Buying a Vote and a Fishhooks Pep Talk
Plot Beats
The narrative micro-steps within this event
Josh and Donna discuss the failure to secure votes, with Josh revealing he recommended buying a vote for $115,000 to fund a study on remote prayer.
Donna tells Josh the story of Fishhooks McCarty, using it to remind Josh of his health and strength, and to encourage him to keep fighting.
Who Was There
Characters present in this moment
Not applicable (referential).
Referenced via quotation as part of Josh and Will's exchange; the Churchill line frames public ignorance and justifies momentary cynicism about democracy.
- • Provide rhetorical ballast for skepticism about public opinion
- • Frame an argument about limits of popular judgment
- • Historical aphorisms can illuminate modern political frustration
- • Quotations function as shorthand for shared political cynicism
Embarrassed and anxious about optics but resolute and seeking emotional recalibration; uses humor to mask moral discomfort.
Emerges from a meeting embarrassed and candidly confesses he recommended buying a yea vote by funding a $115,000 study; he jokes to deflect, accepts Donna's ribbing, and then walks out into the hallway where he immediately launches into tactical talk about polls.
- • Unload the moral weight of his recommendation to a trusted colleague
- • Regain composure and resolve to continue the legislative fight
- • Gauge staff morale and keep lines of practical action open
- • Legislative victory can justify ethically awkward trades
- • Political survival and Bartlet's agenda are worth pragmatic compromises
- • Public opinion can be dangerously uninformed but still decisive
Not applicable (referential).
Referenced by Will as the 'Eaton valedictorian' in a joking claim about taking hazing with dignity; invoked as a self-image rather than a present actor.
- • Provide comic dignity for Will's acceptance of hazing
- • Anchor Will's character as earnest and stoic
- • Personal myths help individuals cope with workplace absurdities
- • Invoked academic pedigree can be a shield against humiliation
Neutral and businesslike.
Present in the lobby talking with C.J.; stands aside and exits the immediate beat as Will approaches, providing a brief logistical presence that helps stage the goat/hazing reveal.
- • Assist press office routines
- • Clear the way for C.J.'s interaction with Will
- • Small adjustments keep daily operations running
- • Hazing logistics are an annoyance but manageable
Not applicable (referential).
Referenced indirectly through the presence of Seaborn-for-Congress posters in the later hazing conversation; functions as comic relief and a staff morale prop rather than a person present.
- • Serve as a vehicle for staff levity
- • Highlight the overlap between campaign culture and governing
- • Campaign iconography can be used to humanize and tease staff
- • Political workspaces absorb campaign residue
Slightly bemused and earnest; attentive to data and messaging rather than moralizing.
Intercepts Josh in the hallway; engages in brisk, information-driven exchange about hostile poll numbers and the case for foreign aid, plays foil to Josh's gallows humor and helps translate private worry into shared tactical language.
- • Clarify the public perception problem using polling data
- • Anchor legislative arguments (foreign aid fosters democracy)
- • Protect his ability to contribute to messaging after the vote
- • Facts and argumentation can shape the public conversation
- • Foreign aid has an arguable, defensible purpose despite polls
- • Policymaking requires translating lofty principles into digestible rationale
Not present; implied weight of potential embarrassment and political exposure.
Named as the target of Josh's recommendation — the recipient of counsel to 'buy' a vote — and thus the institutional locus of the moral calculus Josh reports.
- • Preserve political capital and pass the administration's agenda
- • Maintain institutional integrity while navigating deals
- • The presidency must balance principle with pragmatism
- • Staff will surface necessary compromises to secure votes
Supportive and amused on the surface; quietly resolute and morally pragmatic underneath — intentionally soothing Josh's guilt.
Sitting in the Outer Oval awaiting Josh, she hears his confession, answers with a comic-but-true story about Fishhooks McCarty to steady him, reframes compromise as survival and loyalty, then affirms his work and sends him back into the fray.
- • Soothe Josh's embarrassment and prevent a morale collapse
- • Reframe the ethical cost as part of political survival
- • Keep team focused on the immediate legislative objective
- • Practical compromise is a necessary currency in politics
- • Personal loyalty and morale matter as much as policy wins
- • Telling stories can reframe shame into purpose
Not present; inferred opportunistic posture.
Mentioned by Josh as the lawmaker who requested funding for a remote prayer study in exchange for his vote; not physically present but central to the ethical sting of Josh's confession.
- • Extract resources for district or pet project
- • Leverage his vote for tangible benefits
- • Legislative bargaining should produce tangible benefits for supporters
- • Political deals are an acceptable means to local ends
Not applicable (referential).
Referenced in Donna's anecdote as a legendary corrupt politician whose daily prayer ritual humorously justifies pragmatic theft; functions as an emblematic figure rather than an active participant.
- • Serve as a moralized example in Donna's story
- • Provide narrative cover for pragmatic choices
- • Stories about past figures can normalize present compromises
- • Political survival often requires morally ambiguous choices
Objects Involved
Significant items in this scene
Will Bailey's 500-word brief on American leadership is referenced as the work he must complete amid the hazing; it amplifies stakes for Will and contrasts the serious work of messaging with the silliness of office pranks.
The $115,000 NIH remote-prayer study is the concrete bargaining chip Josh admits he recommended funding to secure Senator Hoebuck's vote. It functions as the moral fulcrum of the confession, making abstract vote-trading suddenly specific and embarrassing.
Hazing bicycles are name-checked by Will as examples of the prank clutter in staff offices; they provide a sensory detail that rounds out the atmosphere of levity and disorder that contrasts with the moral seriousness of Josh's confession.
Ron the goat is invoked in the subsequent corridor conversation as the centerpiece of a hazing prank—its presence punctures the scene's tension with absurd comic relief and helps illustrate staff coping mechanisms under strain.
Seaborn-for-Congress posters are mentioned by Will as a possible window-covering hazing tactic and function as another comic prop that ties campaign culture to the West Wing's everyday life.
Location Details
Places and their significance in this event
The West Wing hallway is the transitional space where private confession moves into public tactical discussion: Josh leaves his private exchange with Donna here, collides with a colleague, and the conversation broadens to polling and messaging. It physically connects the Outer Oval to the bullpen and press areas.
Josh's bullpen area is invoked as the destination of the hallway exchange; it's the operational heart where polling data, vote counts, and deadlines animate staff work and where Josh frames the statistical challenge to Will.
The Communications Office functions as a nearby waypoint in which Will retreats while speaking to C.J.; it anchors the goat/hazing dialogue and contrasts communications choreography with the legislative bargaining Josh describes.
Organizations Involved
Institutional presence and influence
The White House is the institutional setting for the entire exchange: the presidency is the locus of Josh's recommendation, staff morale management, and the tactical scramble over votes and messaging. Institutional imperatives shape the stakes and normalize pragmatic deals.
St. James Church is invoked in Donna's Fishhooks McCarty anecdote as the daily ritual anchor that humanizes a corrupt figure and legitimizes pragmatic compromises; it functions narratively as moral counterpoint rather than a physical actor.
Narrative Connections
How this event relates to others in the story
No narrative connections mapped yet
This event is currently isolated in the narrative graph
Key Dialogue
"JOSH: "I just recommended to the President that he buy a yea vote for a $115,000 and the Bill of Rights.""
"DONNA: "O Lord, give me health and strength. We'll steal the rest.""
"JOSH: "Because 68% think we give too much in foreign aid, and 59% think it should be cut.""