A Low Key Convention

by: Matt Stoller

Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 14:47


I'm watching T Boone Pickens, Carl Pope, and John Podesta on a panel at the Big Tent discussing renewable energy.  I find this convention much less, I don't know, purposeful than I expected.  There are very few memorable speeches or lines, certainly nothing like Ann Richards in 1992.  

Here's a comment from a reader that seems to sum up what I'm seeing here.

My take on the convention so far is that we are being WAY too low key. Other than Kuchinich, I haven't seen anyone get genuinely angry. We've been pissed off and pissed on for 8 years and everyone I know is mad as hell. Where's the passion? How can you incite the people to act up if you won't remind them WHY they need a change? It's almost as though the whole party is afraid that Barack will get labelled "the angry black man." Sooner or later, they'll throw that one out...why not seize the label and embrace it first?

Interestingly, Pickens put out an ad that says that Iran is switching to natural gas and selling its oil abroad while we do nothing, but it was rejected by NBC because they said he couldn't prove we are doing nothing.

That's the kind of nuggets I'm getting from this convention - interesting points from T. Boone Pickens.  I don't mean to be a downer, but this doesn't strike me as a great sign.

Matt Stoller :: A Low Key Convention

Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
A Low Key Convention | 37 comments
Which makes me sad (4.00 / 4)
all over again that Edwards fucked up.

Say what you will about him, he alone among the big-time speakers would've been capable and willing to articulate and tap into the outrage and sense of betrayal afflicting so many of us--and by "us" I mean Americans.

I don't think these emotions need necessarily to be forefront--and with Obama as our nominee, they of course won't be--but a convention should not only speak to the undecided but galvanize the ostensibly decided. It should provide catharsis and inspiration.

That said, it takes only a few speeches to get the job done. A good why-Democrats-are-better-than Republicans speech from Bill, a good rant by Biden, and then poetry from Obama, and we could come away feeling alright.

Which is why Gore's speech worked so well in 2000 (0.00 / 0)

[ Parent ]
I still think it was the smooch with Tipper that did it (4.00 / 1)

[ Parent ]
I think I'm going to stick to number crunching (4.00 / 3)
This nervous nellie stuff is getting me down more than anything happening at the convention.
Agreed (0.00 / 0)
Let's hope that some sweet, sweet math starts making everyone feel better in the next few days!
[ Parent ]
Hard to have a (4.00 / 1)
great convention when you are spending the entire time trying to appease a small group of Clinton supporters who are going on TV every five minutes talking about how they are going to vote for McCain.

We look weak.  Thank the drawn out bitter primary, but this is a convention where everyone is just trying not to offend.  

I really can't see the point of Hillary going to the end even though she couldn't win.  But anybody who said anything was picking on the victim and being sexist.  So this is where we are.  

The primary wasn't healthy.  

strategic anger (0.00 / 0)
It's almost as though the whole party is afraid that Barack will get labelled "the angry black man." Sooner or later, they'll throw that one out...why not seize the label and embrace it first?

because if you do it first, then the perception is that they are proven correct. if you wait till they say it, then you seize it and turn it back on them: Yes, I am angry. Angry that our president has for 8 years ignored the middle class--literally the foundation of our nation. Angry that our vice-president allowed big oil to literally write our nation's energy policy. Angry that the Republican nominee insists he's a patriot yet daily impugns a fellow American's patriotism. Etc. etc.

Kucinich's best line ended up on the cutting room floor. (4.00 / 1)
"They're asking for another four years - in a just world, they'd get 10 to 20." ~ Dennis Kucinich Link

And he woke up an audience that until that moment appeared to be mostly waiting to hear anybody else. - Detroit Free Press

This whole thing is nothing but a yawner.  No wonder the only thing the media talks about is pissed off Hillary supporters.  There is no beef.


[ Parent ]
The Ann Richards quote came in 1988... (4.00 / 5)
not 1992...it was a good line...but we lost that election, as I recall.

Anger doesn't necessarily equate with winning. If it did, Goldwater would have won big time in 1964 and Bush 1 would have won in 1992 when Buchanan got really pissed and called for a culture war.

I think there might be other, more accurate measuring sticks for success than the anger meter. Each race is different.

Just sayin'.

Right (4.00 / 2)
although I do think Ann Richards speech did help. Wasn't Dukakis still in the lead during the summer?

Also there's a difference between Goldwater anger at the New Deal which, you know, people like and progressive populist anger at plutocrats and unfettered corporate power. That's the anger we're talking about. Anger that people (outside of well-off old southern white men, to generalize) can actually identify with.

[ Parent ]
Agreed (0.00 / 0)
Throwing lots of red meat to your base is not necessarily a winning formula for a convention.  As you note it was a disaster for the Repubs in both 1964 and 1992.

It is not as though the Dems aren't whacking John McCain.  Schweitzer and Clinton both took some good shots. "No how, no way, no McCain" could easily stick through the GE.

This convention is starting to remind me of 1992 which jumped Clinton from third place behind Perot to first place.  Clinton needed to reintroduce himself to the public with all his scandal problems and show he was a self made man.  THe repubs had tried to make him an elitist too b/c he went Georgetown and Yale.  Hence he became the man from Hope.  I see a similar theme emerging about Obama.  

