Aaron Sorkin: How I Would Script This Moment for Biden and the Democrats The Paley Center for Media just opened an exhibition celebrating the 25th anniversary of “The West Wing,” the NBC series I wrote from 1999 to 2003. Some of the show’s story points have become outdated in the last quarter-century (the first five minutes of the first episode depended entirely on the audience being unfamiliar with the acronym POTUS), while others turned out to be — well, not prescient, but sadly coincidental. Gunmen tried to shoot a character after an event with President Bartlet at the end of Season 1. And at the end of the second season, in an episode called “Two Cathedrals,” a serious illness that Bartlet had been concealing from the public had come to light, and the president, hobbled, faced the question of whether to run for re-election. “Yeah,” he said in the third season opener. “And I’m going to win.” Which is exactly what President Biden has been signaling since the day after his bad night. Because I needed the “West Wing” audience to find President Bartlet’s intransigence heroic, I didn’t really dramatize any downward pull that his illness was having on his re-election chances. And much more important, I didn’t dramatize any danger posed by Bartlet’s opponent winning. But what if the show had gone another way? What if, as a result of Bartlet revealing his illness, polling showed him losing to his likely opponent? And what if that opponent, rather than being simply unexceptional, had been a dump truck of ignorance and bad intentions? What if Bartlet’s opponent had been a dangerous imbecile with an observable psychiatric disorder who related to his supporters on a fourth-grade level and treated the law as something for suckers and poor people? And was a hero to white supremacists? We’d have had Bartlet drop out of the race and endorse whoever had the best chance of beating the guy. The problem in the real world is that there isn’t a Democrat who is polling significantly better than Mr. Biden. And quitting, as heroic as it may be in this case, doesn’t really put a lump in our throats. But there’s something the Democrats can do that would not just put a lump in people’s throats with its appeal to stop-Donald-Trump-at-all-costs unity, but with its originality and sense of sacrifice. So here’s my pitch to the writers’ room: The Democratic Party should pick a Republican. At their convention next month, the Democrats should nominate Mitt Romney. Nominating Mr. Romney would be putting our money where our mouth is: a clear and powerful demonstration that this election isn’t about what our elections are usually about it, but about stopping a deranged man from taking power. Surely Mr. Romney, who doesn’t have to be introduced to voters, would peel off enough Republican votes to win, probably by a lot. The double haters would be turned into single haters and the Nikki Haley voters would have somewhere to go, Ms. Haley having disqualified herself when she endorsed the leader of an unsuccessful attempt to overthrow the government. Does Mr. Romney support abortion rights? No. Does he want to aggressively raise the minimum wage, bolster public education, strengthen unions, expand transgender rights and enact progressive tax reform? Probably not. But is he a cartoon thug who did nothing but watch TV while the mob he assembled beat and used Tasers on police officers? No. The choice is between Donald Trump and not-Trump, and the not-Trump candidate needs only one qualification: to win enough votes from a cross section of Americans to close off the former president’s Electoral College path back to power. Part of the wish fulfillment of “The West Wing” was that oratory can be persuasive. So Barack Obama could come forth at the Democratic convention next month in Chicago and remind us, once again, that we’re not red states and blue states but the United States by full-throatedly endorsing his old rival. And Mr. Romney could make the case that the Democrats are putting country before party in ways that the MAGA movement will not, and announce his bipartisan cabinet picks at the convention as well. After the assassination attempt on Mr. Trump last Saturday, rallygoers pointed at reporters and shouted, “You’re next!” and Republicans in Congress and on television were blaming Mr. Biden and D.E.I. for the shooting, so it doesn’t look as if that terrible moment will serve as the healing event we’ve all been waiting for. But Democrats nominating a Republican could be. And when it loses the popular vote for the eighth time in nine presidential elections, the Republican Party can then rebuild itself back into a useful force for democracy. The writing staff would tell me I was about to jump the shark, that this is a “West Wing” fantasy that would never, ever happen. But as Bradley Whitford used to say, “Isn’t the biggest fantasy on television a mafia boss in therapy?” The Democrats need to break the glass and this is a break-glass plan, but it’s more than that. It’s a grand gesture. A sacrifice. It would put a lump in our throats. But mostly, it would be the end of Donald Trump in presidential politics.
