…So Goes the Nation
Film Muser Rating : 4 / 5
Release Date : October 4, 2006
Running Time : 90 minutes
Watch Trailer
In the 2004 United States presidential election, it was predicted that the way Ohio votes, so goes the nation. This film focuses on the campaign in Ohio leading up to, and including the election day from both the Kerry/Edwards and Bush/Cheney teams. We get a good look at the different approaches taken by the Democrats and the Republicans to get registered voters out to the polls, while trying to also sway the undecided camp to their respective sides in the swing state. The film speaks with key campaign strategists and voters giving a deep look into the successes and failures of their campaigns.
I didn’t know a lot about this movie before seeing it, and was pleasantly surprised that it was a bipartisan look at the 2004 U.S. presidential election. It was interesting to see the Democratic and Republican campaigns discuss the strategic approach to capture Ohio’s 20 electoral votes three years after the election. Looking back at the campaign, the Democrats discuss how their disorganized campaign in the state was bowled over by the highly coordinated Republican camp. You can see that the Democrats felt that they took the state for granted and threw away what many considered to be a sure thing.
This is definitely a film for anyone with an interest in U.S. politics. The film does an excellent job of showing how an extremely unpopular president could get re-elected by simply staying on course with his message, regardless of the amount of actual truth in that message. …So Goes the Nation‘s unbiased look at the election is a refreshing take on a subject that can so easily go down a path of preaching and partisanship. Even though the campaign in now history, it is worth seeing those involved reflect back on their decisions.
Memorable Scene
While the results are coming in during election night we are shown Evan Hutchison’s (Ohio’s VoteMob director) reaction as Ohio’s Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell announces that a large portion of ballots were going to be disqualified, a decision that likely played a key role in the election results. Being the co-chair of George W. Bush’s re-election committee, it clearly seemed to be a conflict of interest since he was responsible for counting votes and interpreting and implementing federal and state election laws.
I will check this movie out but I really have to take exception to any implication that the 2004 election was won due to an organized Republican campaign and a disorganized democratic party.
I am not saying this in any way as a defense of the democratic party and am sure that the movie is accurate in portraying that the republicans may have stuck to message better, encouraged registered voters, etc.
U.S. elections between only 2 parties which effectively share the same message are not won by ‘campaining to the people’. They are won by corporate fundraising, avoiding discussions of serious issues, encouraging voter apathy, and the list goes on.
Like I said haven’t seen it and my points may be on a tangent but based on your review I am concerned.
The movie doesn’t look at the legal problems with the election. It looks at the field campaigns in Ohio by both parties and the different approaches taken by them. The Democrats themselves speak of their disorganization in Ohio and how they didn’t have a common goal along party lines, as the Republicans did.
Understood. I am just trying to say that in the given state of U.S. democracy this has no impact on what you end up with a government.