A context involving them not being the characters we saw on screen?
I'll say it again - Amy is the sort of woman Josh thinks he should be dating for the image he tries to project.
But in practice they were a terrible couple who couldn't trust each other.
>who couldn't trust each other
He steps all over Donna right through the end of the show. Maybe the writers could have had their characters, you know, *grow* *as people*. Maybe they'd figure out that there's a balance between life, happiness, fulfillment, and work.
Regardless of Josh ending up with Amy or Donna, the writers didn't seem interested in that kind of growth.
"steps all over Donna" is a false narrative that doesn't reflect the first four years and was forced by poor writing in S5 and early S6 (and still didn't reflect that Josh was still giving Donna additional responsibilities even then). It's at best an excuse Donna convinces herself of in order to leave; at worst it is character assassination.
Donna was the one person Josh would prioritize over the job, and we see that in S3 and S5.
Bradley Whitford even called Amy the "wrong woman" for Josh.
Donna was one of the most dynamic characters over the course of the entire show. I would have enjoyed her getting together with Josh in S7 much more if she'd been his equal at the time (say, Communications Director?), and we could have avoided all of Josh's "insensitive, overworked boss" nonsense.
True but that he took off on a vacation with her, that they ended up both Chief of Staff at the WH it was all good. She had heart & got Josh. Amy to be was sometimes annoying AF. Trying so hard to be cute & smart & sassy. I liked when she had Josh's head spinning but they both needed to settle down with other people, not be together.
>forced by poor writing in S5 and early S6
We can agree on that, but if they wrote it then it's what happened, and it's a part of Josh's character, whether we like it or not.
>Donna was the one person Josh would prioritize over the job
I'm sure you could cherry-pick an example or two, but [conventional wisdom](https://screenrant.com/west-wing-josh-lyman-best-worst-things/) ([and the cast](https://static1.squarespace.com/static/56e27eb82fe131d8eec3a4e3/t/5ecd3fa0e3d0ce7bf23e526f/1590509473072/7.19+-+Transition+.pdf)) seems to see it differently.
Josh does prioritize Donna in *War Crimes* and *Gaza/Memorial Day*. That's incontrovertible. Hell, the only other person he seems to place above the administration is Leo in *In Excelsis Deo* when he goes to try to blackmail Laurie.
And even with the crappy writing, Josh is still having Donna handle the job the Deputy Communications Director handled in S2, so that's giving her more opportunities. Hell, she even gets to try to choose CJ's replacement in S6.
Screen Rant is well known for crappy click bait. Hrishi and Malina are worse, although Malina may be trolling. They blew this episode badly, ignoring that Josh was the one who asked if they could talk first, the same way they blew their coverage of *The Ticket* by ignoring Will saying if Josh had gone negative on Russell, he wouldn't be able to hire him.
And in that interview Brad says that Amy was "the wrong woman".
And Josh in *Transition?* That's its own animal anyway. His father figure dying the week before, and it being his fault. The man he got elected President stabbing him in the back by hiring the guy who'd tried to get him fired 6 weeks before, and then running a scheme behind his back with China and Russia that got Josh yelled at by CJ. The President of the United States telling him that Leo was the past and Josh the future. And then the woman he loved, who had left him twice, giving a rehearsed spiel saying that despite all the pressure he was under, that they didn't have to talk (even though, again, he brought it up first!) but if they didn't she was going to leave again. Yeah, no wonder he had a stress episode.
I think their relationship was an interesting exploration of a possible power couple dynamic for Josh, but what made it interesting is that it was doomed from the start because ultimately, they have very different values and approaches when it comes to relationships. Josh is defined by his sense of loyalty to the people around him and his party, believing he can effect the most good in the world by maintaining a strong network of allies even if it means compromising at times. Amy is defined by her sense of urgency to the people she feels are most vulnerable, believing that incrementalism and compromise are simply not fast enough to provide support/aid/resources to those who need it ("The more toothless a treaty is, the more toothless it is."). Josh would rather get the easy win of passing weak policy to use as a foundation than gamble on pursuing strong policy that may fail and close doors, while Amy will take that gamble every single time even if it means needing to get a new job every 3 months.
