What It Is

“Game Change” is an HBO film about Sarah Palin that was based on a book that was written by the dude that called President Obama a dick on national television:

YouTube Link => youtu.be/449FGJwDQRY

According to the interviews I’ve seen, the book is actually about both the Democrat and Republican races in 2008, but since they had to condense it to a 2-hour movie, they elected to focus on the Palin angle.

Also according to video footage I’ve seen, both Palin and John McCain have denounced the film, even though neither had seen it at the time of their interviews, but that makes sense if they weren’t personally consulted about the script and the potential authenticity (or not) of the book it was based on.

Why I Watched It

I don’t give a flying **** about politics. The only reason I’ve been paying attention to the 2012 Presidential race, and blogging about it, is because I was entirely amazed that the Republicans (in my non-politics-following estimation) threw up a “Hail Mary” and forfeited the 2008 Presidential campaign by selecting Sarah Palin to run as Vice President with John McCain.

As soon as Barack Obama was inaugurated as the 44th President of the United States of America, my quest in life became to figure out WHY the Republicans made that choice. That’s why I’ve been closely monitoring the 2012 nomination process, and I’ve been learning, but “Game Change”, fictional or not, gives me the insight I’ve been craving, as to how this could possibly have happened.

Initially, I felt like the 2008 election was going to be fascinating, yet typical. I thought the best thing that could possibly happen is that the Democrats were going to run Hillary Clinton and lose decisively in the general election, merely on the male vs. female President issue.

I had never in my life heard of Barack Obama as of February 09, 2007, when I posted the video “WHEN Hillary Is President” => http://billcammack.com/2007/02/09/reelsolidtv-episode-39-when-hillary-is-president/

YouTube Link => youtu.be/EZBf472OsnM

Eventually, I heard (probably because I walked by a television that was running somewhere, because I don’t watch the news) that a black guy was running, and he was actually a viable candidate this time, not just a symbolic “Non-whites can be President, too! :O” social token.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_American_candidates_for_President_of_the_United_States

In 1888 Frederick Douglass was invited to speak at the Republican National Convention. Afterward during the roll call vote, he received one vote, so was nominally a candidate for the presidency. In those years, the candidates for the presidency and vice-presidency were chosen by state representatives voting at the nominating convention. Many decisions were made by negotiations of state and party leaders “behind closed doors.” Douglass was not a serious candidate in contemporary terms.

In 1972, Shirley Chisholm was the first African-American major party candidate for president. She was a candidate for the Democratic Party nomination and participated in the Democratic primaries in numerous states.[1] She campaigned in 12 states and won 28 delegates.[2] In 1984 and 1988, Jesse Jackson was the first major party black candidate to run nationwide primary campaigns. He also ran as a Democratic Party candidate.[3]

In 1992 Alan Keyes was the first African-American candidate to run in the Republican presidential primaries.[citation needed] Keyes ran again, unsuccessfully, in 1996, 2000, and 2008. In 2004, Carol Moseley Braun and Al Sharpton ran as unsuccessful candidates in the Democratic primaries. “Tea Party” Republican Herman Cain has announced his candidacy for the presidency in 2012, though he has since suspended his campaign.

So I was fascinated by this concept and wanted to know how the American people were going to respond to a real candidate, as opposed to one of these “Run, Jesse, Run! :D” situations that was immensely historically significant while simultaneously logically ridiculous => en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesse_Jackson#1984_presidential_campaign.

I was totally like “It’s possible… It’s possible…. It’s possible…..” until I heard the Republicans selected Palin, at which point I immediately said to myself “Barack Obama is going to be President! :D” HAHAHAHA I mean, I had no doubt in my mind that the race was over when I heard about Palin.

President Palin

The reason I knew it was over was because the Republicans shifted the focus from disinterest in McCain to VIRULENT opposition to “President Palin”.

I see, from “Game Change”, why they selected her, and it may have been the best thing they could have done to try to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat, but to someone like myself, who doesn’t care about politics at all, this became the entire focus:

“This dude McCain doesn’t look all that healthy. If he croaks in office, we will have unwittingly elected Sarah Palin President of the United States of America.”

That concept, Palin being the actual President, was enough to get *ANYBODY* off their asses and to the polls to prevent that.

Once I found out about that, I was like “people are going to vote like crazy *AGAINST* the Republican ticket, even if they weren’t already going to vote *FOR* the Democrats”.

