I only just saw it this afternoon on tape. Why? Why do you think? Because I was out bowling last night.
Continued in the extended just in case others haven’t seen it.
It was pointed out to me that the folks on West Wing did exactly what I suggested in my column some months back: Have Bartlett be effectively incapacitated and, under the 25th Amendment, turn the reins of power over to someone else and watch the fireworks. But Sorkin and crew went far beyond anything I came up with. After all, I simply said it would be the VP. Sorkin–unable to ignore the right shift conservatism of the country since 9/11 that has threatened to make “West Wing” seem positively quaint, not to mention irrelevant, in its liberal leanings–introduces a powerful Republican character who, for starters, talks a lot like Bartlett. Y’notice that?
The set up that leaves for the following year is delicious. Zoe, I think we can safely assume, will be found. Why? Because if she dies, it’ll cast a pall over the series that will make it practically unwatchable. Once she’s found, Bartlett picks up the reins of presidency again. But he’s got no VP. But Goodman’s character of the Speaker of the House has no job. What to do? Well, it’s obvious, but sometimes obvious is just too good to pass up: Install this high-ranking Republican as the VP. Senate approval becomes a cakewalk, and the dynamics it would set up…I mean, wow.
The only thing about “West Wing” that angers me at the moment (and it’s nothing the producers did): I missed a bunch of episodes because of “Angel,” but I figured, hey, no problem, I’ll catch it in reruns. Uh uh. NBC isn’t going to be airing “West Wing” reruns. Instead they’ll be dropping in some new reality series. I’m furious.
PAD
• 
I know it has nothing to do with West Wing- but it was just anounced John Doe is not coming back next season. Another one bites the dust.
Also, Robert Blake just died. This has nothing to do with West Wing. I just thought I’d mention it.
Uh uh. NBC isn’t going to be airing “West Wing” reruns. Instead they’ll be dropping in some new reality series. I’m furious.
Well, there goes my summertime network viewing plans. I had let West Wing drop when Angel switched to Wednesday night, too. Oh well.
Matt
Also, Robert Blake just died.
Did you mean Robert Stack of “Untouchables” and “Unsolved Mysteries” fame? His obit is on the news right now.
Matt
I figure, now that West Wing is in reruns I can catch up on Angel, if only to figure out why everyone seemed to completely change character every time I tuned in since the last time. 🙂
I adore Goodman and have no doubt he’ll do a yeoman’s job beginning next season, but I have more than a little trepidation, based on Sorkin leaving, that the dialogue just won’t have the same snap to it. People are already starting to (surprise surprise) look only at the surface form and say “well, it’s just fast talking, that’s easily duplicable,” but it’s rapid-fire in large part BECAUSE it’s such intelligent, adult, complicated dialogue. And because, for all its speed, Sorkin knows where (and for how long) to put the pauses.
I don’t watch “West Wing” because I personally think it’s pure Democrat sophistry. And yep, seen ’em, a Republican that talks like a Democrat, John McCain or Lincoln Chaffey comes immeidately to mind. That said, PAD must be smoking something if he thinks either a Democrat majority or Republican Majority Senate would ever approve putting a member of the opposite party in the second most power position in the country. The VEEP position is always considered to be the “president-in-training” position. It’s just not going to happen.
Whoops. My error. Got my headlines confused. I meant Robert STACK above.
West Wing was, for my money, the best-written show on for the last few years. Not only did it take on controversial issues, but it also managed to show both sides of most issues, despire the rantings of the conspiracy obsessed right wing. Can we help it if the right answer is usually that favored by Democrats?
As a devoted West Wing fanatic, I have cherished these last few episodes. As comic book afficianados, we know all too well what happens when a new creative team takes over something from the original creator. Sometimes we get Neil Gaiman taking Miracleman to a new level, but all too often there is a distinct jumping of the shark.
I will watch West Wing next season, but I am fearful that this wonderful setup will be squandered by writers who do not understand why the show worked. For a great example, see this season’s “The Long Goodbye” which was not written by Sorkin. A sappy episode of television that didn’t look or sound remotely like the West Wing.
Having extras walking quickly in the background, moving the camera, and giving characters overlapping dialogue are merely conventions that Sorkin and Schlamme used to tell their stories. Without the great content, NBC may as well call this the New and Improved West Wing.
Yup, it will be that bad.
P.S.
PAD, I would be happy to dub copies of any episodes you may have missed.