In the end this is a change election and Obama needs to show he is the acceptable alternative.  I think they are slowly but surely doing that.  I see two messages that need to come out of the convention:

Obama is a self made man and is just like everyone else despite a funny name.  Michelle Obama and the kids went a long way towards making this argument.

McCain=Bush.  That message was clear yesterday from all the speeches I heard.  I expect more today and tomorrow.

[ Parent ]
postive convention (4.00 / 4)
The early reports were that the Obama team wanted a positive convention to introduce him to the larger public as a person they could relate to. It wasn't until fairly recently that there have been campaign sourced quotes talking about a more aggressive attack on Republicans. I assume there is some conflict within the campaign between fear of the "angry black man" perception and stepping on Obama's core, post-partisan message, and the need to negatively define McCain and the Republicans. So the convention feels a little tentative.

My sense is that Obama has strong partisan killer instincts but that he does not believe indulging them publicly serves the purpose of winning the presidency. I think he has taken that balance too far, and that the old blogosphere critique that Democrats fail because they fail to energize the base is correct here.

Interesting (4.00 / 1)
One might imagine that the rest of the speakers attack McCain, making Obama appear by contrast sober and reserved.
[ Parent ]
Agreed. (0.00 / 0)
Except the "angry black man" problem is probably very real and valid. I suspect Obama really does have to reign in the anger. Where things are too soft so far is with the rest of the party, though I think Hillary, Kucinich, Schweizer, and several others made some pretty good hits last night. That said, Obama's "post-partisan" stuff has seemed to me like a problem from the beginning. I hoped he was just doing the usual soothing bullshit, but it's starting too look like he might really mean it. Hope not.
[ Parent ]
certainly real (0.00 / 0)
He is a black man running for the presidency of the United States of America, I think it was Jim Hoffa who said he has to win over some racists to win the election. But it may be that despite the risk a harder Democratic message would get through to them.

Even a moderate can have strong partisan instincts, I think Obama really means the soothing BS.

[ Parent ]
the republicans challenged us to have a positive convention in 2004. we did it!!! (4.00 / 1)

[ Parent ]
angry white surrogates (4.00 / 1)
If Team Obama is worried about a so-called angry black man image, all the more reason to have angry white surrogates do the attacking before Obama arrives with the uplifting speech at the end.
[ Parent ]
"Almost like..."?? (4.00 / 1)
Obama's prime guideline has pretty obviously been to avoid being the "angry black man" like the plague. Unfortunately it's a pretty reasonable, maybe essential, approach given the country he's running in.

As a mere view on the tv, though, I didn't see a glaring lack of attacking, expecially considering that the past 2 nights were supposed to be soft and nice in preparation for today and tomorrow. I thought Hillary and Schweizer and of course Kucinich made some pretty strong points and am expecting it to get a lot more down and dirty with Biden and maybe even Clinton tonight.

It is kind of sad, though, that it takes "non-serious" media like the Daily Show and The Onion to tell it like we all know it really is.

Oh, come on (4.00 / 1)
What reminds me of 2004 isn't what the candidate is doing--it's all this vague public negativity and second-guessing of the campaign.  Haven't you heard of message discipline, people?

The problem with Democrats is that so many of us seem to prefer being the smartest person in the room to winning.

Yeah, like we have this huge megaphone... (0.00 / 0)
Did you see this?

h/t to Raw Story for covering this. Amy Goodman, host of Democracy Now!, and A-list bloggers Glenn Greenwald and Jane Hamsher were all shut out of a Blue Dog Democrat party sponsored by AT & T. All three of them had press credentials. Here's how Amy Goodman covered the event. Welcome to the Dems version of Dick Cheney's energy council.

Or this?

Just talked to Jane Hamsher of Firedoglake. Apparently the organizer of the Blue Dog party was arrested last night. More to come. Stay tuned!!!

I don't want cheerleading.  I want Democrats.

[ Parent ]
Can someone explain why we keep having (4.00 / 3)
"Praise Jesus our Savior" prayer at end of each night? Who dreamed up the religious psychobabble pandering?

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare
Don't know where all the praying came from (4.00 / 1)
or where its all going, but my wife, a recent immigrant from Turkey, could not believe her eyes when she saw a political convention in a nation that prides itself on SEPARATING church and state end with a prayer service. She said that she has never seen such an overt combination of religion and politics, not even from the fundamentalist parties in her home country.



"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."

[ Parent ]
I guess you missed one of the previous threads ... (0.00 / 0)
it's because the convention is being run by Leah Daughtry:

http://www.democrats.org/a/200...

She's a part-time minister

[ Parent ]
great, thanks (0.00 / 0)
someone pass the snakes.

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare
[ Parent ]
Agreed (4.00 / 1)
Case in point: John Sweeney.  I hadn't seen him speak for a while before last night.  If anyone could give an angry, lefty critique of our economic troubles, it should be the leader of the labor movement!  He's a nightmare of a spokesperson for a movement in desperate need.
You forget that no one watches this stuff anyway (4.00 / 2)
Outside of the hard-core watching C-SPAN, the only speeches being heard by most Americans are going to be Michelle, Hillary, Bill, Biden and Barack--no one else.