This all happened immediately for me. There was no doubt in my mind AT ALL that the Republicans were extremely desperate and the race was over as soon as they announced Palin… This was *BEFORE* we found out all the extra stuff about her in the upcoming weeks.

It’s like when you’re going to select a team for sports. First, you want to pick a good quarterback. If you can’t throw the ball and you can’t scramble, you’re probably going to lose. SECOND.. You have to pick a good wide receiver. If the WR can’t get open, there’s nobody for the QB to throw to, and you still lose.

When Obama picked Biden, that was the 1-2 punch. I was like “McCain is going to have to pick a GOOD Vice President in order to..” then they announced Palin, and I was like “It’s over! :D”

I think one of the major miscalculations the Republicans made was thinking that all females are similar. They aren’t.

Just because lots of people were ready to support Hillary Clinton, that doesn’t mean you can pick any woman out of a hat and run her one 72-year-old’s heartbeat away from being President.

Anyway.. I wanted to give my personal background for watching “Game Change”.. In fact, if I had known they were making this movie, I could have saved myself the last six months of misery, watching the Republican nomination tomfoolery, trying to get a clue about how a Palin selection was even possible, *AND* whether the Republicans had any better selections, four years later…

Game Change

This film wasn’t created by asking Palin or McCain what actually happened, but the filmmakers claim that they researched the situations with a lot of people that were there and witnessed it, such as Nicolle Wallace, one of Sarah Palin’s top advisers, who was featured prominently in the film, and who said that “Game Change” was true enough to make her squirm.

That doesn’t make the movie authentic, but it’s different from just speculating about what someone was thinking. You have people that stood there and listened to her say what she said and watched her do what she did.

I wanted to say that up front, because this is a theatrical presentation, which shouldn’t be taken as “word is bond”, but more like an approximation of what probably happened behind the scenes.

YouTube Link => youtu.be/IPhh7mch5zo

I think the first important point is that they selected Ed Harris to play John McCain.

Ed Harris is a *BRILLIANT* actor. He plays people that you’re supposed to hate, but you root for them anyway, such as the super-evil badguy expert sniper in “Enemy At The Gates”. He picks somebody off, and you’re like “OOH!.. NICE SHOT! :D” instead of “DAMN HIM!!! :(”

Also, Ed Harris is currently in good shape. In 2008, John McCain was not. One thing that was missing from the film was the horrific concept that I mentioned above, which was “What if McCain keels over?”.. Pretty much, you feel in the movie that if McCain would have won, Palin would never have become PotUS (which history shows us at this point is true, because John McCain is currently still alive). That’s one of the feelings that I missed from the presentation. It didn’t detract from my enjoyment of the film, but I noticed that it felt different while I was rooting for Ed Harris to become President, even though I already knew the ending to the story.

Julianne Moore was *FANTASTIC* as Palin. Seriously. Excellent job, from the look to the facial expressions to the speech patterns to the accent. Great! :D

The only thing that broke my immersion of “Moore = Palin” is that they have slightly different body types, with Palin having more bounce to the ounce.

I’m not going to be able to explain to the ladies reading this what difference that makes, but it definitely makes a “That’s not actually Palin” difference. >:D

The other thing that broke my immersion (although I’m sure this was a deliberate scripting and acting decision and not a deficiency), is that when I’m listening to Palin speak, the real one, I can tell that she’s deliberately stacking up comments that bolster the point she’s trying to make, or the opinion she wants people listening to her to have, whether her statements are true or not.

I didn’t get that from Moore’s performance. She didn’t deliver that “I drank Jim Jones’ Flavor Aid” look that you can see ‘behind’ people’s eyes when they’re not honestly interacting with you, but they’re deliberately trying to influence you and they know it.

For the ladies out there, that’s the look you see when you already drove by your man’s car at the strip joint parking lot and then, when he gets home, he tries to sell you that he was working late tonight. It’s a look that’s derived from thinking in the background while you serve your agenda to people. It’s like they’re not really there, but following a script.

Anyway, I didn’t get that from Moore’s performance, which caused the Palin character to be way more endearing. “Game Change” was more of a “fish out of water” story than a “deliberate manipulation of the uneducated masses” story.

Woody Harrelson was really good as well. Really good. :) The only thing that broke my immersion with his performance is that I’ve seen that guy Steve Schmidt that he was playing on television a bunch of times, and Woody would have had to put on a BUNCH more pounds to physically resemble that guy, other than the baldie haircut, which was accurate.