I wonder if it’s a coincidence that two weeks ago, the show 24 had the President removed from office by using the 25th Amendment, and now THE WEST WING has its president use the same amendment.
I’m more upset that JOHN DOE hasn’t been renewed. Apart from being a show with a lot of potential, it had the best cliffhanger I’ve seen this season! Then again, Fox also failed to let the brilliant show PROFIT develop…
PAD wrote:
>NBC isn’t going to be airing “West Wing” reruns. Instead they’ll be dropping in some new reality series. I’m furious.<
Perhaps this is a good omen. Maybe, just maybe, they’re cutting down WW reruns to boost demand for a North American release of DVD collections?
Probably not, but I can dream.
Was anyone else alarmed at John Goodman’s breathing last night? “huhhhhhhh huhhhhhhhhh Relax, everyone. \\huhhhhhhh huhhhhhh\ Breathe regular.” I worry for the man’s health is all.
I didn’t recall Goodman listed in the credits, so when he showed up, it was a nice surprise.
For more great Sorkin writing, check out “Sports Night”, now on DVD, if you haven’t already.
Hey Peter i got this season on DVD if u need to catch up….drop me an email if you want a set
There are two shows I don’t miss: 24 and West Wing. Both have used the 25th Amendment. At least WW did it realistically. 🙂
WW has gone downhill over the years- most shows hit their stride around year two and can go another 1-2 years at most, and WW is no exception. I’m glad Sorkin is realizing this and turning it over to someone else.
I’m a Republican who leans Libertarian. Most of the time the WW leaning left doesn’t bother me. In fact, the only thing that’s ever really bothered me about the show is the glorification of the Executive Branch. Have you noticed that everyone (even the Republicans) who works in the White House does so on priciples, but 95% of the Congress (left or right – but mostly right) is always portrayed as political? People on both sides have their principles and serve because of them. Yes, politics come into play too, but just once on WW I’d like to see a principled Republican in Congress negotiating with the White House.
My wife and have been arguing over the Acting President was right when he “dismissed” Bartlett. I thought it was great. He had just made the point that someone had to establish who was in charge and he thrust it home with the “You’re dismissed, Mr. President”. My wife thought it was crass and rude. I suppose it was both. She just wanted someone to punch him…..
Bunch of notes: Congress does not need to okay the placement of Goodman as acting president. They would if he were being named actual (not acting) VP as listed in the 25th Amendment, but the part of the Amendment being used is not that part. Instead, what we’re seeing here is a mix of section 3 of the Amendment and the Presidential Succession Act of 1947, which makes the Speaker the next replacement on the list after the VP.
Didn’t notice Goodman in the credits; I suspect he wasn’t there. Did notice the actor behind my fave buffy villain, so I expected that a certain mayor would fill the role. (They actually used him in a small part, makin me wonder if they’re just setting him up for bigger things in the future.)
Happy to see Goodman, though. Always liked him, and he should do well in the role. I suspect he’ll end up being noble opposition, which could be fun.
But I really think that people who see a little parallel in what’s going on with 24 this year should really think about 24 Season 1 — the lead character’s daughter is kidnapped by grudge-holders looking to free prisoners. Next season could all be President Bartlett’s Worst Day!
I’d love to be the new guy they bring in to replace Sorkin. (Oh, and be Brad Pitt’s replacement in bed. About as likely.)
That said, PAD must be smoking something if he thinks either a Democrat majority or Republican Majority Senate would ever approve putting a member of the opposite party in the second most power position in the country. The VEEP position is always considered to be the “president-in-training” position. It’s just not going to happen.
I think PAD maybe on to something there, you have to remember that it is just a TV show and they can pretty much do what ever they want, regardless of what would happen in reality.
After all there was a show on for like 5 minutes on NBC this past winter called “Mr. Sterling” where “The scandal-free son of a former Governor of California is appointed to be Senator, whereupon it’s discovered he’s an independent.” And then the high jinks ensue.
My wife who I love and adore asked me to sit and watch this show, and when I realized what they were doing I blew my stack. Even she couldn’t believe that no one had bothered to check “Mr. Sterling’s” record to see what he was registered as. But if they think they can sell it they’ll air it.
SPB
“Did notice the actor behind my fave buffy villain, so I expected that a certain mayor would fill the role. (They actually used him in a small part, makin me wonder if they’re just setting him up for bigger things in the future.)”
Could be — he’s been a cabinet secretary before, presumably the same one. I think in a first-year ep he’s the one guy who doesn’t attend the State of the Union, just in case there’s an attack on the Capitol at that time. (Remember when that seemed overly cautious?)
