Dateline Tampa: Should We Still Have Conventions?
Are political conventions worth holding anymore?
It’s hard to avoid pondering that question while walking around the convention hall here in Tampa. Sure, a lot of people are having fun, networking, dating, flogging their books and movies. But does it all still have a point in promoting that funny old concept democracy?
That’s not entirely clear. It’s been decades since an actual presidential candidate was chosen by either party at a convention. They’re more like coronations. The biggest “news” here is some obscure rules fight having to do with delegate selection, but since candidates are almost always chosen way in advance of the convention, it feels a bit moot. Still, I guess that could change at some future date.
Basically, conventions are media events intended to direct attention to the election by a public that was supposed to have been otherwise engaged. But have they? In the swing states they have already been bombarded by television commercials to such a degree that they could be excused for despising politics for the rest of their lives.
Nevertheless, its hard to judge. Nothing has really started here in Tampa. Gaggles of reporters are running around the convention hall, chasing after the likes of Jon Voight and Michele Bachmann, not exactly people scarce to the media under normal circumstances. I’m not going to name names, but if you stand in the “radio row” area long enough, you will notice several big time or semi-big time “celebrities” just standing there waiting to be “recognized.” So it goes in the great “vanity fair,” but it has little to do, again, with democracy or the intention of conventions.
In many ways, the funniest character to make his appearance here is my hometown mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. For reasons unknown (okay, maybe because he’s Hispanic) the L.A. mayor has been appointed the Democratic Party counter-representative here in Tampa. Never mind that Los Angeles is an economic disaster area almost, but thankfully not quite, resembling Detroit. “Hizzoner” actually stood among one of those reporter gaggles, holding forth on his dubious fiscal views. (I actually was in that gaggle and asked Villaraigosa a question about all the empty storefronts in our home city. He gave me a look like Linda Blair in The Exorcist and turned away without answering.)
But back to the question of the relevance of conventions. At least they give the candidates a chance to give speeches for national audiences. Tonight we have Chris Christie, Ann Romney, Nikki Haley, and our own Janine Turner.
I’m particularly looking forward to hearing Ann Romney, because what may perhaps be the greatest calumny of the many Obama-instigated calumnies this year is the so-call Republican “war on women.” It shouldn’t fall on one person to counter this propagandistic nonsense, especially since there is a line-up of women tonight, but unfortunately Mrs. Romney has been put to a great degree in that position. I have suspicion, however, that she will be up to the task.
So I guess I’m still skirting the question. Are conventions worth it? I’m not ready to answer yet. Ask me again on Friday.
More from Roger : Video: Encountering Protesters at 2012 GOP Convention
Is there anything to decide? Isn’t it pretty much a rubber stamp at this point?
Mostly – there are some non-nomination stuff that goes on like creating the official platform (which the majority of voters never read), networking, strategy planning, etc. A lot of that is done in smaller meetings the rest is just a big campaign commercial.
Even more so for the incumbent – when there is no drama as to who the nominee is, and very little to debate about the platform it is even more boring.
Rubber Stamp? Probably. It looks like the powers that be finessed the Ron Paul delegates out of a speaking spot, or of even being seated. I just heard on the radio (I can’t be sure of its authenticity) that Romney and McCain in 2008 fixed the RNC rules so that minority delegates in future conventions would be disenfranchised. As I said, I don’t know if that happened in 2008, but I’m pretty sure they’re doing that in 2012. Sounds like a SCAM. Just sayin’.
As you may be aware, the RNC and the Romney campaign are pushing a massive change to Republican Party rules which will, in part, allow the Presidential nominee to choose delegates and allow the RNC to change rules relating to the party platform and delegate selection whenever they like. http://www.eagleforum.org/alert/2012/pdf/ConventionCommitteeonRulesOrdeofBusinessContactInfo.pdf
The rules changes are intended to prevent a well-organized minority faction from hijacking a state convention and appointing convention delegates that don’t represent either the state party organization or the expressed intent of Republican primary voters.
Ron Paul followers exploited the rules to do just that in several states this year. The Romney campaign and state party officials have responded in a heavy-handed and arguably unfair manner – the Paulites executed their little coups under the letter of the existing rules, and their delegates should have all been seated.
But the Paulites’ actions were clearly in violation of the spirit of the rules and of democratic norms.
Now they are throwing a hissy fit because the loopholes they exploited are being closed to block future troublemaking.