Out of the three main actors, the one that skewed the story for me the most was Ed Harris, because he didn’t look anywhere near 72 years old, and he didn’t look like he was about to keel over any second.

Part of the whole problem in the actual 2008 campaign was that nobody was sure that McCain was going to live through his entire term, meaning that a vote for him was an inadvertent vote for Palin as President, which would have meant that *SHE* could have been the one in charge of our current foreign affairs situation.

YouTube Link => youtu.be/28z5aTiN4UI

So, in “Game Change”, I wasn’t concerned about Harris’ health, so I was able to relax and not feel paranoid about what could have happened if the Republicans had won. That was decidedly *NOT* the case during the real election.

Also, the way Moore portrayed her character, she made Palin seem like way less of a loose cannon than she appeared to be during the incessant “liberal media” coverage of her statements, decisions, and actions during the real election.

This combination allowed me to actually root for McCain and Palin to be elected while I was watching the film. :)

I knew the entire time that Jude Law was going to vanquish Ed Harris in “Enemy At The Gates”, but I was still rooting for Ed when Jude had already gotten the drop on him. There’s an integrity that Harris beings to his characters, where regardless of what you think about them as people, you still have to respect them.

 
Continued in “Game Change” Review [Part 02 of 02]
–
Follow Bill via YouTube | Google+ | Facebook | Twitter | Email Subscription | RSS Feed

Related Posts

• What Is Your Jobs Plan? [Part 02]
• What Is Your Jobs Plan? [Part 01]
• The Current Republican Problem
• Republican Candidates Play To Stall, Not To Win
• Republican Race To The Bottom

My friends Kathryn Jones & Charlie Oliver put together this web-a-thon, and it’ll be streaming today between 1pm and 9pm EST! :D

Related Posts

• Are Women Funny?
• “Game Change” Review [Part 01 of 02]
• Republican GOP Presidential Candidate Debate 2011 [Part 01]
• Hey Ladies!!!
• Social Media in Action

People are all CRYING about the $150,000 (read: One Hundred and Fifty THOUSAND Dollars) that was reportedly spent by the Republican National Committee to update Sarah Palin’s wardrobe.

Well, it’s clear to The Kid that McCain knows what’s up and that he MUST be subscribed to DatingGenius! :D

Exactly four months ago, I wrote “How To Dress Your Girlfriend”. Had I known what was going on behind the scenes, I would have called it “How To Dress Your Running Mate”, and I would have been on the CNN / Charlie Rose circuit right now.

So, Fellaz… I’m going to let you in on what Presidential hopefuls already know. This is CRITICAL information if you hope to be respected by your male peers and climb social or business ladders! Write this down! Tape it to your refrigerator if you have to! Ready? Here it comes…….

Do.NOT.Let.Your.Girl.Look.Like.A.Bum.

This is INSANELY IMPORTANT, dudes. DO not let your girl look like a bum. Spend money on HER gear before you spend on your own. Do whatever you have to do to hook HER up before hooking up yourself. You need a haircut, and she needs a hairstyle?… SHE gets it. She put on that extra 5 pounds, and doesn’t fit in clothes that used to look HAWT on her?… Buy. Her. Some. More! :D Your social status is COMPLETELY dependent upon this. If a guy’s not doing well, the FIRST indicator is that his girl’s looks start to fall off. Don’t let this happen to YOU! :D

Now, McCain *could* have continued to let her dress like “whatever”. Click here for a gallery of Sarah Palin in her normal gear. This, however, would have been an egregious mishandling of Eye Candy.

It doesn’t matter how cute your girl was or that she was a cheerleader or beauty pageant contestant or newscaster back in the day. If you’re tryinna get in the club, it matters what your girl looks like RIGHT.NOW. :D “Cute” isn’t going to get you in the door. Your chick has to look BANGIN’! so that when you walk up with her, the doormen know you’re “bout-it bout-it” and the velvet rope slides to the side without you having to say ANYTHING to them. Guys can and WILL judge you by how your chick looks, so keep her up to par, even if you have to spend a hunnid-fitty Gs of the RNC’s money! :D