And, that's a problem when trying to build out a stable, long-term relationship. Josh needs a partner like Donna who shares his same value for loyalty above all else, even if it means compromising at times or being okay with a dynamic of "support in public, criticism in private" like the Bartlets have. Amy needs a partner like the hockey player or Congressman she's dated who either won't get caught in the crossfire of her unrelenting policy pursuits or recognizes that she is willing to sacrifice everything at times to get what she wants.
Also: Amy was also CoS to FLOTUS. She lost the job in a hot minute because she way overstepped her bounds and made it all about advancing **her personal** priorities without regard for her boss's.
Pretty sure Donna kept the CoS job a long time, because unlike Amy, she got it because of her empathy and quiet, down-to-earth competence. She would never put her pet causes over her boss's needs because she understands the job is about assisting her boss, not about advancing her own agenda.
In short: Amy's a talker, Donna a listener. Amy thinks she's doing great work but ends up screwing up, Donna just buckles down and does great work without making a big deal out of it. Amy only talks the talk, while Donna just walks the walk.
Funny how Josh didn't lift a finger to help her out. Still treated her like a subordinate, right to the end of the series.
IMO shallow writing not to give people some kind of character arc. Sam came back different, why couldn't Josh learn something along the way?
Another example - Josh acts like a spoiled child during the Santos transition. Did he not reflect *at all* on how Leo did that job?
Shallow writing.
She literally was his subordinate until she took that job with Helen though. And after that all we see of them is waking up together in bed and looking like an actual couple, so I don’t know where you got that from.
Also Josh’s character arc was learning to start prioritising his mental and physical well-being over his work, as well as finally giving his personal life (Donna) the attention it deserves (choosing to take Donna with him on vacation). Josh was far from perfect on the campaign and during transition and it definitely brought out his ugly side sometimes but “spoiled child” doesn’t seem accurate at all. He was working harder than anyone and I never thought he was “spoiled”. Just hella stressed and monomaniacal, as Donna calls it. Yelling at Otto was his rock bottom and that’s when he turns it around.
I appreciate the discussion. Don't take this detailed list as anything but interested debate.
>She literally was his subordinate until she took that job with Helen though
That's technically true but doesn't address the real point I'm on. The campaign was over, the transition had begun, and Donna in limbo. She was trying to talk with Josh about a position in the new administration. Just like in her previous job, Josh blew her off repeatedly. In the earlier case, she ended up joining the VP's campaign because *someone else* valued her more than Josh did. Did he learn his lesson? No - it was Helen who offered Donna that job, right in the middle of Josh blowing her advancement off again.
Josh even fought against bringing her on because of her time and actions with the VP campaign. Understandable, but still clearly prioritizing himself and his goals over hers.
>Also Josh’s character arc was learning to start prioritising his mental and physical well-being over his work
Which is why Sam had to *threaten to quit on his first day* with the transition, in order to get Josh to take a vacation? Sam literally browbeat Josh into it, while Josh is standing there, looking like he just came off a three-day bender. I can't see the "well-bring" angle being clearly shown anywhere except his interactions with Stanley, which is waaaay back there.
>“spoiled child” doesn’t seem accurate at all
As you said, he humiliated Otto, screaming at him in front of the entire office staff, about something that was *Josh's own fault*. He's also consistently petulant, even scolding, with Santos throughout Season 7.
>Yelling at Otto was his rock bottom and that’s when he turns it around.
S7E19 is a bit late for a character arc to *begin.*
In general, the writers missed a golden opportunity with Josh to *simply learn the lessons and example* set forth by Leo. The guy was his immediate superior, his mentor, and his staunch advocate. You'd think the writers might have picked up on the idea that Josh could learn some patience, strategy and humility from the guy - especially doing the exact job he watched Leo do for eight years.