Do we want people to get involved and run for party positions or not? If yes, then shouldn’t we show respect when an individual wins the election for a position?
The existing rules were established to guarantee that a small group organized by the state parties’ elites could control delegate selection despite the opinions expressed by primary voters. What Ron Paul supporters did was to master the arcana of the rules and then out-organize the party establishment in some states. The response of the elite has been to seek yet more revisions to the rules to make them even more anti-democratic.
If the conventions exist as media events and if national TV networks are choosing not to televise most of it, what’s wrong with this picture? Quit whining that networks don’t want to show up to a party they don’t want to attend other than for a quick hello. Conventions have let in enough media riffraff that can cover it. If people are too poor to have cable, internet or smartphones to have alternative access to Ann Romney’s speech, then either they’re capable of making a decision by reading the newspaper or by seeing the speech on the news. If Ann Romney is supposed to sway us to vote for Mitt, it’s time to take our voting rights away. Conventions are a waste of time and money. If I wanted to see a pep rally, I’d go to my local high school.
– bring back the proverbial “smoke-filled room” for Arnold.
This is two whines in a row. I wish you would stop it. It helps nothing and hurts lots of things. We don’t need this now. It’s the 4th quarter. We need players and cheerleaders. You can criticize the plays and the players after we win or lose.
I spent a while wondering why have conventions when I attended this year’s GOP convention in Fort Worth. Political parties have been diminished by selecting candidates in primaries, but party brand still means something. If you’re going to have a brand, you need an organizational structure to support it, and conventions are how the organizational structure is maintained. In my view, that’s what conventions are about. The candidates provide the circus to keep people interested while the dull, organizational stuff is handled.
Party conventions are an anachronism. Not only is the party’s nominee selected long before the convention now, but the party platform has become a meaningless piece of paper as well. (Does anyone today remember what the Democratic and Republican Platforms in 2000 were?) Today, the party’s policies are whatever the Presidential nominee’s policies are.
There does need to be a mechanism to deal with the (highly unlikely) possibility that in some future election year, no nominee will receive a majority of the delegates from the primaries and caucuses. But you don’t need a convention every 4 years just for that remote possibility. If it ever should happen, the party’s National Committee can meet to decide the nominee.
Using crude numbers, 1/3 of the voters will always go Democratic, and 1/3 will go Republican, even if the devil was at the top of one ticket. The remaining 1/3 will decide after the World Series. They elect our President. Their views are only reflected in polls taken the weekend before election day. Recently a poll revealed that 38% did not know who Mitt Romney was, after some $500 Mn has been spent defining him, by both parties.
The conventions do not work because America does not work. A large segment of our society has no deeply held concept of the meaning of the American experience, what makes us different from all the nations in the dust bin of history. I well remember a young man who said he voted for Clinton because Clinton played the saxophone. I have often pondered if that young man, and his family, will be killed in a thermonuclear war. Conventions do not matter, but elections matter, for life and death. And this one is a toss up, Senate, and White House.
Before I read any of the comments. No. I do not feel we need a convention. I’m tired of it all. I’m tired of even attempting to make myself look up to any politician. Just get your ass in there and fight for the intent of the founders regarding the role of government. That’s it. That is all I care about. The RNC reeks of establishmentarianism.
Another thing we need is for all primary votes to take place on the same day. Say, April 15th, Tax day. I’m sick of this primary silly season crap.
And you think that Gordon Gecko, er.. I mean Mitt Romney is going to do that for you. Think again, friend. (OK, I’m not your friend, I just don’t think either R nor D will provide you with your idea of constitutional gov’t)
Where did he even imply that Mitt Romney would do anything about conventions and refocusing on Founders’ principles? I kind of think “reply” should be reserved for an entry that addresses something writer has brought up in some way.
By the way, I agree wholeheartedly with Rik. And that has nothing to do with Obama or Romney or Pat Paulsen. It has to do with our increasingly dysfunctional party politics and the superficiality of campaigning these days.
Not for the GoP. The rules change just made it another yawn fest of the privileged telling the proles how good they are going to make it for us.
R & R on ’12 then comes the real work.
I suggest The Campaign 4 Primary Accountability
Primary the incumbent, lather, rinse, repeat.
Conventions only seem to make for exciting gaffes.
Juan Williams insulting Ann Romney immediately after her speech, for instance. And did anybody catch Megyn Kelly and Brit “The Heart of Fox News” Hume sitting and talking on-air over the National Anthem?
