Game Change - Chloe Hain

1.Why is political vetting so important?

Political vetting is extremely important when looking for the right Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates, the candidates must be popular among the people as well as knowledgeable when it comes to current and relevant issues. Sarah Palin is a great example of a candidate who was very popular among the people as a person, but had relatively no political education whatsoever. Vetting can point out a candidate’s flaws before the fact of selecting them to officially run. It is really important to know that a politician is educated enough to actually be in charge of whatever they are running to become, if they do not have the skills or prerequisites to become President or Vice President, then they should be eliminated from the race. However, in some elections the social appearance is more important than the actual level of education that a candidate has. For example, Donald Trump seems to know little about what a President’s responsibilities are or how a democratic government functions, but because he had such a revolutionary campaign of change, he gained a large enough following to win the election.

3.Does a POTUS or a 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?

I think that Presidential or Vice Presidential candidates absolutely should have a strong education in governmental issues and have actual stances on policy matters. It is highly immature and unprofessional to rely on staff to tell you how to do your job. I think that it is definitely necessary to have staff brief you on information, but they should not be your only source of information like Sarah Palin’s staff were to her in the McCain-Palin 2008 campaign. In my opinion, if you actually have the drive to become POTUS or VPOTUS then chances are that you do have a knowledge of politics. The people with more education and experience are more qualified than those who run for office as a publicity stunt.

Game Change - Jacob Greifer

1. Political vetting is an extremely important process to do before deciding on a candidate, or in the case of Game Change, picking someone to run as your vice president. As shown through this movie, not knowing enough about someone you invest in can be very costly. John McCain and his campaign picked Sarah Palin because of her image. She was a mother of five, with one kid being a soldier and another having Down Syndrome. For this reason, they thought she could reach a certain demographic of Americans and help them win the campaign. With her being Alaska's Governor, they trusted her political knowledge that ended up not being there at all.  Because they failed to politically vet, their campaign was deeply hurt and was a big reason to why they lost to Obama.

2. In the perfect world, politicians would win campaigns based on their careers and experience rather than their popularity. However, as this year has shown, that is not the case. This year's presidential campaign is a great example that people care more about the appearance of the candidate rather than their actual success or qualifications. Hillary Clinton has years of experience in office. She was by far the more qualified candidate. However, her popularity dropped because of her emails, and that was really all that mattered. Another example of this was when Richard Nixon and John F. Kennedy ran for office. This was the first televised campaign, which greatly affected people's decisions. Kennedy had a much more appealing look to him, of someone that people would want to represent them and run their country. As important as political experience is, the fact of the matter is that people end up selecting the ones that give off a better charm.

Game Change- Tess Kihm

From watching "Game Change", it is clear that proper political vetting is vital to a successful presidential campaign. Sarah Palin may have looked like she was the perfect VP candidate, but in actuality, she had no idea what she was talking about when it came to issues of foreign policy and even issues on the home-front. Once it was clear that Palin was not clear on policy issues, McCain's campaign fell apart. The public could no longer could trust that Palin was ready to take on the vice-presidency, and it was clear that Obama and Biden had much more experience and knowledge.
When it comes to national political campaigns, I would like to think that career politicians with lots of experience would be valued over the candidate running solely on their ability to use their charisma and popularity to win over the American people. I think the best candidate would be a perfect combination of both aspects, charisma and experience. The president represents America and the American people, and needs to be able to be charismatic. They will have to tackle numerous speeches throughout their presidency, and be able to present themselves well to the rest of the world and world leaders. The most important thing a president needs to be though, is experienced. Their primary role is to make important decisions and create programs to better the country, and in order to do that, they need to be knowledgeable on the issues facing the nation. The biggest issue that Palin faced during her campaign, was her lack of experience. Her good acting skills could only take her so far, and once it was clear to the public that she did not understand major policy issues, they lost trust.

Game Change - Frances Hubbard

How did the McCain/Palin campaign of 2008 set up Donald Trump for success in 2016?
          The Sarah Palin and her selection as John McCain's running mate brought the chaos that allowed Donald Trump to be president in the 2016 election. Palin was uneducated -- in terms of major political issues and etiquette-- and unapologetic. She said whatever she wanted, whenever she wanted. The American people, specifically white blue collar Republicans, responded to this out of the box tactic. Donald Trump was similarly outspoken, unapologetic, and uneducated. The same voting base responded in the same way as Trump as it did to Palin, positively. Additionally, after Sarah Palin people have started to look for popularity and charisma instead of knowledge. For a lot of people Trump has charisma and popularity in the same ways Palin did.If the McCain/Palin ticket hadn't come before Trump there wouldn't have been such a strong desire for someone who "tells it like it is" and Trump's strategy wouldn't have been as effective. Palin started a thirst for a politician that was "real" and "out of the box" and Trump then fulfilled that desire.  She was the first with this rhetoric to be seen on a national political scale and opened the door for other outspoken, political novices like Trump to make their way into the government.