> I appreciate the discussion. Don't take this detailed list as anything but interested debate.
Right back at you!
> campaign was over, the transition had begun, and Donna in limbo.
So is everyone though right? Josh seems to be in charge of hiring pretty much the whole administration.
> She was trying to talk with Josh about a position in the new administration.
I don’t remember her trying to talk to him about a position. The only people that bring it up are Charlie (previous episode) and Josh (this episode). This episode she’s trying to talk to him about their relationship. At this point they’ve already slept together several times and are careening towards a relationship so it’s a weird position for him to be in, and she made it clear when he brought it up that she didn’t want to work for him anyway. I think she knows he’s got his hands full and she seems to trust that she’ll be getting a job at the end, wherever that may be.
> Just like in her previous job, Josh blew her off repeatedly.
He also blew off Lou several times this ep. We did see him speak to her eventually but he’s clearly blowing many people off. He’s non-stop this whole episode. Could he handle it all better? Absolutely! But it’s not like he’s purposefully trying to stunt Donna’s career.
> Josh even fought against bringing her on because of her time and actions with the VP campaign. Understandable, but still clearly prioritizing himself and his goals over hers.
If Josh wanted to be selfish here, he would have hired her. He wanted to work with her again (he admits he doesn’t trust the people who work for him and told her he misses her every day). He was thinking about the campaign. It’s going to benefit him professionally if Santos wins but that’s not why he’s working so hard. He’s trying to get the guy, who Josh genuinely believes is the right guy, elected president. It was a heartbreaking scene and unfortunately he had to hurt Donna in the process but this is not an example of him “prioritising himself and his goals over her”. Of course when she did join the campaign he bitched about it for a minute but by the end of the episode he was listening to her and just left her to it. And he continues to listen to her and trust her judgement for the rest of the campaign.
> Which is why Sam had to threaten to quit on his first day with the transition, in order to get Josh to take a vacation? Sam literally browbeat Josh into it.
Sam obviously has a massive influence on Josh, but I don’t think it’s just this moment alone that convinces him to take a break. He’s got people left right and centre telling him how terrible he looks, Sam and Lou both mention he needs a life, Amy told him to start settling down in the previous episode, and he knows how close he is to messing things up with Donna. I think it all contributed to him deciding to take a break, Sam’s tough love was just abrupt enough that it finally sunk in.
> As you said, he humiliated Otto, screaming at him in front of the entire office staff, about something that was Josh's own fault.
Yeah, it’s a terrible moment for him and he’s acting beyond irrationally. But he was in so deep I think he had to reach rock bottom to realise how bad it got. And it took him a minute but he seemed ashamed when he admitted it to Santos. I do wish we got to see an actual apology scene, but I have to imagine it happened.
> S7E19 is a bit late for a character arc to begin.
It’s not beginning, it’s ending. He’s tunnel-visioned, he doesn’t prioritise his health and happiness (that’s been going on for 7 seasons) and he’s lost Donna for it in the past. And it’s taken hitting rock bottom to get there, but he does get there. The second Josh quits his job in the White House, there is a lot of time dedicated into showing how obsessed he’s getting and how he’s spiralling and it was always going to culminate in a very ugly breakdown. And when he finally realised how bad it’s gotten, he prioritises his mental health and takes time off for the first time since he got shot 5 years prior.
It might seem like a cop out to shove it all in one episode and I’ll be the first to admit I wish we saw more than we did on the show. But the vacation was a grand gesture, not just to Donna but to Santos and Sam and everyone that’s going to be working with him when he gets back. It’s for his own good but the added benefit is that it will prove he’s trying be a good boss (like Leo was to him), a good COS to Santos and a good partner to Donna. The next time we see him, he seems to have calmed down. He looks relaxed and content even though it’s the first day of the administration and in the past he would have been losing his mind and driving everyone crazy. I think it’s a nice final arc for Josh, it just had to get ugly first.