Now THAT’S Pimpin’! :D

Now, in this particular case, it was extra-important for McCain to shell out the ducats. In most cases, a chick’s entire job description when you go out in public is “Look Good”. Period. You normally don’t have to worry about her being actually involved in the conversation you’re having with your boys, much less someone interviewing her or her actually having to DEBATE anyone on public television. Under these special circumstances, you want the takeaway for people to be “DAMN, She looked GOOD, didn’t she? :D ” as opposed to actually paying attention to what she said. I mean, if you were going to go the “pay attention to what she said” route, you would have selected a more qualified and less attractive female from the giddyap, right? :D

Now… As I was discussing “How To Dress Your Girlfriend” with my friend Michelle’s friend Jennifer, she crinkled up her nose and goes “Why don’t you dress YOURSELF, *FIRST*?” hahahaha :D Now, this is a legitimate question. The answer is:

I don’t have to.

It’s not the guy’s job to look good. It’s the guy’s job to make sure HIS GIRL looks good. You think I’m kidding? Look around? How many guys do you see get out of Porches looking bummy? They know they don’t have to dress up, because chicks (of a certain calibre) are going to sweat their car. Look at the “couples” you see walking around town. How many times have you seen bummy dudes with chicks “dressed to the nines”? Uh-huh. It is NOT a guy’s JOB to look good.

Even if it was, guys in general have no particular shape. All you have to do to make a guy “look good” is put a suit on him that hides his pot belly. Done deal. *yawn*. So you’re not going to hear about a hunnid-fitty Gs spent on Obama’s gear or McCain’s gear. Dressing women is like touching up art. You can’t just throw *anything* on them, because you might be SUBTRACTING from their natural beauty instead of ADDING to it.

So this is why McCain did the right thing by hookin’ a sistahs wardrobe UP! :D First of all, McCain already HAS a suit…

So, you’re not going to be able to dress him up any more than that. Spend the “hook a brotha UP!” budget on the person you’d RATHER have people looking at… Sarah Palin.

Now… Let’s say they had gone the other route. Let’s say that the RNC spent a hunnid-fitty Gs on McCAIN’S GEAR and left Palin dressing “regular”:

That would have been an INCREDIBLE error, because you’re not going to make McCain look any better, regardless of how much money you spend. With Palin, however, the sky’s the limit! :D

People are already speculating about her career path in case Obama becomes the President of the United States of America. They’re thinking she could have her own talk show. They have all this celebrity stuff planned for her. This is because the RNC did what they had to do and upped the ducats to make her look PROPPAH for the cameras! Nice work! :D

So that’s the deal, fellaz… “As goes your girl… There goes your social life”. You can look as FLY as you want, show up to the club with a bummy chick and NOT get in. OTOH, you can spend those ducats, make sure your girl’s looking HAWT, and people will see you as a man of respect who handles his business and keeps his woman satisfied.

We’ll find out on November 4, 2008 whether it’s enough to get you elected PRESIDENT!!! :D

~Bill

DatingGenius Category: billcammack.com/category/datinggenius
Subscribe to DG!: feeds.feedburner.com/BillCammackDatingGenius

Related Posts

• How To Compliment A Woman
• No Romance Without Finance
• Bill’s Dating Tips For Women [Part 05]
• Ass Out, In The Garbage (Homegirl Epic Failure)
• Appreciate Your Girlfriend

Are women funny?

My sister Liz is funny, but that’s because she’s my sister and we share superior genes. Kim will catch you out there with a slew of punchlines if you get on her nerves, FRLZ, and I think Mel’s probably pretty mentally dangerous in a snap-fest, but, overall… are women FUNNY?

I know there are female comedians, and I’ve been laughing incessantly over how I can’t tell Tina Fey apart from Sarah Palin,

but… in general… are women funny? And if so… Is there “Male Humor” and “Female Humor”?

I’m thinking about this because I watched / listened to a panel of bigwigs in the internet comedy space yesterday. After they spoke, they had a Q&A session, and my homegirl Kathryn Jones got her hands on the mic…. RUH ROHHHH!!! :D

Kathryn Jones & Bill Cammack

So, basically, Kathryn asked “Where is the content BY women and the content FOR women?” and the answer was “um, uh, um, uh, um…” hahahahaha :D Kathryn’s been asking this question ever since I met her, so as soon as I saw her get the mic, I was like AWWWWW HERE WE GO!!!!! :D

The answers made sense, business-wise, and the thing to remember is that this internet stuff is business for them, not art or entertainment. If you do “art” and nobody watches it or buys ads on your content, you get fired. If you do business, and it’s the same business over and over, you get advertising dollars and you keep your job.