Should the McCain campaign have kept Sarah Palin away from the national and international media (Charlie Gibson, Katie Couric, Anderson Cooper)?
           Once the McCain campaign realized that Palin was uneducated in political matters and not ready to be seen on such a large scale they should have kept her way from the extremely high profile interviews. That is the logical decision but it would have hurt them just as much as it did to keep her in the spotlight. Palin brought a buzz to the campaign, and even though she was terrible in the high profile interviews she participated in she brought the campaign media attention. Neither decision by the campaign, put her in the media or keep her away, would have been the perfect decision. If she was kept away she could attend rallies where people loved her; if she was in the spotlight she brought press to the campaign and followed tradition. If she was kept away she risked been painted as noncommittal and she would have been questioned as a serious part of the ticket; if she was participated in major interviews she preformed terribly her legitimacy and knowledge would be under fire.

Game Change -- Kathryn Campbell

1. Why is political vetting so important?

I think political vetting is important because it not only makes sure that the person is safe and trustworthy, but also fit for the job. As we saw in Game Change the lack of sufficient vetting for Sarah Palin led to many surprises. When someone is in route to becoming a very powerful and influential person in the country, whether it be president, vice president, or any other political figure, it is necessary for there to be almost no secrets when it comes to their staff. In the case of Palin, she threw a huge curveball at the McCain campaign staff, when she proved that she did not know anything about politics. If the staff were to have known this before, they may not have chosen her as the vice president elect. Political vetting is so important because it provides the staff with more information, and if there are some weak points in a person’s history or opinions, they can prepare to handle them, instead of having them become a breaking news story that could ultimately prove problematic.

2. --
3. Does a POTUS or VPOTUS need to be highly knowledgeable about all issues associated with their offices or should they rely on their staffs to provide information to answer questions?

There are so many different offices and committees in the executive branch that knowing everything about each one is not necessary. I do believe, though, that a president and vice president must know the important information about each office, as well as current events and breakthroughs surrounding them. This is because the president and VP must be ready to answer questions all of the time, as well as know what is going on in the whitehouse. Sometimes the president will have to make a decision without having time to first be informed by the staff. Additionally, people will ask questions outside of planned interviews where there is no preparation, so the president and VP must be ready to answer such questions. Although I have been proven wrong by this year’s election, I believe that a president must be very bright and knowledgeable. This is not saying that they should know every little detail, but they are in charge of these offices, and are one of the most powerful people in the world, and they should know what they’re doing. Being knowledgeable and wanting to obtain more information on important subjects within the offices also shows that a president or vice president really cares about their job. If they only want the information when they need it to answer a question during an interview, then they are not passionate enough to be in such a high position.

Game Change blog - Daniel Frederick

Question 9: It is very important for any politician at the state or national level to be aware and knowledgeable of past and current historical, economic, or political events in both foreign and domestic affairs because our nation is intertwined in a global economy and is deeply involved in foreign conflicts, which means that said events can impact domestic policies. Politicians in the Federal government must especially be aware of current affairs because the bills and policy papers they either introduce or vote for relate to the global society. Holding political office requires one to have a knowledge of historical or political events, but it is also important to remain in touch with contemporary events and norms so that any policy properly addresses current issues.

Game Change Blog - Sofia Chaudruc

- Does a POTUS or a 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?

I believe a POTUS and VPOTUS must be highly knowledgable about all issues associated with their office because no matter how much the staff can prep out a candidate, there will always be obstacles thrown their way. Staff can help prep them out because that just means more people gathering research, facts, and statistics. But POTUS and VPOTUS have a lot of time on the air and being interviewed so they can't repeat the same facts, they must be well versed so they can seem brilliant. For example in the Katie Couric interview when Palin didn't have answers because she didn't prepare. Her staff could have prepped her out but Couric threw some curve balls so she must be ready to answer questions on the spot because citizens want an educated POTUS and VPOTUS. 

- Should the McCain campaign have kept Sarah Palin away from the national and international media (Charlie Gibson, Katie Couric, Anderson Cooper)?

I believe they should have eased her into the spotlight of the media slower, starting small then getting to the larger interviews. She didn't comprehend the importance of being prepared for national interviews because she crashed and burned in the Couric interview. This was because she came from the small Alaskan government and never had to think about public scrutiny of what she says. The McCain campaign should have started smaller and turned down the large interview offers at first because she was too unstable and uneducated to be participating in large scale interviews. Closer to the election, she became more comfortable and confident on TV and in the media so she should have done the Couric and Cooper interviews then so the public always viewed her as a stable candidate.