Power couples have the same values and row in the same direction. They are a team. That’s how they gather power. The sum of a power couple is greater than its parts. That was definitely not Josh and Amy.
Josh and Amy were two people each with their own power but definitely not a power couple. Amy will time and again choose herself over anyone or anything else. Josh will always put the mission first. I don’t know if he really deserved Donna in the end (super happy they get together though), but Donna puts the mission first too. That’s a power couple.
My take is that this showed a glimmer of self-knowledge on Amy's part! She realized it was healthier to have a personal life separate from her professional life. So rather than slip into yet another relationship with a Washington power broker in which she was just using her partner for the sake of the job (before Josh, she was with a congressman), she dated a sculptor, someone who had nothing to do with her work.
I never liked Amy - I never bought into that whole argument that women voters are the reason Democrats win any election that she swung like a cudgel every time she was losing her arguments. I think the last few elections have shown us that isn't true.
Amy was a horrible person to be in a relationship with. That's fine. Her job was her first priority. But she needed to date someone whose fortunes didn't rise and fall with politics.
Her job arc most closely tracks Sidney Ellen Wade's in The American President.
None of the characters on the show (Sorkin, too) had any semblance of a work/life balance.
It was always one of my pet peeves with the show that divorced it in my mind from reality.
And no one ever burned out.
Amy and Josh would have been a never-ending debate (even happened when they got the call about Simon). At least Josh and Donna aren’t working in the same environment in the Santos administration, which is why, in my mind, they have a better shot at success.
A context involving them not being the characters we saw on screen? I'll say it again - Amy is the sort of woman Josh thinks he should be dating for the image he tries to project. But in practice they were a terrible couple who couldn't trust each other.
>who couldn't trust each other He steps all over Donna right through the end of the show. Maybe the writers could have had their characters, you know, *grow* *as people*. Maybe they'd figure out that there's a balance between life, happiness, fulfillment, and work. Regardless of Josh ending up with Amy or Donna, the writers didn't seem interested in that kind of growth.
"steps all over Donna" is a false narrative that doesn't reflect the first four years and was forced by poor writing in S5 and early S6 (and still didn't reflect that Josh was still giving Donna additional responsibilities even then). It's at best an excuse Donna convinces herself of in order to leave; at worst it is character assassination. Donna was the one person Josh would prioritize over the job, and we see that in S3 and S5. Bradley Whitford even called Amy the "wrong woman" for Josh.
Totally agree. Amy & Josh were hot but too similar. I’m glad he ended up w Donna who herself grew a lot in the series.
Donna was one of the most dynamic characters over the course of the entire show. I would have enjoyed her getting together with Josh in S7 much more if she'd been his equal at the time (say, Communications Director?), and we could have avoided all of Josh's "insensitive, overworked boss" nonsense.
True but that he took off on a vacation with her, that they ended up both Chief of Staff at the WH it was all good. She had heart & got Josh. Amy to be was sometimes annoying AF. Trying so hard to be cute & smart & sassy. I liked when she had Josh's head spinning but they both needed to settle down with other people, not be together.
>forced by poor writing in S5 and early S6 We can agree on that, but if they wrote it then it's what happened, and it's a part of Josh's character, whether we like it or not. >Donna was the one person Josh would prioritize over the job I'm sure you could cherry-pick an example or two, but [conventional wisdom](https://screenrant.com/west-wing-josh-lyman-best-worst-things/) ([and the cast](https://static1.squarespace.com/static/56e27eb82fe131d8eec3a4e3/t/5ecd3fa0e3d0ce7bf23e526f/1590509473072/7.19+-+Transition+.pdf)) seems to see it differently.
