2.00 | "I think the doc is more aimed at people who didn't learn anything in grade school and high school" "Children are dumb and don't know anything." "I got the feeling throughout that this was something that high school football coaches could show their history/government classes in lieu of actually teaching." |
Well, how was that first documentary? If all else fails, most of us can agree it is better than Only God Forgives.
Anyway, when I first heard of this, I could hardly wait to see it. It had nothing to do with Mo Rocca or that Indiana was involved in it. Rather, it had everything to do with the topic. The discussion of the Electoral College (E.C.) is important and interesting yet incredibly frustrating because adults know very little about it or what it does. With that being stated, Electoral Dysfunction did a fairly good job of illustrating its working.
I particularly liked how Rocca used an elementary class to simulate the workings of the E.C. That was creative, effective, and accurate. The result was convenient where most of the students picked one and the "electoral college" chose the winner, which was the other option. I say it was convenient because it illustrated what Rocca and the film wanted - the E.C. misrepresents the will of the people. Well, that is not entirely true. More on that later.
Another informational aspect of the film is the ease of someone becoming an elector. Like the film suggested, it is incredibly easy for anyone to become a state elector. The only thing that is required is party identification and paper work. That is all. If more people knew that, more people would want to be an elector, which could lead to faithless electors - people who claim to vote for a candidate but votes for the other guy.
Any time Indiana is mentioned in any kind of media, my initial reaction is to cringe. I am paranoid Hollywood or any independent filmmaker will poke fun of my beloved home state. When I saw Rocca going to Indiana, I feared for the worst. Honestly, I was pleasantly surprised. I was happy to see something meaningful from Indiana as opposed to Rocca pulling a Bill Maher in Religulous.
Now, Electoral Dysfunction is biased against the E.C., toward the popular vote, and against voter ID laws. Essentially, it chronicles the politicization of voting. Indiana is chosen not because it was a "swing state" in 2008 but because at the time it had stringent voter ID laws. Rocca wanted to see how the McCain/Palin and Obama/Biden people handled the situation. What Rocca found was exactly for what he looked; the right to vote turned to a political viewpoint. The issue of Mike Marshall highlights that.
I disagree with the film's thesis on the E.C. There have only been four instances in American history where the E.C. winner and the popular vote winner did not match up. That was in 1824, 1876, 1888, and 2000. Since 1824 - the first election where the popular vote was recorded - it had four hiccups. That is a stable system.
Also, the popular vote will not be as representative as Electoral Dysfunction claimed. It makes it sound like participation will skyrocket and will be pure. That is incorrect. The focus will no longer be on states but the most populated cities. Furthermore if people want less money in politics, the popular vote method is not the way to go. That method will make people more sick of politics than they are currently.
I will write more in my second round but all in all, Electoral Dysfunction was pretty good. It is not an "A" movie but a "B/B-" is fairly accurate. Grade: B-
Sara, what did you think?
Anyway, when I first heard of this, I could hardly wait to see it. It had nothing to do with Mo Rocca or that Indiana was involved in it. Rather, it had everything to do with the topic. The discussion of the Electoral College (E.C.) is important and interesting yet incredibly frustrating because adults know very little about it or what it does. With that being stated, Electoral Dysfunction did a fairly good job of illustrating its working.
I particularly liked how Rocca used an elementary class to simulate the workings of the E.C. That was creative, effective, and accurate. The result was convenient where most of the students picked one and the "electoral college" chose the winner, which was the other option. I say it was convenient because it illustrated what Rocca and the film wanted - the E.C. misrepresents the will of the people. Well, that is not entirely true. More on that later.
Another informational aspect of the film is the ease of someone becoming an elector. Like the film suggested, it is incredibly easy for anyone to become a state elector. The only thing that is required is party identification and paper work. That is all. If more people knew that, more people would want to be an elector, which could lead to faithless electors - people who claim to vote for a candidate but votes for the other guy.
Any time Indiana is mentioned in any kind of media, my initial reaction is to cringe. I am paranoid Hollywood or any independent filmmaker will poke fun of my beloved home state. When I saw Rocca going to Indiana, I feared for the worst. Honestly, I was pleasantly surprised. I was happy to see something meaningful from Indiana as opposed to Rocca pulling a Bill Maher in Religulous.
Now, Electoral Dysfunction is biased against the E.C., toward the popular vote, and against voter ID laws. Essentially, it chronicles the politicization of voting. Indiana is chosen not because it was a "swing state" in 2008 but because at the time it had stringent voter ID laws. Rocca wanted to see how the McCain/Palin and Obama/Biden people handled the situation. What Rocca found was exactly for what he looked; the right to vote turned to a political viewpoint. The issue of Mike Marshall highlights that.
I disagree with the film's thesis on the E.C. There have only been four instances in American history where the E.C. winner and the popular vote winner did not match up. That was in 1824, 1876, 1888, and 2000. Since 1824 - the first election where the popular vote was recorded - it had four hiccups. That is a stable system.
Also, the popular vote will not be as representative as Electoral Dysfunction claimed. It makes it sound like participation will skyrocket and will be pure. That is incorrect. The focus will no longer be on states but the most populated cities. Furthermore if people want less money in politics, the popular vote method is not the way to go. That method will make people more sick of politics than they are currently.
I will write more in my second round but all in all, Electoral Dysfunction was pretty good. It is not an "A" movie but a "B/B-" is fairly accurate. Grade: B-
Sara, what did you think?
RSS Feed