quote: WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Democratic National Committee has chosen Denver to host the party's 2008 national convention, the committee formally announced late this morning.
Denver beat out other cities including New York for the right to host the party's presidential nominating convention that begins August 25 and runs through August 28. DNC Chairman Howard Dean cited the party's recent political successes made in the West as one of the reasons why he chose Denver for the convention site.
"There is no question that the West is important to the future of the Democratic Party," Dean said in a prepared statement. "The recent Democratic gains in the West exemplify the principle that when we show up and ask for people's votes and talk about what we stand for, we can win in any part of the country. Additionally, we have a number of strong Democratic leaders in the West who will be a part of showcasing the vision of Democratic leadership for America as we introduce the next Democratic President in the Rocky Mountains."
I can't find the thread I said it in, but I said months ago that the best chance Democrats had for picking up new votes was in the West, and it was in their best interests to have their nominating convention in the west, like Denver or maybe Arizona somewhere (but not Vegas, that's just ripe for the picking).
This is sound, smart tactical thinking. New York is the OBVIOUS choice, or really anywhere in the established liberal bastions. Denver is a play to openly court western states where they have a serious chance of picking up new electoral votes. The only other real choice besides Denver would have been in like Ohio, Columbus or Cincinnati (or Toledo?).
Between this and what I saw from the new Democratic campaign machine in 2006, I think Republicans will see a lot of their traditional campaign advantages shrink in 2008. Get out the vote, phone banks, driving little old ladies to polling stations etc etc, Democrats are finally on the ball with that, and I think it was evidenced in 2006.
Game on in 2008.
[ January 12, 2007, 03:03 PM: Message edited by: Lyrhawn ]
Posted by Evie3217 (Member # 5426) on :
This is interesting. For some reason, I never really thought how politically important the city in which the DNC was is. (That sentence really does make sense in my head, I swear.) But it makes sense. I think that Lyrhawn is right, the Democrats are changing the way they play the game, because it obviously hasn't been working for them lately. 2006 was a good indicator for what's going to happen in the next election. I can't wait.
Posted by James Tiberius Kirk (Member # 2832) on :
Hey, that's the one with the big bear.
--j_k
Posted by Will B (Member # 7931) on :
I'm surprised they didn't go for New Orleans.
Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
Sure, it sounds good now. Wait until all the delegates luggage gets eaten by Denver's airport.
Then the snow falls.
Then see how good the decision was.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
I've been watching Colorado and Arizona with great interest the last 10 years. There really does seem to be a trend towards blue in recent years, it makes perfect sense for the Democrats to attack that region. I get pretty tired of living in a region where both sides say election after election, "That place is a foregone conclusion, I'm not wasting a day there."
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dan_raven: Sure, it sounds good now. Wait until all the delegates luggage gets eaten by Denver's airport.
Then the snow falls.
Then see how good the decision was.
lol true story. Have the Dems ever had their convention in Chicago though? Thats a much bigger problem there. You can't leave the cursed state when the weather doesn't want you to, but I suppose thats not as bad as Denver's infamous "luggage relocation" maneuver.
Posted by Occasional (Member # 5860) on :
I'm thinking Republicans at Provo, UT come 08 convention. hmmm. . . just a thought.
Posted by PrometheusBound (Member # 10020) on :
Hmm, I wonder if this could be sign that the Southwestern Democrats are coming to the fron. Bill Richardson is stepping out of the shadows and growing in popularity. Of course, he has the disadvatage of being better qualified for the job than Mrs. Clinton or Mr. Obama, so he probably won't win.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by Occasional: I'm thinking Republicans at Provo, UT come 08 convention. hmmm. . . just a thought.
haha! I'd attend, we could go out for dinner afterwards! The R/D party headquarters in Provo are VERY close to each other, like less then a block away.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
Snow? The nominating convention is usually during the height of summer. I know it's the mile high city, but they still have a summer don't they?
The last time the Nominating Convention was in Denver was 1908. So a century will have passed since they were there.
* The Republican Convention will take place the following week in St. Paul, Minnesota. So no dice for the southwest. St. Paul was one of the three finalists (after New Orleans dropped out) of the Democratic nominating convention, but they went with Denver, wisely I think.
Posted by Tarrsk (Member # 332) on :
*tries to imagine O'Hare being even more crowded with pissed off, impatient people than usual*
*can't*
Posted by Zophar (Member # 10063) on :
A century since the last one? I like these sorts of anniversaries. Does this mean the Cubs will win the World Series this year or next? Please?
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
A century since they were in DENVER, they were in Chicago 12 years ago.
No dice for the Cubs.
Posted by Zophar (Member # 10063) on :
quote:A century since they were in DENVER, they were in Chicago 12 years ago.
No dice for the Cubs.
Yep, understood about Denver etc. Just thinking more generally about 100 year anniversaries. I'll keep hoping. there's two years in a row that are 100 year anniversaries for the Cubs. Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
Ah, I get it now.
Posted by i_r_actor (Member # 10081) on :
I think both the Republicans and Democrats chose beautifully, putting their conventions in spots that are traditionally the other party's but could easily swing thier way. In 2004 the two closest states were New Mexico for Bush and Wisconsin for Kerry both going with a below 1% margin. Unfortunately for the Democrats, if they pick up the five in play states in the west (Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, Nevada, and Montana) and the Republicans pick up the three in play states in the mid-west (Minnesota, Michigan, and Wisconsin) the Republicans will win 291 to 247, way bigger than 2004. Luckly for the Democrats, the convention location doesn't really do that much (Republicans had their 2004 convention in New York and lost it by 1.4 million votes, the largest margin in the entire country.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
Doubtful the Republicans will pick up Michigan. We just reelected a Democratic governor by a few million votes, and a Democratic Senator.
To say nothing of the crap state of the economy right now. And most people blame Bush, and by association Republicans. I think we're going to be a cakewalk for Democrats in 2008.
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)