Harry Groener was previously Secretary of Agriculture on West Wing, which is fairly far down the Presidential replacement hierarchy (scary fact of the 20th century; for a fair period when he was at least in his 80s, and I believe 90s, Strom Thurmond was #3 in line, right after the Speaker, in his role as Senate President Pro Tempore. Had he ever ended up in charge, I’d bet a 25th amendment Cabinet meeting would’ve been called almost immediately.
And Harry Groener already has a role for next season on another show. Ironically enough, it’s on a WB mid-season replacement show titled “The Mayor”. No, he’s not playing that role; it’s a comedy about an 18 year old who ends up as mayor of a small town via an incident that reminds me of how Prez Rickard’s political career started in the comics.
Question: wasn’t the 25th Amendment the one used to put Jack Ryan in the VP seat in a Tom Clancy novel whose name I can’t recall at the moment (the one before Executive Orders)?
Okay, so now King Ralph is President – cool.
I thought perhaps WW would have Zoe die, then Goodman’s character could put off letting Bartlett back into power, on the pretense that his emotions would cloud his judgement. – If that plotline makes any sense.
If John Goodman is President, does this mean that Rosanne is going to play the First Lady?
Y’all are missing one small point. The evidence is very strong that Sorkin is leaving “West Wing” on his power, assisted greatly by a big shove from NBC.
Frankly, I saw this coming two weeks ago when the VP resigned; my only mistake was figuring that the kidnapping would trigger a crippling MS attack. I do not hold great hopes for the next season, which is a shame; Da Wing caught my heart back in season 1 with the last ten minutes of “Let Bartlet be Bartlet”, and now it’s going to be run by the moron who manages ER.
Sorkin will be sorely missed.
JSM
I don’t understand why Bartlet stepped down.
Yeah, I heard the conversation on the stairs with Leo (“What if I forget [information]?”) But what does mean, exactly?
He can’t handle the stress because of the MS? Doesn’t that mean he had no business running for re-election?
He can’t handle the stress because it’s his daughter? Isn’t that his responsibility? And aren’t there any number of situations that could affect him “personally”? (For example, what if terrorists had taken over that school at which his father used to work?)
He can’t handle the stress because the MS/daughter combination is unique in the history of the presidency? [shrug]
Perhaps it’s just me, but I didn’t get it.
Reruns:
Cable TV and reality shows have changed the way programming works. Reruns — with the rare exceptions of powerhouses like “Friends” or “Will & Grace” — don’t do well and you can expect major preemptions.
I don’t mind so much, as long as they keep releasing shows on DVD (like “Angel” or “Sex and the City”) so soon after they originally aired (“24” had a very quick turnaround).
TV DVDs might actually help the video rental industry, as it doesn’t cost much to own a DVD of a new movie (especially with all the extras that take longer to watch than a couple of days). However, TV shows are often viewed as more “disposable” and the relative high price of a “complete season” makes renting them more attractive (as I’ve done with “Angel,” “Buffy,” and “X-Files” — I couldn’t afford them all on DVD and don’t really want to own all the episodes).
I know it has nothing to do with West Wing- but it was just anounced John Doe is not coming back next season. Another one bites the dust.
Of course not. They introduced people with psychic powers, firmly establishing the series as science fiction. The moment Fox realized they had science fiction on their hands, it had to go.
Why do you think Chris Carter spent years flatly stating “X-Files” wasn’t SF? If he’d ever said, “Yes, it’s science fiction,” it’d have been gone by the end of the first season.
PAD
I don’t watch “West Wing” because I personally think it’s pure Democrat sophistry. And yep, seen ’em, a Republican that talks like a Democrat, John McCain or Lincoln Chaffey comes immeidately to mind. That said, PAD must be smoking something if he thinks either a Democrat majority or Republican Majority Senate would ever approve putting a member of the opposite party in the second most power position in the country. The VEEP position is always considered to be the “president-in-training” position. It’s just not going to happen.
So you don’t watch “West Wing” and therefore can’t give an informed opinion about what might or might not happen on it…and you don’t know history, apparently, because you don’t know that there has indeed been at least one instance of a President and VP of different parties.
I didn’t say, “Look, a Republican who talks like a Democrat.” I said, “Look, a Republican character who talks a lot like Bartlett.” The last major Republican figure on the series (which you wouldn’t know about because, you know, you don’t watch it) had the intelligence of an artichoke. People complained that it was insulting to Bush because the character was so much like him…which is pretty funny when you think about it. Indeed, there have been no GOP figures in the series I can think of off hand (unless one was introduced during the eps I missed ’cause of “Angel”) who was really able to hold their own with Bartlett. Goodman’s character obviously can.
