Political Conventions: Necessary Pageantry Or A Waste Of Time?
Sure they serve a legal purpose, but has the time come to re-think how American political parties hold their nominating conventions?
Photos
They have been a slice of American political life since 1832, but when was the last time Americans watched a political convention take place with the outcome truly in dispute until then?
For Democrats, it was 1980, when Senator Ted Kennedy hoped a floor fight for unpledged delegates would help him wrestle the nomination from incumbent President Jimmy Carter.
For Republicans, it was 1976, when President Gerald Ford staved off a challenge from Ronald Reagan.
But since then, network television coverage of the events have dwindled, ceding it to cable television. On Wednesday, when Paul Ryan accepted the GOP nomination for Vice President, more people watched "Honey Boo Boo" on cable than they did Ryan's speech on any one cable network.
Next week, NBC's coverage of the Democratic National Convention on Wednesday will be replaced by the opening game of the NFL season. Somehow, just as Republicans managed to re-arrange their schedules due to Isaac, as well as the networks' earlier decision not to broadcast Monday night coverage before the weather kicked in, here's guessing the Democrats will figure out a way to fit it all in.
U.S. House Speaker John Boehner, talking to reporters at the RNC, conceded, "I'm not sure that having a four-day convention in the future makes much sense," according to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.
MONEY MONEY MONEY
And there is a practical matter to consider. The federal government will spend a total of $100 million on security alone between the two conventions this year. Because of security concerns after 9/11, the convention sites, which were already compounds onto themselves before, are even more so now, meaning that besides the prestige and name recognition that comes with hosting the event, one could argue about the merits of hosting the convention to boost a local economy.
Quick: do you remember who hosted them in 2008 (without Googling it!)
ON THE OTHER HAND
The Atlantic laid out a four-pronged plea for why we should keep conventions, in part arguing that the events are more for the people in the audience at the event and watching at home as opposed to the campaigns, and that conventions have helped bring "new stars" to light.
Tell us what you think about political conventions: Keep Them? Tweak Them? Ditch Them? How would you formally nominate candidates for President and Vice President?
Sonny Pondrom
10:42 am on Sunday, September 2, 2012
The convention last week was a waste of $50 million dollars. Its purpose of nominating a party's president was already accomplished. Selection of a vice-president - done. Although explaining why an economic leader of the House would be chosen when their production is next to nothing and their rating is lowest in the history of the United States.
What did not happen? Platform conversations/debates and what are the controversies and why one view was picked in the Republican platform. Speaking of platform, the presidential nominee said he did not agree with everything in the platform. Was the platform wrong or the nominee?
We built it? Taking a phrase out of context and turning around its meaning does not belong as a theme in a national convention. Leave this for Rush's radio show.
A 20th century conventions were represented the people - the vast majority white. Last week, only 2% of the delegates were black. Everything old is new again?
Mystery Guest Speaker? Yes, Clint was the most entertaining but still not as good as the NFL playoff's half-time show. However, it did show how he and the Republican party 'see' the president.
I must admit that I did not watch most of the convention. I couldn't help changing channels when I heard a lie (I mean an untruth).
Gregg Palermo
10:57 am on Sunday, September 2, 2012
I hope we can keep this conversation focused on the need/utility of the conventions. For instance, what if both parties split 4 days in a single city?
Sonny Pondrom
12:47 pm on Sunday, September 2, 2012
That is a great idea. I hope it gets out that we can save $50M with no losses. They can take turns: Incumbents day 1 and 3 and minority day 2 and 4 and independents on day 5.
Jim Aspen
12:29 pm on Sunday, September 2, 2012
North Carolina is a "Right to Work" State. What dip in the democrat party made that decision. Unions cannot be happy about that.
RDBet
12:53 pm on Sunday, September 2, 2012
Jim Aspen from Ames. Spreading the GOP propaganda far and wide.
Jim Aspen
1:37 pm on Sunday, September 2, 2012
North Carolina is a right to work state. Unions are not happy that the convention is in Charlotte. Am I saying anything that is not true.
Jim Aspen
2:41 pm on Sunday, September 2, 2012
Unions shrug at Democratic convention
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0812/80529_Page2.html
mike reilly
12:54 pm on Sunday, September 2, 2012
$100 million in security costs and $18 million (each) to stage the conventions is a waste. Let the parties have to pay for each and then buy television time and we will see how important they are?
Tom Maher
1:38 pm on Sunday, September 2, 2012
For both parties - it's simply a vehicle to present more speakers to rile the troops and diss' the opposition.
The platforms are irrelevant as neither seem follow them behind the election; they simply throw a bone to a particular loud voice.
Primaries, for better or worse, have replaced the conventions. Period.