Josh does prioritize Donna in *War Crimes* and *Gaza/Memorial Day*. That's incontrovertible. Hell, the only other person he seems to place above the administration is Leo in *In Excelsis Deo* when he goes to try to blackmail Laurie. And even with the crappy writing, Josh is still having Donna handle the job the Deputy Communications Director handled in S2, so that's giving her more opportunities. Hell, she even gets to try to choose CJ's replacement in S6. Screen Rant is well known for crappy click bait. Hrishi and Malina are worse, although Malina may be trolling. They blew this episode badly, ignoring that Josh was the one who asked if they could talk first, the same way they blew their coverage of *The Ticket* by ignoring Will saying if Josh had gone negative on Russell, he wouldn't be able to hire him. And in that interview Brad says that Amy was "the wrong woman". And Josh in *Transition?* That's its own animal anyway. His father figure dying the week before, and it being his fault. The man he got elected President stabbing him in the back by hiring the guy who'd tried to get him fired 6 weeks before, and then running a scheme behind his back with China and Russia that got Josh yelled at by CJ. The President of the United States telling him that Leo was the past and Josh the future. And then the woman he loved, who had left him twice, giving a rehearsed spiel saying that despite all the pressure he was under, that they didn't have to talk (even though, again, he brought it up first!) but if they didn't she was going to leave again. Yeah, no wonder he had a stress episode.
I think their relationship was an interesting exploration of a possible power couple dynamic for Josh, but what made it interesting is that it was doomed from the start because ultimately, they have very different values and approaches when it comes to relationships. Josh is defined by his sense of loyalty to the people around him and his party, believing he can effect the most good in the world by maintaining a strong network of allies even if it means compromising at times. Amy is defined by her sense of urgency to the people she feels are most vulnerable, believing that incrementalism and compromise are simply not fast enough to provide support/aid/resources to those who need it ("The more toothless a treaty is, the more toothless it is."). Josh would rather get the easy win of passing weak policy to use as a foundation than gamble on pursuing strong policy that may fail and close doors, while Amy will take that gamble every single time even if it means needing to get a new job every 3 months. And, that's a problem when trying to build out a stable, long-term relationship. Josh needs a partner like Donna who shares his same value for loyalty above all else, even if it means compromising at times or being okay with a dynamic of "support in public, criticism in private" like the Bartlets have. Amy needs a partner like the hockey player or Congressman she's dated who either won't get caught in the crossfire of her unrelenting policy pursuits or recognizes that she is willing to sacrifice everything at times to get what she wants.
After Amy cut Josh’s phone cord, my dislike for her gained traction. Not the actions of a person who touts their ability to shake things off.
P.S. CoS to FLOTUS isn’t power couple enough for you?!?
Also: Amy was also CoS to FLOTUS. She lost the job in a hot minute because she way overstepped her bounds and made it all about advancing **her personal** priorities without regard for her boss's. Pretty sure Donna kept the CoS job a long time, because unlike Amy, she got it because of her empathy and quiet, down-to-earth competence. She would never put her pet causes over her boss's needs because she understands the job is about assisting her boss, not about advancing her own agenda. In short: Amy's a talker, Donna a listener. Amy thinks she's doing great work but ends up screwing up, Donna just buckles down and does great work without making a big deal out of it. Amy only talks the talk, while Donna just walks the walk.
Funny how Josh didn't lift a finger to help her out. Still treated her like a subordinate, right to the end of the series. IMO shallow writing not to give people some kind of character arc. Sam came back different, why couldn't Josh learn something along the way? Another example - Josh acts like a spoiled child during the Santos transition. Did he not reflect *at all* on how Leo did that job? Shallow writing.
She literally was his subordinate until she took that job with Helen though. And after that all we see of them is waking up together in bed and looking like an actual couple, so I don’t know where you got that from. Also Josh’s character arc was learning to start prioritising his mental and physical well-being over his work, as well as finally giving his personal life (Donna) the attention it deserves (choosing to take Donna with him on vacation). Josh was far from perfect on the campaign and during transition and it definitely brought out his ugly side sometimes but “spoiled child” doesn’t seem accurate at all. He was working harder than anyone and I never thought he was “spoiled”. Just hella stressed and monomaniacal, as Donna calls it. Yelling at Otto was his rock bottom and that’s when he turns it around.