帕利媒体中心刚举办了一场展览，庆祝我在1999至2003年期间创作的NBC剧集《白宫风云》开播25周年。这部剧中的一些情节在过去1/4个世纪里已经变得过时了（第一集的前五分钟完全要看观众是否不清楚POTUS这个缩写），但其余情节却变得——好吧，不能说有先见之明，但却不幸地产生了雷同。
在第一集结尾跟巴特勒总统参加了一个活动后，枪手想要射杀一位角色。在第二季结尾标题为“两座大教堂”的那一集中，巴特勒一直向公众隐瞒的病情曝光了，而这位步履蹒跚的总统要面对是否还寻求连任的问题。“当然要。”他在第三季开场中说道，“我会赢得选举的。”
这正是拜登总统自他经历的那个糟糕夜晚后的第二天起，一直在对外传递的信号。
因为我需要《白宫风云》的观众看到巴特勒总统不愿妥协的英雄壮举，我没有对他的病情会给他连任的机会产生怎样的负面影响去做任何夸大。更重要的是，我没有夸大巴特勒总统的对手取胜，会形成怎样的危害。
可万一这部剧朝着另一个走向进行，会发生什么呢？
万一，巴特勒总统透露病情的结果，是民调显示他要输给他的潜在对手呢？而万一那个对手不是一位普通的对手，而是一个充满无知跟恶意的垃圾车呢？万一巴特勒的对手是一个危险的弱智，有着明显的精神失常，跟自己的支持者像是小学四年级学生，把法律当做傻子跟可怜虫才在意的东西呢？要是还是白人至上主义者们的英雄呢？
我们会让巴特勒放弃竞选，支持最有可能击败那个家伙的人物。
现实世界中的问题就在于，没有一位民主党人的民调明显领先拜登先生。退选，在这种情况下可能是非常勇敢的举动，却并不会让我们有所触动。
但是民主党人可以做一件事，使人们深受触动，不光是因为它对于要不惜一切代价阻扰唐纳德·特朗普而团结一致的呼吁，也是因其另辟蹊径的思维跟自我牺牲感。因此，我在这里要给我的编剧室送上我的提案：民主党应该选择一名共和党人。
在下个月的党代会上，民主党人应该提名米特·罗姆尼。
提名罗姆尼先生，正是我们用实际行动去证明自己：清晰且有力地表明了这次选举不在于我们的选举通常应该要怎样，而在于阻止一个精神失常的人掌权。罗姆尼先生，这位不必再给选民做介绍的人物，无疑将赢得充分的共和党选票，会赢非常多选票。两派都不赞同的人将回到只反对其中一派，而妮基·海莉的支持者也有了出路，先前海莉女士因支持那位试图推翻政府失败的领导人而弃选了。
罗姆尼先生支持堕胎吗？不支持。他想提升最低工资，加强公共教育，强化工会，扩大跨性别权利，推进累进税改革吗？很可能也不会。然而他是那种什么都不做，就看着电视上自己召集的暴徒对警察进行殴打并使用泰瑟枪的漫画暴徒形象吗？不是。选择是在唐纳德·特朗普和非特朗普之间产生，而非特朗普候选人只需要一个资质：从各个阶层的美国人手中赢得足够多的选票，来封锁前总统的竞选团再次掌权的道路。
《白宫风云》的部分愿望，是让演说能够带来说服力。因此巴拉克·奥巴马可以在下个月于芝加哥举行的民主党大会上去支持他的老对手，再次提醒大家，我们并不是红州跟蓝州，而是美利坚合众国。罗姆尼先生可以证明，民主党人正在将国家利益置于政党利益之上，而这是“让美国再次伟大”运动不会做的，在大会上宣布他的两党内个人选。
在上周六特朗普先生遇刺后，集会者们冲着记者大喊：“你是下一个！”而国会以及电视上的共和党人都因枪击而拿拜登先生跟多元、平等和包容是问，因此那个糟糕的瞬间似乎并非我们一直等待的治愈事件。但是民主党提名共和党人可以带来治愈。而在它九次总统竞选中的第八次输掉普选时，共和党届时可以重建自我，化身为一股对民主有用的力量。
编剧团会告诉我说，我这是要烂尾了，这是一个永远不可能上演的《白宫风云》幻想。但正如布莱德利·惠特福德曾经说过的那样：“电视上最大的幻想不是一名黑手党老大在接受治疗吗？”民主党人需要破壁，而这是一个破壁计划，却又不止于此。这是一个了不起的姿态。是一次牺牲。能触动我们每个人。
但最重要的是，它将成为唐纳德·特朗普总统政治的结局。
但是现在是道貌岸然，各怀鬼胎啊。
可惜不可能了，有些人真是一旦错过就不再
贴一下英文原文： https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/21/opinion/biden-west-wing-aaron-sorkin.html
Aaron Sorkin: How I Would Script This Moment for Biden and the Democrats
The Paley Center for Media just opened an exhibition celebrating the 25th anniversary of “The West Wing,” the NBC series I wrote from 1999 to 2003. Some of the show’s story points have become outdated in the last quarter-century (the first five minutes of the first episode depended entirely on the audience being unfamiliar with the acronym POTUS), while others turned out to be — well, not prescient, but sadly coincidental.