Now, ignoring the requisite ad hominem “smoking something” comment, the fact is that when John Adams, a Federalist, became president, Thomas Jefferson, a Republican, was vice president. This led to the 12th amendment which stated that a President and VP from two different parties could not be elected by the electoral college.
But that’s “elected.” If Bartlett wanted the Goodman character to be made VP, I don’t *think* that conflicts with the 12th amendment (and I’ll bet you that if the storyline goes that way, the 12th amendment will be brought up.) The world of politics in the “West Wing” can play out any way the producers want, and if the producers say that the GOP-majority congress is thrilled over the notion of their top guy being a heartbeat away from the presidency…which, frankly, I think they would be…then that’s what happens.
“Democratic sophistry.” Because, of course, any argument a Democrat makes by definition is sophistry. Sigh.
PAD
“That moron who runs ER” has been running West Wing from the start. And for all the good Sorkin has done, all the bad things about the show are also his doing.
Whatever happened to Mandy? Fell into a plot hole. Jorja Fox’s Secret Service character? Ainsly? How about Sam Seaborn? Where’s he? It was stated he wasn’t going to win the election, but he was going to come back as a major White House Council…so where is he?
How about the Republican Presidential canidate…he was written to be a bøøb when far better story choice would to actually make him Bartlett’s equal.
What happened to Corbin Bernson’s character? He was introduced as a major player, with Sorkin regular Felicity Huffman as his chief of staff…and then nothing….
Yes, Sorkin leaving might be a bad thing…but the show has hardly been all roses with him.
On another note, today is David Boreanaz, Pierce Brosnan, and Debra Winger’s birthday. That’s Angel, James Bond, and Wonder Girl. neat.
Indeed, there have been no GOP figures in the series I can think of off hand
There’s been one or two…Corbin Berson’s character looked like he could..but never showed up again, and in the first season around Let Bartlet be Bartlet, there was a leading Senator who favored campaign reform who, if not Republican was strongly conservative:
BARTLET
We agree on nothing, Max.
LOBELL
Yes, sir.
BARTLET
Education, guns, drugs, school prayer, gays, defense spending, taxes, you name it, we disagree.
LOBELL
You know why?
BARTLET
‘Cause I’m a lily-livered, bleeding-heart, liberal, egg head, communist.
LOBELL
Yes, sir. And I’m a gun-totin’, redneck son-of-a-bìŧçh.
BARTLET
Yes, you are.
LOBELL
We agree on that.
BARTLET
We also agree on campaign finance.
LOBELL
Yes, sir.
PAD, you’re right that Goodman’s character “talks like Bartlet” to the extent that he’s obviously educated. Sadly, he appears to lack any sense of humor or compassion which suggests to me that he’s not going to talk much like Bartlet in a lot of the ways that count.
I will be pleasantly surprised if he doesn’t come off as a complete áššhølë next season, because he’s certainly coming off like one so far.
A better man — even from a different party than the President — would have, as part of his World War I riff, complemented Bartlet for what he was doing; would have been gentler with Bartlet than “You’re relieved”.
We’ll see what happens.
I haven’t got many hopes for West Wing next season. Sorkin, with all his strengths and weaknesses, is so much the defining force of what the series does that I can’t see any writer or team of writers replacing him. The best it’ll be is just another “quality” TV show. The worst it’ll be is like “Buffy’s” last two years, a crippled clone of it’s former self coughing up blood but unable to die.
Actually, the 12th amendment doesn’t say anything about the President and Vice-President having to be of the same political party; in fact, it sets up a scenario where the reverse could happen (if no person gets a majority of Electoral votes for both President and Vice-President, the House decides the President and the Senate decides the Vice-President. If they’re controlled by different parties, well…)
What the 12th did was correct a situation where the President and VP were almost guaranteed to be in opposition, given the creation of political parties (which was not anticipated in the original Constitution; I’m not sure if parties are ever mentioned, even in the Amendments). Basically, originally the runner-up in the Presidential race got the VPship. The deciding incident was when Jefferson and Burr tied in 1800, tossing the result into the House even though the clear intent was for Jefferson to have been the President and Burr the Veep. The 12th changed it so there was a clear election for the VP slot, as well as for the Presidential slot.