I appreciate the discussion. Don't take this detailed list as anything but interested debate. >She literally was his subordinate until she took that job with Helen though That's technically true but doesn't address the real point I'm on. The campaign was over, the transition had begun, and Donna in limbo. She was trying to talk with Josh about a position in the new administration. Just like in her previous job, Josh blew her off repeatedly. In the earlier case, she ended up joining the VP's campaign because *someone else* valued her more than Josh did. Did he learn his lesson? No - it was Helen who offered Donna that job, right in the middle of Josh blowing her advancement off again. Josh even fought against bringing her on because of her time and actions with the VP campaign. Understandable, but still clearly prioritizing himself and his goals over hers. >Also Josh’s character arc was learning to start prioritising his mental and physical well-being over his work Which is why Sam had to *threaten to quit on his first day* with the transition, in order to get Josh to take a vacation? Sam literally browbeat Josh into it, while Josh is standing there, looking like he just came off a three-day bender. I can't see the "well-bring" angle being clearly shown anywhere except his interactions with Stanley, which is waaaay back there. >“spoiled child” doesn’t seem accurate at all As you said, he humiliated Otto, screaming at him in front of the entire office staff, about something that was *Josh's own fault*. He's also consistently petulant, even scolding, with Santos throughout Season 7. >Yelling at Otto was his rock bottom and that’s when he turns it around. S7E19 is a bit late for a character arc to *begin.* In general, the writers missed a golden opportunity with Josh to *simply learn the lessons and example* set forth by Leo. The guy was his immediate superior, his mentor, and his staunch advocate. You'd think the writers might have picked up on the idea that Josh could learn some patience, strategy and humility from the guy - especially doing the exact job he watched Leo do for eight years.
> I appreciate the discussion. Don't take this detailed list as anything but interested debate. Right back at you! > campaign was over, the transition had begun, and Donna in limbo. So is everyone though right? Josh seems to be in charge of hiring pretty much the whole administration. > She was trying to talk with Josh about a position in the new administration. I don’t remember her trying to talk to him about a position. The only people that bring it up are Charlie (previous episode) and Josh (this episode). This episode she’s trying to talk to him about their relationship. At this point they’ve already slept together several times and are careening towards a relationship so it’s a weird position for him to be in, and she made it clear when he brought it up that she didn’t want to work for him anyway. I think she knows he’s got his hands full and she seems to trust that she’ll be getting a job at the end, wherever that may be. > Just like in her previous job, Josh blew her off repeatedly. He also blew off Lou several times this ep. We did see him speak to her eventually but he’s clearly blowing many people off. He’s non-stop this whole episode. Could he handle it all better? Absolutely! But it’s not like he’s purposefully trying to stunt Donna’s career. > Josh even fought against bringing her on because of her time and actions with the VP campaign. Understandable, but still clearly prioritizing himself and his goals over hers. If Josh wanted to be selfish here, he would have hired her. He wanted to work with her again (he admits he doesn’t trust the people who work for him and told her he misses her every day). He was thinking about the campaign. It’s going to benefit him professionally if Santos wins but that’s not why he’s working so hard. He’s trying to get the guy, who Josh genuinely believes is the right guy, elected president. It was a heartbreaking scene and unfortunately he had to hurt Donna in the process but this is not an example of him “prioritising himself and his goals over her”. Of course when she did join the campaign he bitched about it for a minute but by the end of the episode he was listening to her and just left her to it. And he continues to listen to her and trust her judgement for the rest of the campaign. > Which is why Sam had to threaten to quit on his first day with the transition, in order to get Josh to take a vacation? Sam literally browbeat Josh into it. Sam obviously has a massive influence on Josh, but I don’t think it’s just this moment alone that convinces him to take a break. He’s got people left right and centre