Watching it unfold live, I was reminded of the most recent POLIWOOD segment, on the decline of FOX News (8/24)… It underlines everything Simon and Chetwynd were saying about the channel losing it’s way.
I’m not a big flag-waver, but it sort-of pissed me off. A tenor was belting out the Star-Spangled Banner at the top of his lungs. Kelly, Hume and her producers obviously heard him. Even a Convention Goer standing in the background looked askance at the hosts.
Humorously, the Fox News Insider cuts the segment short in their posted video clip. They drop Hume in mid-sentence…
Being over 50 can be a very romantic time in life.Recently, Senior
Dating enjoys the tremendous popularity.join us to Make your life more
meaningful & colorful. It is never too late to fall in love.Check out…
…google SeniorLUV.C0Μ……to date someone mature, to feel Romantic
Love again, and to make your life more adventurous.
Before I read any of the comments. No. I do not feel we need a convention. I’m tired of it all. I’m tired of even attempting to make myself look up to any politician. Just get your ass in there and fight for the intent of the founders regarding the role of government. That’s it. That is all I care about. The RNC reeks of establishmentarianism.
Well, Obama is arguably the best speaker in the Democratic party and he got his start at the 2004 convention. I just watched Christie’s speech and he is arguably the best speaker in the Republican party and he didn’t do his future prospects any harm. None at all. I think conventions are an inflection point for both parties to showcase the approach they are going to take. So far I’ve watched Ms Love and Mr Christie and it is a lot more convincing that it was in 2008.
The real question is, Should we still have primaries? The answer is plainly, No. Primaries are easily manipulated by determined minorities who support radical candidates like Ron Paul and Barack Obama. The old smoke-filled rooms of machine bosses produced much more centrist candidates and frankly much more intelligent and well-prepared candidates. The old time pols wanted to continue their gravy train and only supported people who were well-known and well-established. The primaries consistently produce lunatics: for the Dinos–Carter, McGovern, Mondale, Kerry, Gore, Obama; for the Rinos–McCain.
I was thinking about all this myself. Whats the point of all the hoopala? We already know who is going run. It’s not like the old days when you didn’t know who the parties choice was going to be until the convention.
When the country was smaller. smaller population, the convention was the highlight for many from the boondocks to see and hear the actual candidates. People in the South were mostly simple-minded souls who never got really involved in anything other than a cookout or stump speeches. Small towns made up the voter lists and local newspapers belonged to people who printed them, not to some bigshot Australian commie. Now, all that has changed with latecomers from Europe and Asia making up the most influential voters. The “old guard” in most small towns are gone. The ones who could remember FDR as a living god nobody would badmouth. Heaven forbid! The idea of a black president would have had them spinning in their graves. Now, we third generation types just spin our wheels. There is so little difference between
the Dems and Repubs, I wouldn’t be surprised if, in the future, the Convention would be a combination party event under one roof.
The conventions probably still serve important functions for the parties. Large organizations need some opportunity to come together periodically for numerous reasons. They no longer serve the function of selecting the nominee of the party or of informing the general public. They could play an important role in selecting a nominee if the primaries do not sort it out or if the delegate winner dies or suffers some blow to his/her ability to accept nomination (e.g., health, scandal, etc.). Both parties and third parties have plenty of resources to introduce the candidates to the country. We had a bazillion debates in the Republican primary for goodness sake.
However, conventions no longer serve the purpose of political theater. There is no real drama. They are infomericals at best, sort of like what Ron Ropeil does. That’s why the networks now hate them. It makes the anchors and “experts” less important (which is a good thing IMHO). I’ve tuned in a bit to the Rep convention. All the media folk are bored to death and very unhappy. They have nothing to do really, and they have nothing important to say. They try to cover the conventions as if we are still living in the old world, where the conventions selected the nominees. They are zombies. We no longer rely on them for the bulk of our information, but they still want to be in that role. They are overpaid, and they know it. They are demoralized, because they make lots of money but serve such small purposes. They also know that this will not last.
It’s probably good for the country to hear the nominees give a speech on national television, but the hour per night is about right at this time. Overall, I prefer primaries to the old ways of selecting candidates, notwithstanding the problems that primaries create. I don’t think the conventions will go away, but they will no longer have the same prominence they once had. Times change.
Ooops…Ron Popeil… Sorry Ron… send me a pocket fisherman.