Basically, they said they have a demographic and they cater to it. Business 101. If the people watching your content is GUYS, then you make more content that GUYS would like so that they tell MORE GUYS to watch your videos and you grow your community and make more money.

Rocketboom had a study done a while back, which IIRC determined that a whopping 8% of their viewership was female. Of course, that has to do with Eye Candy, but that’s a different topic. The point is… well… the point, I guess, is a question… “If 92% of your viewership is male, why cater to females at all?” or, “Why not do things that affect 92% of your viewership instead of 8%?”. That’s how I was feeling during that silent period right after Kathryn asked her question and the panelists were mentally deciding who was going to address it. :)

One panelist even said that if they were going to do female-oriented content, they would have to make a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT SITE! :D This and other comments that escape me right now are what got me thinking about this topic. Is there a difference between “female humor” and “male humor”? Do women (in general) get stuff that’s “funny to women” and men get stuff that’s “funny to men”?

Assuming that’s the case… In this era of niche marketing, there’s no “space” for the combination of “male and female humor”. Doing stuff to attract women will “turn off” male viewers, taking away from “the bottom line”. The question becomes whether attempting to increase the low percentage of female viewers will decrease the number of male viewers to the point that it wasn’t worth it in the first place.

The moderator had the solution… technically… which was to bring in female content creators to make videos specifically geared towards a female audience. However, this fit EXACTLY into the other two theories, which were basically “We’re going to cater to what our demographic is” and “If we’re going to ‘add’ females, we need to make a completely different site”.

On a different topic, yet the same, in a way… I ran into the same issue with my DatingGenius blog. Being a guy, I can blog all day and all night about tricks and tips for “getting girls”. It’s easy to create content for males, because all guys want to know is how to get around the artificial obstacles women throw up which prevent / delay guys from getting laid. It’s not so easy for me to create content for women, because I have to reverse-engineer it. I think to myself “What would *I* do to them?” and then figure out their defense against me and write it. The only other way I get female-oriented material is through actual discussions with my myriad homegirls and selecting common issues that they have, like why guys catcall.

Thinking about this question in terms of my own content, it’s clear to me that if I gave a damn about having female-oriented content and I knew damned well that my mind didn’t generate this stuff on its own, I would need to bring in someone who understands “female comedy” to handle that part of my business for me. This is why it was funny to hear “um, uh, um…” when Kathryn brought up the same topic she always brings up :D , because you would think that if I’VE heard the question a million times, THEY would have heard the question a BILLION times and done something about it by now.

However… Being that internet video is about “the bottom line”, viewership, eyeballs, revenue sharing, CPM, CPC etc etc etc, women may just have to wait until they’re seen as a “market” worth throwing funds at…. haha Wait… I forgot something. :D

Assuming that it’s NOT the case that there’s “male humor” and “female humor”, there should be a crossover. You should be able to make comedy shows by females that males flock to (other than because they think she looks good and don’t give a damn what she’s saying anyway) and comedy shows by males that increase the female presence in your demographic surveys.

The whole idea may be self-fulfilling. We can’t get female numbers up higher than blah blah percent, so why bother catering to them? Meanwhile, not catering to them doesn’t increase your female viewership past those traditional percentages.

I have no idea and totally don’t care what my demos are for DatingGenius. I try to mix it up and have something for tha fellaz AND tha ladiez! Then again, DG isn’t a business. It’s something I do for kicks. If I were doing it for money, haha, I might be in the same boat with the panelists, saying essentially “Our statistics haven’t show that the sector you’re asking about is worth us wasting our production money on, due to lack of ROI”.

So maybe it doesn’t matter whether women are funny or not. Even if they WERE, they’re not going to see any light unless businesses can figure out ways to make money off of them. Seems to me like a void waiting to be filled by women that are willing to create their own content, encode, post, distribute and market it THEMSELVES and take advantage while the currently established sites get caught slippin’.

~Bill

Social Media Category: billcammack.com/category/social-media/
Subscribe to SM!: feeds.feedburner.com/BillCammackSocialMedia

Related Posts

• Men Buy Sex
• Boys’ Club of America
• He’s Lying To You [The Okey-Doke, Part 02]
• Why Women Have To Be Attractive And Men Don’t
• Top 10 Mistakes Girls Make When Trying To Get A Guy