Gunmen tried to shoot a character after an event with President Bartlet at the end of Season 1. And at the end of the second season, in an episode called “Two Cathedrals,” a serious illness that Bartlet had been concealing from the public had come to light, and the president, hobbled, faced the question of whether to run for re-election. “Yeah,” he said in the third season opener. “And I’m going to win.”
Which is exactly what President Biden has been signaling since the day after his bad night.
Because I needed the “West Wing” audience to find President Bartlet’s intransigence heroic, I didn’t really dramatize any downward pull that his illness was having on his re-election chances. And much more important, I didn’t dramatize any danger posed by Bartlet’s opponent winning.
But what if the show had gone another way?
What if, as a result of Bartlet revealing his illness, polling showed him losing to his likely opponent? And what if that opponent, rather than being simply unexceptional, had been a dump truck of ignorance and bad intentions? What if Bartlet’s opponent had been a dangerous imbecile with an observable psychiatric disorder who related to his supporters on a fourth-grade level and treated the law as something for suckers and poor people? And was a hero to white supremacists?
We’d have had Bartlet drop out of the race and endorse whoever had the best chance of beating the guy.
The problem in the real world is that there isn’t a Democrat who is polling significantly better than Mr. Biden. And quitting, as heroic as it may be in this case, doesn’t really put a lump in our throats.
But there’s something the Democrats can do that would not just put a lump in people’s throats with its appeal to stop-Donald-Trump-at-all-costs unity, but with its originality and sense of sacrifice. So here’s my pitch to the writers’ room: The Democratic Party should pick a Republican.
At their convention next month, the Democrats should nominate Mitt Romney.
Nominating Mr. Romney would be putting our money where our mouth is: a clear and powerful demonstration that this election isn’t about what our elections are usually about it, but about stopping a deranged man from taking power. Surely Mr. Romney, who doesn’t have to be introduced to voters, would peel off enough Republican votes to win, probably by a lot. The double haters would be turned into single haters and the Nikki Haley voters would have somewhere to go, Ms. Haley having disqualified herself when she endorsed the leader of an unsuccessful attempt to overthrow the government.
Does Mr. Romney support abortion rights? No. Does he want to aggressively raise the minimum wage, bolster public education, strengthen unions, expand transgender rights and enact progressive tax reform? Probably not. But is he a cartoon thug who did nothing but watch TV while the mob he assembled beat and used Tasers on police officers? No. The choice is between Donald Trump and not-Trump, and the not-Trump candidate needs only one qualification: to win enough votes from a cross section of Americans to close off the former president’s Electoral College path back to power.
Part of the wish fulfillment of “The West Wing” was that oratory can be persuasive. So Barack Obama could come forth at the Democratic convention next month in Chicago and remind us, once again, that we’re not red states and blue states but the United States by full-throatedly endorsing his old rival. And Mr. Romney could make the case that the Democrats are putting country before party in ways that the MAGA movement will not, and announce his bipartisan cabinet picks at the convention as well.
After the assassination attempt on Mr. Trump last Saturday, rallygoers pointed at reporters and shouted, “You’re next!” and Republicans in Congress and on television were blaming Mr. Biden and D.E.I. for the shooting, so it doesn’t look as if that terrible moment will serve as the healing event we’ve all been waiting for. But Democrats nominating a Republican could be. And when it loses the popular vote for the eighth time in nine presidential elections, the Republican Party can then rebuild itself back into a useful force for democracy.
The writing staff would tell me I was about to jump the shark, that this is a “West Wing” fantasy that would never, ever happen. But as Bradley Whitford used to say, “Isn’t the biggest fantasy on television a mafia boss in therapy?” The Democrats need to break the glass and this is a break-glass plan, but it’s more than that. It’s a grand gesture. A sacrifice. It would put a lump in our throats.
But mostly, it would be the end of Donald Trump in presidential politics.