A Republican 'West Wing'?

[MacLeod]

I suspect you've cut to the heart of the matter and it's to do with validation as much as anything. For any Party to be portrayed showing its core and driving values you have to at the very least try and understand them. The trap would be for a production team to want to show failure in those. If there was a liberal bias in the creativity aspect it would be so difficult for that bias not to come through. I believe it takes a strength to overcome bias. You see it every day and interestingly in forums like this where words are expressed regards equality and fair hearing. Talking the talk and walking the walk do not necessarily follow each other. Much easier to generalise and create stereotypes.

Did anyone here watch JAG?? I recall it was supposed to have had a conservative leaning bias.

It's been a while since I watched JAG, but don't really recall too much of a bias either way.

 

[MacLeod]

You won't see the Republican party be portrayed as best as it can, because liberals don't see that as possible, and don't get conservative values at all. If you don't support a woman candidate, you're a misogynist. If you don't support a black candidate, you're a racist. The idea that actual politics have anything to do with the support is foreign to them. This is what they see when they see anyone who disagrees with them, and it's even worse among Hollywood writers. They cannot possibly pull off a Republican West Wing.

The only criteria for a candidate for any party is are they the best candidate they can field regardless of gender/ethnicity etc...

TWW was about an idealised Democratic Presidency and what measures his party wanted to introduce to make the country better for all of it's people. For discussion purposes what would a idealised Republic Presidency be like?

 

[Tenacity]

For discussion purposes what would a idealised Republic Presidency be like?

Probably surprisingly like the idealized Democratic presidency, except the agenda would be right of center instead of left. The running of the white house as a large office would be pretty much the same. The Republican white house would be pro-Israel (which the Bartlet white house was), pro-military (which the Bartlet white house was). There would be problems getting their own party to co-operate with them on legislation (Frequent problem for the Bartlet white house). Pro-school choice, the character of Charlie spoke out on his support for such an idea stemming for his wish as as a child to attend the school of his choice instead of the violent one he lived closest to.

The original TWW spent a lot of time on the lives of the characters, this would likely be the same with a Republican TWW.

Jeb Bartlet wasn't Bill Clinton, so the Republican president wouldn't be Donald Trump.

There would be more time spent on the subject of terrorism. Syria and North Korea would be have story lines. Pushing for more advantageous trade agreements. Story-line concerning one or more nominations to the Supreme Court. Sensible gun control vs hysteria.

If the original Democratic west wing were made today, I wonder if it could be as openly pro-Israel as the Bartlet's white house was?

It's been a while since I watched JAG, but don't really recall too much of a bias either way.

Binge watched the whole thing about four years ago, there was definitely a pro-military bias, pro justice, pro-America. For the most part the characters were politically neutral

The series commonly took place in government offices, and there frequently were pictures of President Clinton hanging respectfully on walls. Although the show did early on use the President for humor, the starring character (Harm) a one point faced possible changes for telling a sex joke involving the President at a party.

 

[Snaploud]

A reasonable center-right (or even out-right conservative) government could be interesting to watch on television, but, at this moment in time, you would have to make it a foreign government (such as the British Parliament), a far-flung future society, or a very, very different alternate reality. Current U.S. right-wing politics has gone too far off-the-rails for it to be otherwise.

 

[Tenacity]

Current U.S. right-wing politics has gone too far off-the-rails for it to be otherwise

Only from the perception of people on the left. For those on the right it's mostly a matter of what's being accomplished.

 

[Guy Gardener]

What is being accomplished by the Trump Administration?

Lower taxes?

Stronger military?

Woo...

...Hoo?

 

[Gaith]

Only from the perception of people on the left.

Yeah! Like the leftist who tweeted this a few days ago:

When the full extent of your venality, moral turpitude, and political corruption becomes known, you will take your rightful place as a disgraced demagogue in the dustbin of history. You may scapegoat Andy McCabe, but you will not destroy America...America will triumph over you.​

And that radical leftist was... Former CIA Director John Brennan (2013-7).

As the joke goes: it's not that you're properly following the signs, but a thousand cars are driving the wrong way on the freeway. It's you, buddy.

 

[suarezguy]

You won't see the Republican party be portrayed as best as it can, because liberals don't see that as possible, and don't get conservative values at all. If you don't support a woman candidate, you're a misogynist. If you don't support a black candidate, you're a racist. The idea that actual politics have anything to do with the support is foreign to them.

I would hope and I actually think that attitude has at least somewhat declined what with we having been through (white) woman candidate vs. black (male) candidate elections, both primary and general (and mot recently most of the more-liberal segments supporting male socialist Bernie over female centrist Hillary).

 

[suarezguy]

TWW was about an idealised Democratic Presidency and what measures his party wanted to introduce to make the country better for all of it's people. For discussion purposes what would a idealised Republic Presidency be like?

Probably want to cut taxes or reduce the deficit but not both, willing to use the military but not eager to do so (responding strongly after an actual attack, terrorist or otherwise), at least somewhat hostile to environmental regulations but for having alternatives to get to similar results (like cap and trade or possibly revenue-neutral carbon tax) rather than just eliminate the regulations and instead have nothing, able to get voluntary restraint in Hollywood about its content and compromises on school choice. Not sure that with health care it's easy to get compromises but still try to reduce its costs to make it more affordable rather than just have the government provide/pay for it.

 

[The Borgified Corpse]

@The Borgified Corpse are politics now so partisan there's no shifting them? Because it's only a matter of time before these ossified humans are given up on and forgotten, maybe even a new party rising up.

We will never be rid of extreme ideological differences in politics. That's probably a good thing. What's not so good is the 2 major parties having so much institutionalized power and putting more emphasis on staying in power and scoring points for their team than in actual legislative accomplishments. Show me a plan for genuinely undermining the 2 current parties and I'll be the first one to sign up for that. Our government would probably be more accurately representative if successful Independent candidates were the norm rather than the very rare exception.

President Trump is kind of an odd example in modern politics. He's far from a card-carrying Republican and has in fact been opposed by much of the established party leadership. But he was successful in grafting his cult of personality onto the existing party structure, leading to him being a successful candidate rather than the next Ross Perot.

For discussion purposes what would a idealized Republic Presidency be like?

Tough to say because the current Republican party consists of 3 different factions and generally only 2 of them can get along at any given time. You've got the Small-Government Conservatives who just want government to be smaller and less intrusive, the Business Conservatives who want whatever's best for business (so anti-regulation but pro-bailouts), and the Social Conservatives who want the government to promote "traditional values."

 

[arch101]

How about a show about a Libertarian President who has to make a coalition government work? THAT could be fertile ground for interesting stories.

 

[Australis]

A Libertarian President would have to be independent of either party, and the chance of ne getting in would be beyond remote.

 

[Refuge]

Only from the perception of people on the left. For those on the right it's mostly a matter of what's being accomplished.

The perception of people on the left is negative, negative, negative. I can't help but think a Republican or conservative bias in a show like the West Wing would be healthy. Mix things up a bit.

 

[ichab]

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.

There is a huge market for it but I doubt it would ever happen. Tim Allen's conservative show was yanked even though it had strong ratings and Roseanne's show has been criticized for having the audacity to show a Trump supporter in a positive light. If Hollywood has proven anything, it has shown that it cares more about pushing an agenda than it does doing what is good for business.