All the other coverage gets filtered through the media, and if all they want to do is talk about Clinton-Obama, well, that's what they're gonna do.

Ann Richards wouldn't even be heard on Tv in 2008, these networks are just tools.

I think (4.00 / 2)
That some people are a little too invested in this convention right now, just like what happened toward the end of the primary.  Progressive blogs have been looking forward to the convention as a time when we would define McCain and get a huge bounce in the polls,  worrying that it wouldn't happen, and thus afraid that Obama will later get swiftboated and lose the general election.  

Those are all fair concerns, but I think that what has happened is we are so afraid of the worst outcome (Obama gets swiftboated and loses), that we aren't seeing the convention as it is, but through the prism of our fears for the election.

definitely (4.00 / 1)
Good points are being made here by Chris and Matt, and honestly, I feel largely the same as they do.  But we have to realize the campaign is more than just four days long, and this thing is going to be a nail biter to the end. It was always going to be this way... honestly with either Hilary or Barack as nominee.  This is what we knew we were getting into and now we have to take whatever small or large bounce we get out of this, effectively blunt the Republicans' message next week (I hope we will have a cable ad buy that matches theirs from this week), own the debates, and haul ass until the end.  It's not gonna get any easier.
[ Parent ]
Just hoping.... (0.00 / 0)
....that Hillary was the turning point and we'll see some fire tonight.
schedule (0.00 / 0)
Here's a tangential question.  Why did we again let the Republicans schedule their convention second?  They're going to have the opportunity to deflect whatever we get out of this week and take the momentum into the home stretch.  A positive first convention followed by a negative second convention is a recipe for disaster for the first party.
They get to go 2nd .. (0.00 / 0)
because they are the party currently occupying the White House
[ Parent ]
The incumbent party (4.00 / 1)
always holds their convention last  
[ Parent ]
Angry black man (0.00 / 0)
Doesn't he realize that the problem with embracing the "angry black man" label is that it won't get the people we need to vote for us TO vote for us.  
Why would we expect obama's convention to be liberal fire and brimstone (4.00 / 1)
That is not who Barack is, that is not what the people he is trying to convince want to hear.  I think this convention "personality" and story are exactly what is needed to win.  A day of discussion on how Obama is like every other American  (did he not have to address the "exotic" ridiculousness).  A day for the economy and unity (Schweitzer, Kucinich, and Clinton all gave heartfelt, passionate, American value speeches).  And now we await foreign policy and Biden's counter-offensive.  The story as it matures is getting more dramatic, more persuasive, and more enthusiastic.  Tomorrow I expect it will climax.  I for one am enjoying the story as it unfolds.  

Of course the media is impatient and wants a knife fight every moment. I don't think that is what America wants and I don't think that would do anything but hurt Obama-Biden's chances.

a slug fest (0.00 / 0)
Yes, I think the relative lack of vitriol just points to how bloody this thing is going to be to the end.  10 point Obama leads are a pipe dream.  This guy is a new comer with a funny name; he was never going to get those kinds of margins for long.  Rather, he's going to have to fight it out to the end.  

Thinking that we would retake the high footing this far in advance is naive for all the reasons people are suggesting.  What would we rather do.. spend the next 10 weeks making our case to America, or fighting down the image of Obama and Democrats as "angry"?  Michelle as a black nationalist and Hilary as a PUMA?  

No, now this is the time for feeling good and building unity.  Then, a brutal long march to the end.  I wish that we could be coming out of this convention with an insurmountable lead based only on our brilliant attacks on McCain.  But that was never going to happen.  The public has too many questions about Obama, and Democrats have too much negative baggage to overcome.  No, we'll be looking at 1-2 margin up to the end.  And that's ok.  This is what Chris calls the "natural state" of the race.

Matt - (0.00 / 0)
Perhaps you need to get the hell out of the Pickens tent and Harold Ford/DLC schmoozers.

I mean maybe it's just me, but it sounds like you've been spending an awful lot of time around crappy events when there's likely lots better stuff going on.

Ya think?  

Teflon John (0.00 / 0)
One explanation I haven't heard mentioned for the Dems-as Matt mentions- not being able to direct much animus towards McCain is that had things worked out slightly differently, the same party regulars trying to knock him off his pedestal would have been marching behind him as Kerry top choice for VP a mere four years ago.

Add to this that the strongest endorsements for McCain in the past have come from Democrats, including from Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden.

McCain had a killer ad out in response to Obama's tapping Biden for VP in which Biden declares, bizarrely , that he would be "proud to run against John McCain, and proud to run with John McCain."

If McCain pulls this out it will be due to seeds which Democrats themselves planted over the years.

They'll only have themselves to blame.  And they will need to recognize this if they have any hope of developing a strategy to combat it.

 

A Low Key Convention | 37 comments
USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS

Home | RSS/XML Feed | Register | Contact

  © OpenLeft 2007-2010, Powered by SoapBlox

Powered by: SoapBlox