, John Heilemann and Mark Halperin's.

reply

[–] GuyOnTheLeft 11 years ago

Wrong. Game Change was written by Halperin and Heilemann, not Schmidt although he was extensively interviewed, along with many others, by the authors.

--------
See a list of my favourite films here: http://www.flickchart.com/slackerinc

reply

[–] pouncemo 11 years ago

Did we take things too literally? In something like this that was taken from a work of non-fiction I would think they'd have to be very careful about 'dramatizing' to any significant degree.

They may have made a disclaimer due to the fact that conversations could not be recalled verbatim. But the substance would certainly have to be accurate.

To portray that she did not know Germany's role and what the Axis powers were is an extremely serious accusation. In addition, this was not a passing reference. She wrote down this info on notecard. If it were just 'refresher' information, she would not have done that.

If memory serves, one of the advisors asked if she'd like to take a break and she said, 'No way, this is flippin awesome,' as if she was learning this for the first time.

And to digress, when the foreign policy advisors first arrive in Steve's office they tell him what they plan to cover with her, something fairly recent and complex. Steve informs them that they'd have to be starting with something a lot more basic.

So, they lingered on this point to a fair-thee-well. I don't think it was artistic license. I guess the only way to know for sure is to read the book.

reply

[–] Niv-1 11 years ago

Roach said on the Tavis Smiley show that she was not learning anything in the scene. Then Tavis Smiley laughed at him and said "COme on!" and Roach said no there is nothing in that scene that indicates she is learning. That was not about defending palin that was about preventing a lawsuit. Some Scenes are just vague enough so that it is not really clear. Even people on this site say that the scene of her in her robe on the floor in the fetal position is not her having a catatonic stupor but her taking a nap!! LOL!! But the scene where she is secretly observed by a doctor after everyone starts talking about catatonic stupors and nervous breakdowns is supposedly fine because the doctor who does the secret observation says she is "not half bad!" Obviously HBO has been doing these kinds of movies for decades and knows legal loopholes or libel. Like the fact that Strong and Roach said everything was confirmed by Wallace and Schmidt.

reply

[–] SALTER-pt 11 years ago

Not a million miles away, though.

Her political cache is her image, not her substance. She was the most dangerously stupid high-profile political figure of my lifetime, beyond question.

Heroin is probably one of the easiest [addictions to beat] - rjfme

reply

[–] alienature 11 years ago

Nancy Pelosi has a lengthier political career than Sarah Palin, yet has been caught saying some of the stupidest lines in modern political history, like, "We have to pass it to know what's in it," and, "Americans are losing 500 million jobs every month." I would put Palin on the same level as Pelosi, only Pelosi has done more damage.

To the original thread poster, though I have not seen this movie, I don't discount an agenda for this film. All 3 actors on the cover are die-hard liberals, and one of them has been in an interview saying how they loved to play the "bad guy."

reply

[–] stilavictor 11 years ago

I agree alienature that Pelosi has said some truly lame things. And thank goodness Sarah Palin has never gotten elected to govern anything other than a state with a population smaller than Rhode Island's.

...saying how they loved to play the "bad guy."

And all three have said how they like to play characters unlike themselves.

reply

[–] bettestreep2004 11 years ago

I've read the book and seen the movie and all I can say is 'Phew! Thank God McCain wasn't elected".

And I don't think Palin is that dumb either.

I believe the people who voted for her in Alaska and the people who selected her to be McCain's VP pick are the truly dumb ones.

Sadly she has not gone quietly away like Dubya has and there is enough material to make another film about her and her family.

reply

[–] GuyWhoSezThatsNotGood 11 years ago

I don't think she was dumb as much as she was ignorant and incurious. In some ways the movie showed her as pretty savvy.

reply

[–] ScreenwriterVA 11 years ago

She is ignorant, incurious, dumb and ambitious. A lethal combination. She's a former beauty queen who apparently "needs to be loved," as the character so plainly said at the end. Cunning, maybe, but spiteful and dumb as a box of rocks. So glad she's faded out of sight, at least for the time being.

reply

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Niv-1 11 years ago

THis is exactly what the movie shows and palin is supposed to come off the worst but these consultants and advisers to mccain are fine with it. She could have removed the ticket very easily and with controversy if they revealed it all as they dumped her from the ticket! But they were all fine with it and wallace and schmidt and others never even went to mccain with the info! Stayed working for her for VP! What about these people witnessing this stuff and doing nothing!

reply

[–] stilavictor 11 years ago

"What about these people witnessing this stuff and doing nothing!"

These were professionals who, after the debate obviously felt that Palin was on track.

After she broke her word and betrayed John McCain they probably felt differently.

reply

[–] Niv-1 11 years ago

The going to the new hampshire and not appearing with the pro choicers because she opposes campaigning with any pro choicer and not doing any ads that call for stem cell use and ignoring the mccain campaign was totally reason to drop her from the campaign and they could have made it public when they dropped her. The debate performance was not helpful to the mccain campaign. Huge margins said biden won and obama increased his lead in the polls. She was not back on track. Palin is never really on track in the movie. There is always something wrong with her.

reply

[–] stilavictor 11 years ago

"Huge margins said biden won and obama increased his lead in the polls. She was not back on track."

Biden did better in the debate than Palin did. But compared to her disastrous pre-debate interviews and her subsequent unprofessional behavior, Palin was definitely "back on track" by the debate, even though she didn't win.

reply

[–] In_Celluloid_We_Trust 11 years ago

I find it very damning that Nicolle Wallace, who was the senior advisor to Palin in the film, found Game Change convincing enough to make her "Squirm". As you might know you can find interviews with Wallace all over youtube giving her frank opinions on Palin and this is coming from someone who was right there at the front and, given her political career, is presumably a loyal Republican who found herself unable to vote.

There are certainly other politicians both Democrat and Republican who are as ignorant as Sarah Palin, but the most frightening thing and the reason she has garnered so much attention is that she came so close to potentially running the U.S simply because of her 'star power' if she'd had the intellectual capacity to back any kind of charisma up I don't think most would have a problem with her unless it was politically (obviously). Even though I'd still baulk at her sparkly type of "You betcha" personality anyway.

reply

[–] someofusarebrave 11 years ago

Plenty of individuals go through school not having learned that stuff, or not longer than necessary to pass the grade in question..this is the country filled with citizens who believed Saddam had weapons of mass destruction even after Bush 'n co. started backpedaling on the topic. I would not put much faith in the American public having even a cursory knowledge of U.S. history, yo.-

reply