TaterSalad
2:27 pm on Sunday, September 2, 2012
Bain Capital and who has an "Equity Stake" in this company: Democrats will not want to here these facts and figures!
http://therealrevo.com/blog/?p=82494
Jim Aspen
3:33 pm on Sunday, September 2, 2012
Obamas Approval ratings tanks in 43%
http://www.gallup.com/poll/113980/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Job-Approval.aspx
Jeanbean
5:48 pm on Sunday, September 2, 2012
Getting back to the original question...I do think the traditional political conventions are no longer needed. They have become mere rubber stamps for the candidates still standing after the people have voted in the primaries. Surely the money spent could be put to better use. At least cut the convention to one day for each party. Let the candidates for vice-president and president each give their speeches the same night. And wouldnt it be nice if they would stick to what their party's platform is and how they plan to implement it? Give details. Dissing the other party's candidates is a waste of time since they are preaching to the choir anyway. Bill McClellan's column in this morning's Post-Dispatch addressed the wisdom of having these conventions too.
PaulRevere
9:12 pm on Sunday, September 2, 2012
Democratic Convention: Waste-of -time Defined:
Showing Obama's face for the award winning "1millioneth" time.
Trying to explain Why he failed. Abraham Lincoln will be blamed for the recession.
Since ABC,NBC,CBS never report the real facts, how else could anyone even see the faces of our Next President.
PaulRevere
9:28 pm on Sunday, September 2, 2012
Correction::
Obama will explain for the 1millioneth time "Why BUSH Failed"
Sonny Pondrom
9:37 pm on Sunday, September 2, 2012
Perhaps more debates would be a better way to determine the better party's plan. But these debates should include not just Reps and Dems.
martin, bob
5:39 am on Monday, September 3, 2012
16 Trillion in Natl Debt o hit on first day of election. Thanks for nothing democrats
RDBet
8:05 am on Monday, September 3, 2012
You are welcome - says George W Bush and the meltdown under GOP supply side economics.
Jim Aspen Tatersalad,martin, bob etc...-it's odd that you outstate tea party propagandists join local and Missouri politic discussions. Missouri is not a swing state as far as I can tell.
Is it the MO senate race that brings you here? Why should you worry about that when Akin has God on his side?
PaulRevere
12:56 pm on Monday, September 3, 2012
RDBet:
What kind of Hospitality do you show to those "outsate" opinions.
"CONVENTIONs" are National.
Sonny Pondrom
11:33 am on Monday, September 3, 2012
Bob Martin - Don't thank the democrats. As discussed at last week's convention, remind them of the Republican's plan to reduce the 16 Trillion over the next 10 years.
Sonny Pondrom
2:05 pm on Monday, September 3, 2012
RDBet - Contrary to the theory of "States Rights", when those who work for the top 1% believes a poor state needs help making up the minds of its inhabitants, they may influence an election in another state.
PaulRevere
2:47 pm on Monday, September 3, 2012
Debt Information: Sept 2012 (Note our Debt is made up of 2 types)
Public Debt=$11.2Tril
InterGovt =$ 4.8Tril (this is the debt that rises on every Payroll tax cut) (steals)
TOTAL =$16Tril (under Obama)
History of Blame?
PublicDebt 1992 =$6Tril (End Bush1)
PublicDebt 2000 =$5.6Tril (End Clinton)
PublicDebt 2008 =$6.3Tril (End Bush2)
PublicDebt 2012 =$11.2Tril End OBAMA 1st term)
Now would anyone care to refute
Bush PublicDebt increased less than $1Tril in 8 years = $5.6Tril to $6.3Tril
Obama PublicDebt has increased $5tril since 2008.
This country has no recovery because the President has borrowed to pay for everything "FREE"
Free-- Auto ClunkersFree- 1st time homesFree- Cell Phones and service
Free- Health careFree- College subsidies
Free- Tutition subsidies (foolish reimb of never ending College pay increases)
Free- GM volt subsidies
Free- GM Federal tax forgiveness for 10 years (as Ford pays $2Bil)
Free- GM bailouts ($60Bil cost to all of us)
Free- GM interest forgiveness on $60B.
FREE- GM $30B US loss on investment never recovered.
FREE-Chrysler $15B investment loss sold for $1 to Fiat.
Free- Energy Solar panel disasters (paid by US)
Free- Unemployment extensions costing over $1Tril
Free- Afghanastan WAR costs. as this was the "Right" war in Obama's words.
The cost of Afghanastan escalation is 100% on Obama Watch.
(Who wants to debate that?)
Not lies.
$5tril new spending did not come from Bush.
RDBet
7:47 pm on Monday, September 3, 2012
Lol, good to see Colbert show on air on Labor Day