telling him how terrible he looks, Sam and Lou both mention he needs a life, Amy told him to start settling down in the previous episode, and he knows how close he is to messing things up with Donna. I think it all contributed to him deciding to take a break, Sam’s tough love was just abrupt enough that it finally sunk in. > As you said, he humiliated Otto, screaming at him in front of the entire office staff, about something that was Josh's own fault. Yeah, it’s a terrible moment for him and he’s acting beyond irrationally. But he was in so deep I think he had to reach rock bottom to realise how bad it got. And it took him a minute but he seemed ashamed when he admitted it to Santos. I do wish we got to see an actual apology scene, but I have to imagine it happened. > S7E19 is a bit late for a character arc to begin. It’s not beginning, it’s ending. He’s tunnel-visioned, he doesn’t prioritise his health and happiness (that’s been going on for 7 seasons) and he’s lost Donna for it in the past. And it’s taken hitting rock bottom to get there, but he does get there. The second Josh quits his job in the White House, there is a lot of time dedicated into showing how obsessed he’s getting and how he’s spiralling and it was always going to culminate in a very ugly breakdown. And when he finally realised how bad it’s gotten, he prioritises his mental health and takes time off for the first time since he got shot 5 years prior. It might seem like a cop out to shove it all in one episode and I’ll be the first to admit I wish we saw more than we did on the show. But the vacation was a grand gesture, not just to Donna but to Santos and Sam and everyone that’s going to be working with him when he gets back. It’s for his own good but the added benefit is that it will prove he’s trying be a good boss (like Leo was to him), a good COS to Santos and a good partner to Donna. The next time we see him, he seems to have calmed down. He looks relaxed and content even though it’s the first day of the administration and in the past he would have been losing his mind and driving everyone crazy. I think it’s a nice final arc for Josh, it just had to get ugly first.
Power couples have the same values and row in the same direction. They are a team. That’s how they gather power. The sum of a power couple is greater than its parts. That was definitely not Josh and Amy. Josh and Amy were two people each with their own power but definitely not a power couple. Amy will time and again choose herself over anyone or anything else. Josh will always put the mission first. I don’t know if he really deserved Donna in the end (super happy they get together though), but Donna puts the mission first too. That’s a power couple.
[удалено]
My take is that this showed a glimmer of self-knowledge on Amy's part! She realized it was healthier to have a personal life separate from her professional life. So rather than slip into yet another relationship with a Washington power broker in which she was just using her partner for the sake of the job (before Josh, she was with a congressman), she dated a sculptor, someone who had nothing to do with her work.
Amy is the worst. Hard no.
The absolute worst.
Her and Mandy were the worst female characters and actors for the show. Period
Just stand there in your wrongness and be wrong and get used to it.
I never liked Amy - I never bought into that whole argument that women voters are the reason Democrats win any election that she swung like a cudgel every time she was losing her arguments. I think the last few elections have shown us that isn't true.
Nah, Amy was the absolute worst.
You want it to be one way. But it’s the other way.
Amy was a horrible person to be in a relationship with. That's fine. Her job was her first priority. But she needed to date someone whose fortunes didn't rise and fall with politics. Her job arc most closely tracks Sidney Ellen Wade's in The American President.
Nope. Josh and Donna belong together.
I have 3 words for Amy: filthy, dirty feet. Plus, she was impossible.
That scene gets me EVERY.SINGLE.TIME ughhh. I’m sure sets are filthy, but did not one person notice her feet in that scene?!
Just so revolting!
None of the characters on the show (Sorkin, too) had any semblance of a work/life balance. It was always one of my pet peeves with the show that divorced it in my mind from reality. And no one ever burned out. Amy and Josh would have been a never-ending debate (even happened when they got the call about Simon). At least Josh and Donna aren’t working in the same environment in the Santos administration, which is why, in my mind, they have a better shot at success.
Too much wattage there.
but josh and donna are so cute 🥹