The 25th Amendment covers both giving the Presdient the power to nominate a new Vice-President should that office become vacant, and what to do if the President becomes temporarily disabled. Interestingly, it only mentions the Vice-President with regards to the latter, with no reference to the rest of the chain of succession. There’s a minor Constitutional crisis in terms of the Speaker taking over in such a case unless the President acquises.
Also no mention that I see that the Speaker is no longer a member of the House…if a Speaker became the actual President, as opposed to Acting, yeah, he’d only have one, but there’s nothing in the Constitution about the situation where he’s only Acting President.
Sadly, he appears to lack any sense of humor or compassion which suggests to me that he’s not going to talk much like Bartlet in a lot of the ways that count.
To be fair, it really wasn’t the time for the humor or compassion (note he asked about Abbey when he first gets there). The capital is shut down, there’s been a number of terrorist actions in the past day or so (remembering the previous episode) huge enemy armies are on the move, the President’s daughter has been kidnapped and being held perhaps by terrorists (though I suspect Nancy is right–its less then it appears), there’s no VP, the President is stepping down temporarily…It’s not the time for banter or the ongoing debates of the staff.
He’s there to do a job and do it his way. He was called in because the President can’t make the decisions, so he’s laying down the law that he will be making them.
You will also note that in that scene, Bartlet greeted the Speaker with a gun control rant and then started to tell him to lay off the staff. Barlet was out of line and the Speaker put him in his place.
People who compare this to King Ralph are forgetting another role he did, one that came immediately to mind with his appearance and sent a chill up my spine. Anyone remember Huey Long, the Kingfish?
http://louisianahistory.ourfamily.com/kingfish.html
BTW, Scavenger, I do not blame Sorkin for the loss of those characters. In most cases they were committed to other series and couldn’t make it back. You cannot fill every continuity gap in a 46-minute show and tell a decent story as well.
As for the Republican candidate…I thought Sorkin wrote him quite accurately. He played “the common man” but behind that facade was someone entirely different, as you saw in the season finale. And while I realize it was just wishful thinking and sheer unrealistic melodrama…lord, I loved what Bartlet did to him in that debate.
Perhaps Wells was “running” the Wing, as you suggest, but you can’t tell me that Sorkin wasn’t running him up until now. Based on the previews and highlights I’ve seen for ER–what the hëll are ER doctors from Chicago doing in Africa, for heaven’s sake?–I don’t hold out much hope for next year.
If Josh and Donna end up in bed, I’ll know the show is dead.
JSM
So you don’t watch “West Wing” and therefore can’t give an informed opinion about what might or might not happen on it…and you don’t know history, apparently, because you don’t know that there has indeed been at least one instance of a President and VP of different parties.
I’ve seen enough of the show to know that it’s loosely based on what’s happening or happens in Washington TODAY, not two hundred years ago. That one instance, btw, was caused by a loophole in the Constitution that has since been addressed.
That said, you’re right, I don’t follow the stories on West Wing, so I don’t know why there’s no Vice President already in place. Don’t care really, otherwise I WOULD watch the show.
And, also Sorkin can have his characters do whatever he wants, including fly and have heat vision if he chooses. Which they’re more likely to get than to have two members of opposing parties in the Veep and Pres offices at the same time AND approved by both Houses of Congress in a “cakewalk”, let alone the Senate.
Especially with Bartlett being a lame duck president, ( I seem to recall him being re-elected) Sorkin would have to make you believe that no one in Bartlett’s party has any political ambition to become president what-so-ever, that they wouldn’t mind giving someone of an opposing party, a political advantage.
Talk about a “jumping the shark” moment.
what the hëll are ER doctors from Chicago doing in Africa, for heaven’s sake?
Lending their skills to any one of dozens of international medical and humanitarian organziations that regularly solicit trained doctors from nearly all fields of medicine–but especially emergency room doctors–to do precisely such work. I didn’t see the episode, but the practice is very, very common, and not just for doctors: a cousin of mine who is an EMT and physicians’ assistant spent a year working in Ghana as a trained medical volunteer, through a program set up by his own US hospital. “er” has had characters on the show doing work like this before, too: Benton went to an impoverished area of the rural South, Weaver’s spoken of her summer work overseas, etc.
Having said all that, I’m with you: I don’t have great hopes for the “er”ification of “West Wing”. Yes, yes–Wells has been involved in WW from day one, but all the press reports I’ve read suggest that he’d now like to bring the two shows closer together in tone given the opportunity presented by Sorkin’s departure.
