A Republican 'West Wing'?

[Australis]

I wasn't sure where to post this, so thought I'd try here, see how it plays.

Having just binge watched 'TWW', I was thinking again about why we've never seen the Republican take on the same idea.
It wouldn't be about a particular president, in the same way that Jed Bartlet has bits of Kennedy, Clinton and Carter in his character. So why not a series with the better bits of Reagan, both Bushes, even Nixon (who did good things)?
As a rabid leftie* I liked the more moderate view of America it presented, and on it some of the right were mad, and some reasonable. There were some interesting conservative characters, from Ainsley Hayes to Arnold Vinick. Right now IRL, Republicans look terribly, terribly... out of touch is the most charitable I can come up with.
My personal preference would be to see the US in Democrat hands for the next few decades, but a more realistic option would be to present Republican voters an option of what a true Republican presidency would look like.
Of course, some will come in and say "You're seeing a true Republican presidency" but I really don't think so. It often comes off as cruel, heartless, self-centred and greedy But just look back at some of the others over the last half century. And a positive representation would help voters see the kind of people they should be electing.
The storylines practically write themselves. NRA donations. Corporate 'sponsorship'. Lobbyists. Peer pressure. Public health. Quality of candidates. In some of them a conservative government would not look good... but options, real options, could be shown.
I know Hollywood leans left, but a lot of the money men are from the right, and there are actors, directors and producers also have right leanings. It could be made.
So I guess what I'm saying is, would there be a market for such a series in the US? I believe there would be, but I don't live there, and I'm genuinely curious. Thoughts?

*I live in Australia, which is already leftist, and I'm left of the centre, so yeah. I can still see the value in such a series.

 

[RJDiogenes]

While the idea of a program that gives Righties an example of the best that they can be-- nurturing is usually more effective than satire-- is a good one, I have a feeling that it would quickly devolve into propaganda, especially if Right-Wing creators were involved. Plus, you'd probably have to go back as far as Teddy Roosevelt to find a really positive Right-Wing role model.

 

[MacLeod]

I have my doubts that the show would be a success. But then again it all comes down to the execution.

 

[Guy Gardener]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[cultcross]

I would certainly be interested in a portrayal of a right wing American government on TV in an everyday sort of manner. Hollywood tend to lean toward Democrat fictional presidents, or at least ones where they are unspecified-but-clearly-progressive. A Republican is normally wheeled out when the President is required to be an antagonist. It would be interesting to see a production set in a moderate Republican White House, but it would require a bit of work to imagine in the present day - such a thing has not really existed in the digital age.

 

[The Nth Doctor]

Despite whatever may have been originally planned and depending on who you ask, I genuinely wanted the show to continue with a Vinick administration to see a Republican White House, even if Vinick was a more moderate Republican by 2006's standards (but especially now). Of course, that ship has sailed but I still think the idea has merit, perhaps even more so now with how loony the Republican Party has become (the kindest description that I can give them). The real question is are there enough smart writers in Hollywood who would give the Republican Party an honest shake?

 

[CorporalClegg]

They have that. It's on CBS, Sundays at 10 Eastern.

 

[The Nth Doctor]

They have that. It's on CBS, Sundays at 10 Eastern.

...NCIS: Los Angeles?

(I don't watch network television anymore and that's what came up on the CBS schedule)

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

I've heard talk that Vinick was originally supposed to win the election, but John Spencer's death put the kibosh on that because the writers didn't want Santos to lose both the election AND his running mate.

I honestly admit this surprised me, because I always assumed that it would be a foregone conclusion that Santos would win - given that TWW was a show written by, featuring, and starring Democrats. I mean, Vinick was a reasonable enough sort of person, but I never actually thought there was a chance of him winning.

 

[Snaploud]

I've heard talk that Vinick was originally supposed to win the election, but John Spencer's death put the kibosh on that because the writers didn't want Santos to lose both the election AND his running mate.

I honestly admit this surprised me, because I always assumed that it would be a foregone conclusion that Santos would win - given that TWW was a show written by, featuring, and starring Democrats. I mean, Vinick was a reasonable enough sort of person, but I never actually thought there was a chance of him winning.

Well, they did have that short-run spin-off (Mister Sterling) about an appointed Senator turning out to be an Independent. It would also give them a chance to play up the 'only Nixon could go to China' plotlines in which Vinnick makes proposals that go against Republican orthodoxy. I also assume he would have had a 'team of rivals' type atmosphere in which he could have Republicans and Democrats argue until they came to some compromises.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

It'd be interesting to see a right wing show with a truly balanced self-image and truly balanced image of the democratic party. I haven't met a lot of right wingers willing to look at themselves with a critical eye, but I'm assuming they exist.

