...So Goes the Nation

Very entertaining. It's clever, lots of good personalities on camera, the editing is witty.

As a Democrat, a bitter pill to swallow.

While I appreciated the focus on campaign strategy, it was impossible for me to sit through this without thinking about the murkier questions surrounding this event. I left feeling that the filmmakers had to turn a blind eye to those questions in order to get the story they were after. I suspect it would be a deeper film if they had explored the chaos created by the surprises of the campaign.

line 10

When I went to see this movie, part of me was expecting an hour and a half of Bush bashing. That can be fun every once and again but what surprised me about this movie was the fact that it looked at both sides of the election. The Kerry/Edwards campaign was represented and so was the Bush/Cheney campaign. No one side was made out to look like it was perfect. Faults were shown on both sides and high points were shown on both sides.

As far as cinema goes, I thought this was a great film. When I left the theater, I was physically tired as a result of what I had just watched. The viewer gets so much information in this relatively short span of time. The film itself is well organized and well constructed, without too much bias (would it really be possible to have a film be completely without bias?).

Whatever your political stance, this is a film that can be appreciated for the questions it raises: questions about political strategy, specifically. Because it does not take a pro-Bush or pro-Kerry stance, it can appeal to everyone.

A documentary covering the 2004 election, and particularly focusing on the swing state Ohio, is probably something close to essential viewing for those who want to see the inner-workings of election-year politics on both sides and to see what makes both sides work and not work, sometimes at the same time or not at all. But the problem with So Goes the Nation is that it doesn't go far enough, it doesn't dig into items that are of crucial importance to understanding why 2004 was such a MAJOR misstep in one of the US's most important elections.

So much has been written and discussed about the scandal with the Diebold machines- those little voting machines that, by way of the man who supplied them (I forget the name, but the man basically promised to deliver Ohio to the republicans)- as well as Ken Blackwell, that it's given practically no notice at all. In the scant 90 minute running time the filmmakers dig into the nuts and bolts of why so many people ended up voting for Bush over Kerry, or why Kerry didn't get the kind of support he could've gotten. But there's so much corruption, as with Florida in 2000 (if not, at the time, as noticeable as what happened there, arguably), that leaving it out negates the fact that, despite whatever the republicans might get right in manipulating the right voters their way, also lie, cheat, steal, and disenfranchise voters (particularly minorities) where it suits them best.

But I digress; So Goes the Nation does work, at least, in its 90 minutes, on the terms of live-and-learn storytelling, and as a form of quasi-political analysis. It's actually a documentary republicans might like even more than the democrats (aside from the fact, of course, that Bush got the presidency for a second term, albeit the results afterward), as it clarifies the strengths that the republicans end up having if a) given the right opponent like Kerry, particularly for someone like Karl Rove, and b) the power to bring out the base of supporters in record numbers by playing up the fear angle. It goes without saying that the Kerry campaign, and Kerry perhaps, made mistakes along the way. But it's fascinating (and, for a democrat like myself, more than a little disillusioning) to see how emotional response in the voter, catch-phrases hold on more than things like, say, policy. We hear more than couple of times people comment on Bush's strategy, which was to try and obfuscate the fact that they were an administration that, domestically, was for the elite, and had a policy of continuous war overseas, and paint Bush as an everyman on the ranch. Everything starts with "yeah, he's this or that" and ends with "but..." when referring to a man who, as time has shown even to many republicans, is an emperor with no clothes.

But once again, I digress- this is the kind of response that So Goes the Nation might provoke out of the thinking viewer, on either side of the fence, about what it means to look at the past (RFK, Reagan, Bush 1 and Clinton all played the same politics games as these two and, in a way, were maybe better at it overall) when looking at the present. And as far as making it multi-faceted, the filmmakers do get some good footage and interviews with those who canvassed and led the charge in Ohio on each side to try and garner the votes for the candidates. There's a sense of frenzy that is captured, up to a point- albeit not showing nearly enough the number of lines and the full-blown reality (save for a startling mention of Dick Tracy/Mary Poppins voters registered all over the state)- that reminds one how it's not simply the politicians and campaigners that need to learn a thing or two about what to do, or what works, or what should be tried or utilized with the overwhelming power of the media, but about the democratic process itself.

The title itself suggests a duality- so goes the nation in general, a 'so-it-goes' thing, or so goes the nation with a question mark? Not at all a very good or complete look at one of the most warped dramas played out in American political history in recent memory, but it is a good film to show in the likes of schools or to perplexed protesters.

The movie fails to transcend the screen, and stays simply as a piece of film, a point in history.

The movie focuses on a group of people attempting to change the outcome of Ohio in the 2004 Presidential Election. The film presents, in the beginning, the views of exclusively democrats, but gradually things open up.

The movie's true fault lies in the fact the only take aways one has from the film are factual and concrete, no ideas to be applied to other situations. But in documenting the lives of these individuals during the 2004 race the movie succeeds.

So Goes the Nation is movie for the truly politically motivated or those interested in the 2004 Pres. Election. 7/10

The producers of this documentary are to be commended for their even- handed approach in covering the voting in Ohio during the 2004 presidential election. It is easy for either side in the process to hurl charges that the other side "smeared" their candidate (Kerry's activities after he returned from Vietnam did leave him vulnerable to the eventual Swift Boat attacks, regardless of whether one considers him a war hero) and Bush did serve honorably in the Air National Guard, despite charges he avoided the draft -- if he avoided the draft, how did he then manage to end up in a military unit?). Each side was guilty of hyperbole, inaccuracies, half lies, but -- unfortunately -- that's what passes for politics these days. The trick is to sort through all this muck and tell an accurate, balanced story presenting the point of view from both sides. That the producers were able to do this in recounting the emotionally charged election in Ohio is nothing less than remarkable. I use this video in my American government classes, precisely because it is a balanced look at the realities of 2004.