Election: Obama’s favorite political movie

Read at Movie Night.

Long before Alexander Payne found his curmudgeonly muse in Paul Giamatti and made Sideways (2004) and then The Holdovers (2023), he directed Election (1999). According to Payne, this is Barrack Obama’s favorite political movie, but I don’t believe him. It’s inconceivable that our smoothest president, the one responsible for tracking down and killing Osama bin Laden and dumping his body into the sea, prefers a movie about white suburban kids running for student council president to something edgy and subversive like Malcolm X (1992) and Snowpiercer (2013) or a classic like Mr. Smith Goes to Washington (1939).

At the beginning of what is allegedly President Obama’s favorite political movie, Jim McAllister (Matthew Broderick) asks his class about the difference between morals and ethics. I had to look this up: it’s the difference between a personal code of conduct and societal standards. Most of the students also have no idea, but Tracy Flick (Reese Witherspoon) knows. Her hand shoots up first, but McAllister won’t call on her. He has it out for her because his best friend, Dave Novotny, lost his teaching job and marriage when he was caught sexually abusing her. (This is how we should describe teachers and students having sex, regardless of the circumstances, unless they’re French, I suppose.) Even though Dave is clearly at fault, McAllister resents her. The class ends without anyone answering McAllister’s question. If he had called on Tracy--if she had reminded him of the difference between morals and ethics--would that have changed the course of the movie?

Probably not. The characters in this movie follow their hearts/morals instead of adhering to established rules and laws, which is the American way. We root for Clint Eastwood whenever he takes the law into his own hands. We cheer on Thelma, Louise, Neo, and Barbie--characters who don’t go as far as Eastwood but nonetheless reject the standards imposed by society. Some of us even approve of Trump for this very American reason.

In movies, this is usually fine because the characters are virtuous or some aspect of their society is corrupt. But in Election, the characters are shitty people. They’re motivated by selfish interests that they disguise as adherence to a higher law. For instance, when Novotny’s relationship with Tracy is uncovered, he cries ugly and claims he and Tracy are in love, with love being the highest moral law. Novotny and the rest of the characters in Election need to stick to ethics because their moral compasses are crooked.?

Some other important characters are Paul (Chris Klein), a popular jock McAllister recruits for the election so that Tracy doesn’t win unopposed, and Tammy (Jessica Campbell), Paul’s sister, who runs in the election as an act of revenge against her brother who is dating the girl she loves. Tammy believes student government is meaningless and runs on the promise to raze it when she’s in power, which resonates with the student body. She is the early frontrunner.

When I first saw this movie (on a DVD rented from Blockbuster Video), as someone just out of high school, the election between Tracy, Paul, and Tammy was the entire point of the movie. But on this second viewing, 20+ years after the first, I’m more interested in the middle-aged men. Tammy’s right: the election means nothing. I’m more interested in how men in positions of authority and respect casually destroy themselves in this movie. One day, they have everything, and the next, nothing. Some reinvent themselves into a functioning version of their former selves--maybe even a version they prefer--while others are crushed into something unrecognizable. Is that what Obama sees when he watches his favorite political movie? Not white suburban kids playing politics, but a story warning him about the abuse of authority and the stunning speed at which he could lose everything?