If they can do this, showcase their positive aspects as well as address fair criticisms of themselves, while at the same time showing democrats as reasonable people who disagree with them as opposed to the classic Fox News portrayal of America-hating heathen snowflakes. Sure, I would watch it.

Though it'd have a weird juxtopposition with the current administration to have a show with a normal republican president. Would have worked very well during Bush or Obama. Although, now that I think about it more that could help rehabilitate the image of the republican party. Saying "No, THIS is what we are about."

 

[Guy Gardener]

A two faced account about how they have to justify working against good ideas to keep their thick, greedy or racist electorate happy.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

A two faced account about how they have to justify working against good ideas to keep their thick, greedy or racist electorate happy.

That is very reductionist, overgeneralizing and selectively vigilant.

I've personally had some very nice, rational, evidence-oriented discussions with people who are right wingers. That's what happens if you don't open the conversation with an insult.

 

[Guy Gardener]

You can have all sorts of rational conversations with people who want to electrify homosexuals until they re-access their orientation, until you start talking about gay rights.

There are lots of different shades of Republicanism, sure, but once you strip away all the scary shit, what you're left with is a libertarian, which is still a little bit shit.

 

[E-DUB]

Classic contemporary American conservatism (as exemplified by the likes of Barry Goldwater) is not without its virtues. But we're sure not seeing them with this crowd. And the rare bird who does exhibit them is vilified as a RINO.

 

[MacLeod]

Well from an outside perspective the GOP platform seems to be along these lines

Anti-Healthcare
Anti-Sensible Gun legislation
Tax cuts (esp. for the top 1%)
Anti-Environment
Anti-Climate Change
Favours corporations over workers
Increased Military Spending

That isn't too say all who support the GOP support all of those positions and even the ones they support they might be differences in levels of support from ok to this is a must priority.

 

[bigdaddy]

Your whole way of thinking is just wrong.

There aren't a democrat or republican party anymore, hasn't been in 40 years since the 'Supreme' Court made bribes legal. There is only one party, the corporate party.

 

[Australis]

You guys mostly get what I'm getting at, basically a Vinick White House. And then we see how they do it compared to a Democratic House.

Example: increased military spending vs increased health aid.
While I'd like to think there could be a debate around it, it could also be a sausage factory - everyone likes sausages, but no one likes to see how they're made. There could be a lot of petty, right-wing ideology to justify it, and the US public needs to see that too.

 

[Jedman67]

Well from an outside perspective the GOP platform seems to be along these lines

Anti-Healthcare
Anti-Sensible Gun legislation
Tax cuts (esp. for the top 1%)
Anti-Environment
Anti-Climate Change
Favours corporations over workers
Increased Military Spending

That isn't too say all who support the GOP support all of those positions and even the ones they support they might be differences in levels of support from ok to this is a must priority.

Unfortunately true.
The "real" conservative platform is:
Small government; efficient at doing what needs to be done but not overly bloated
Low taxes on the individual
Generally, more textualist-constitutional thought and policies.
Last, but most importantly, a willingness and desire to govern fairly and broadly.
- things like healthcare and food stamps shouldn't be major issues; the fact that Obamacare is really expensive (causation or correlation?) on most consumers, many who can hardly afford it, means that the GOP had an opportunity to dive into healthcare and find common ground to keep the benefits and find ways to reduce costs. Instead, they scrapped it.
For a very short time, the Tea Party seemed to embrace the above, until they went radical and off the deep end. The fact that todays congress seems intent on allowing lobbyists and corporate "campaign donors" to run the show is a sad testament to what our country has become.

 

[suarezguy]

I think Bartlett did have some elements of Reagan, he was mostly a mix of Kennedy and Reagan (and thus or because he was a lot like Clinton).

Most television and actors tend to like playing Republicans only as villains and conservatives (when they reveal their inclinations) seem to focus on doing religious rather than political shows. Gary Sinise, Kelsey Grammer or Patricia Heaton are the main Republicans I could think of who could dramatize their beliefs with conviction and charisma while also being fair to the other side.

Sorkin actually did make a rare, pretty sympathetic view of conservatives (working with moderate Democrats) in the based-on-a-true-story Charlie Wilson's War but for a whole series he would probably prefer to preach. But it could be very interesting for him or another writer to make a show about a female or racial minority Republican, why they chose that party, the conflicts they face and their struggles and successes.

Edit: Dick Wolf of Law & Order would be a great choice to create/supervise the show if he was willing to shift genres, L&O had a lot of good, thought-provoking, generally balanced political commentary and debate.