Bringing back "The West Wing"?

Should Aaron Sorkin's revive his hit TV series to help his country?

For seven seasons, Aaron Sorkin’s “The West Wing” took us inside a fictional American Presidency where optimism, idealism and service were the rule and not the exception.

Of course, it was a pipe dream but one that millions of Americans bought into every Thursday night, me included. If it wasn’t what government actually was - and it wasn’t - it perhaps was what government should be.

The series was led by a whipsmart President, a compassionate, open-hearted, thoughtful, occasionally hot-tempered leader of the free world who wanted to be role model for every American, not just his damn base. With Martin Sheen as Jed Bartlet, a brilliant economist, a former New Hampshire Governor whose wit, charisma and intelligence light the way like a President should, he had a dedicated staff, Josh, Toby, C.J. Leo, Sam who were fervid in their dedication and loyalty to him and his mission.

Could a "West Wing" reboot turn our national attitude around?

Sorkin’s show most certainly had a liberal Democrat bent, one reason, I’m sure, I found it so appealing. Sorkin has said lately that he’s interested in reviving the show. And trying to write something unifying would be really challenging. Especially when you remember the closing moments of the show’s pilot episode in 1999. It couldn’t would run more contrary to our 2024 politics, which either is or isn’t a shame.

With his staff gathered in the Oval Office, Bartlet shares a note: “Approximately 1,200 Cubans left Havana this morning. Approximately 700 turned back due to severe weather. Some 350 are missing and presumed dead. One hundred and thirty-seven have been taken into custody in Miami and are seeking asylum.”

He crumples the note, takes off his glasses and looks his staff in the eye. \

“With the clothes on their back, they came through a storm. And the ones that didn’t die want a better life and they want it here. Talk about impressive.” Don’t think you’d ever hear those words out of Donald Trump’s mouth. President Biden wouldn’t dare to say them either.

Contrary to what you may have heard and seen in ads, HBO’s John Oliver’s recent “Last Week Tonight” carefully dissected the mythical “migrant crisis” and concluded simply there wasn’t one. Hearing about it over and over again on some networks and from one of the candidates, about half of America believes there is. So there we are.

The show was extraordinarily successful, winning 100 awards out of 289 nominations, winning the Primetime Emmy Award for four seasons in a row, including nine in its first season. It won Golden Globes, Peabody Awards and on and on and on. Brilliantly written, superbly acted, it gave us a weekly hour where we could imagine this is how our own government was really working for us. Or maybe how it SHOULD work FOR us.

The episode that may have gone the farthest in that direction - and also maybe the least plausible - sadly, came in Season Five, Episode 12 “Slow News Day.” Toby, the dour head speechwriter, comes in mighty early with a far-fetched idea to save Social Security, somehow gets the President to go along with it - under the table - then, when it all leaks out, they find out the only way to pass the bill is for the Bartlet Administration to not take credit for it.

That’s right. They gave the credit to someone else for that social security-saving idea because it was the right thing to do. I suppose there are those who’d suggest that President Biden voluntarily stepping down after one term might fall into that category, too. But there are others who’ll insist he only did it out of fear for a Trump victory. So much for idealism.

For his part, Sorkin’s interest in reviving the show is tempered by the ferocious political climate. He was so concerned about a Trump win, he penned a New York Times Op-Ed suggesting Democrats nominate Mitt Romney just to show they put the country first, as in “The West Wing.”

And he speculates what he might have had to write if Barlet was facing off vs. a Trump for reelection.

“…what if that opponent, rather than being simply unexceptional, had been a dump truck of ignorance and bad intentions?,” Sorkin asked. “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?”

Once Sorkin learned Kamala Harris had succeeded Biden as the Presidential candidate, he let the Romney idea go.
“I take it all back,” he tweeted. “Harris for America!”

Could a revival of “The West Wing” help heal our nation, written in real time, with the current political divide, could Sorkin find a way to get us talking, thinking about our national problems with cohesiveness, honesty and fairness? It’s an idealistic idea, that’s for sure, one that would surely bring as many skeptics and supporters.

At it’s peak, “The West Wing” drew roughly a quarter of American television viewers. With cable and streaming, who knows what kind of audience is even out there now or, worse, if they’d even watch or care?

But we have to think about finding ways to put the country back together. As Bill Maher says, “I don’t want the country to get divorced.” Could a “West Wing” reboot be our marriage counselor?