**Includes spoilers for the show**
Being somewhat of an idealist, I instantly got hooked on Kiefer Sutherland’s character Tom Kirkman when I started watching Designated Survivor. Though I have mixed feelings about season 3, the show overall is one of my favorite political dramas. I love the spy thriller vibe it started with. Yes, the unlikelihood of events keeps you at the edge of your seat but at some point it had to move to the West Wing. However, I saw a different Tom Kirkman in the third season.
Doing what’s right and in the right way was the show’s Potus’ cornerstone since the very beginning. I didn’t watch any other show that portrays the president as only righteous, playing by the book like he’s written it. That’s what intrigued me the most, even more than all the drama and conspiracies.
I mean, the guy clearly started as an underdog. In the HUD office, he presumably didn’t need to get knee-deep into favor-exchanging politics. It was nice to see that the POTUS’ only goal, in any of his decisions, was to do good, do the right thing, and try to unite the country. By the end of the first season, it looked like he was getting the hang of it, while not compromising his integrity.
The second season started with a devastating accident that put him somewhat in a trance, I’d say. I’d definitely be in a similar state if I had to wear his shoes. But somehow, he made it through. Didn’t sway from his classic righteous, idealist persona. Though broken inside, he kept it together for the kids, the country, and sought help. I still found the same president when he dealt with cyber and bio threats. He was reluctant to avoid aggression and prioritized diplomacy. He was pragmatic but didn’t deal in favors, so he stayed true to his principles. The thought he put into the decision of running for the office was even more admirable.
Evidently, season 3 started with a bang. We went to full campaign mode. It was a nice change—more importantly, we needed to go there someday. But the POTUS’ behavior seemed off to me. He was constantly angry and shouting at people. I understand that the pressure has suddenly doubled. My question here would be, if he didn’t lose it after losing his wife, what made him scream now?
President Kirkman was absolutely transparent from the beginning unless something involved national security or classified information—both very good reasons to take caution. However, I didn’t really get how he agreed to suppress information or make an accusation with incomplete facts.
Yes, Cornelius Moss would probably be a worse president. The guy is mixed up in some murky politics. Tom Kirkman, on the other hand, was true to his beliefs, didn’t have a background in shady politics, and, most importantly, he had a vision. I understand his win was necessary and all that but using hardball tactics? I never thought I’d see Tom Kirkman do it. I never thought he believed that the end justifies the means.
Sure, politics is like that and you can’t stay like that forever if you’re into it. But to me, the catch of the show was a righteous president that nobody tried to show before—at least, as far as I’ve seen. This was indeed a good catch as I believe entertainment or literature has a real impact on society. Anyway, even if the lesson was that politics or power eventually corrupts people, what was the point of the previous seasons?
Plus, the most righteous person getting corrupted by power or a vision is not new in film or TV. Still, it’s a nice show, really well made with a beautiful script, kudos to the writers. The camera work and acting also hit all the right notes. I’m a fan of the show but I still have all these unanswered questions about the character development of Tom Kirkman. And my biggest question to the POTUS is:
“Does the end justify the means when the stakes are too high? Or does power definitely corrupt?”
