The significance of Primary

One could make the argument that the purpose of a documentary is for a director to bring a subject to light from a neutral standpoint so at the end of the film the viewer would be the to make their own conclusion. The documentary Primary was suppose to do just that, but any viewer can tell that the film is very biased towards the two competitors that consisted of the old-fashioned Humphrey and the superstar like Kennedy. The one that is under attack is where this argument starts. Most would conclude Humphrey was under attack and being viewed as a has been struggling in this race in which he has no chance of winning. Then you have the superstar Kennedy having nothing but crowds of people surrounding him as well as his beautiful wife. However, by the director doing just that, he takes the chance of causing what I will call a rebound effect. Simply put, a director models their movie in a way that the viewer comes off with a certain opinion on that film and that opinion tends to be the same as the directors. On the other hand, say the opinion the director was trying to get across was the exact opposite of the opinion the viewer has after watching their film. That's the significance of Primary. There is no simple answer over who's being put into the negative light.
Kennedy comes off as a cocky politican that has people all over him and it seems as he doesn't need to do much to overcome Humphrey. When JFK is shaking people's hands, he can't wait to get into his limo away from all the excitement. His speeches were about nothing and when it came time for counting the votes, he seemed very tense for such a popular guy.
Now there is Humphrey who's this politican that needs to go out and talk to the people for their vote, they are not there surrounding him. His speeches, even though maybe in front of 20 people, had a point of what he was going to do for the people and their agriculture. He knew his importance in the race whereas JFK was viewed as more of a guranteed victor. At the end of the race Humphrey was the winner and JFK lost. The old timer beat this superstar who, throughout the documentary was viewed as though he had no chance of losing. Maybe his ego was a little too big? Now if the director wanted to really make Humphrey look really bad, why did he leave the results of the election out? As the teacher pointed out it was Humphrey's hometown and the margain he won by was disgraceful for a politican in their hometown. That element was left out and the opinion one is left with is never underestimate the turtle in the race.