Sorry for the double-post, but I couldn’t resist the schadenfreude:
I stopped watching Angel when they put it up against West Wing, so now I’m sitting pretty for a summer of reruns of what so many of you tell me is a much-improved show featuring the original Sunnydale Deadboy. Forgive the gloating….
….it is terrible what NBC’s doing with their programing choices, though.
PAD, I didn’t object to the fact that the Presidential candidate was supposed to resemble Bush. What I was annoyed by with that whole storyline was that it made it obvious how it would turn out. I didn’t want to see a “smart-vs-dumb” campaign. I wanted to see a “smart-vs-smart” campaign. I wanted to see Sorkin write a principled Republican debating a principled Democrat. That would have been so much better than the “Gee, crime, I don’t know” crap he gave us instead. Sorkin admitted that all he wanted to do was replay Gore-Bush in a way he would have preferred. Maybe that allowed him his fantasy, but it made for bad drama.
EClark, if you don’t watch the show, why are you posting about it?
“I’ve seen enough of the show to know that it’s loosely based on what’s happening or happens in Washington TODAY, not two hundred years ago.”
If there’s one thing we’ve learned from the last couple of years, it’s that you can’t predict how Washington will react to a potential Constitutional crisis.
Midway through 2000, I made a bet with a friend — and lost heavily, I might add — that if there was ever, ever another case where a candidate who lost the popular vote got the election via Electoral College, that there would immediately be a crapstorm that would inevitably lead to the revocation of the Electoral College.
Shows how much *I* knew. You can’t ever predict Washington.
EClark, if you don’t watch the show, why are you posting about it?
Because I can.
Seriously though, I’m not. I was posting on the possibility of a situation like the one PAD posited for the show actually occuring in reality. I know the writers can do as they wish with the characters. However since the show is supposed to be somewhat grounded in reality, my contention is/was that such a situation occurring on the show SHOULD be highly unlikely, and any events that occur on the show that would bring about such an unlikely situation would have to be so contrived as to amount to bad writing.
Of course, that’s just my opinion. Others may vary. Oh, and just because I said I don’t watch the show doesn’t mean that I haven’t seen it. That’s how I formed the opinion that I no longer wanted to watch it. Unfortunately, sometimes even “West Wing” is the most interesting thing on tv. So I still tune in from time to time for a few minutes.
I may be coming in late to this party, but just to toss my two cents in: I loved the West Wing season finale, in part because it was played so naturally, so inevitably.
There had been an amount of speculation that the climax would involve President Barlett being removed from power under the 25th Ammendment (sorta like what almost happened to Harrison Ford in Air Force One.) The fact that he removed himself was a far better bit of characterization, and a far more interesting development IMO.
As for speculation about next season’s events, the idea of John Goodman becoming the VPOTUS in interesting, but another scenario came to me, based on my reading of the 25th Amendment and extrapolating it into showbiz drama. Whaddaya think of this:
Bartlett resigned because he felt unable to discharge the duties of POTUS (presumably because of the emotional stress of his daughter’s kidnapping and perhaps that stress’s affects on his MS.) Barlett will reassume the role of POTUS when he transmits a letter declaring that his inability has passed.
So, my question is this: what happens if folks don’t accept his statement that his inability has passed? At that point, some body, presumably Congress, would have decide the issue of Bartlett’s inability or ability. That sort of constitutional coup-d’etat might just make for some interesting dramatic TV.
(Of course, like much dramatic TV, that scenario might not be strictly realistic. Barlett seems to have resigned under Section 3 of the 25th Ammendment; the language about rejecting the president’s declaration of passing inabiliy and subsequent Congressional hearings is in Section 4. But I defer to any constitutional scholars in the crowd…)
don’t understand why Bartlet stepped down.
I assumed Bartlett resigned to take himself out of the equation. He made it impossible for the terrorists who kidnapped Zoe to blackmail him.
Now the kidnappers have a hostage who means significantly less to the man in charge, though that doesn’t bode well for Zoe’s continued health.
Not read every single comment in this thread, but…anyone notice..?
Alan Dale obviously got a good agent. The man previouly best known in Britain for the role in Aussie soap *Neighbours* (and who turned up in X-Files not so long ago) is not only playing the President de facto in 24 but is one of Bartlett’s cabinet in West Wing (blink and you’ll miss).
Both characters helping to replace Presidents.
Hmmmmm. Co-incidence. Youuuuuuuu decide.
John M