Where should the Democrats hold their 2008 Convention?

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/09/27/republican.convention.ap/index.html

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Republicans have chosen the Twin Cities of Minneapolis-St. Paul over Cleveland and other cities for the 2008 presidential convention, GOP officials said Wednesday.

--snip--

The Democrats plan to hold their convention August 25-28, 2008, and the Republicans will meet a few days later on September 1-4.

--snip--

The Democrats, who last met in Boston, will announce a decision later this fall. A spokesman said 11 sites expressed interest in having the party's convention, but only four completed the proposals. New Orleans later withdrew its bid, leaving Denver, New York City and Minneapolis-St. Paul.


---------------------

So, of the three remaining choices, in which city would you hold our 2008 convention?

[Ian David]

1. It's too bad we can't have it in New Orleans. n/t

[BOSSHOG]

2. I believe the city fathers decided the could not afford it right now

[BOSSHOG]

3. I think Baghdad would be a great locale for the dems

A 24/7 commercial against the grand old party

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

6. It'd make for a great "excuse" for a "terrorist" to kill off half of us

You couldn't pay me to have it there. The Republicans would have us killed, literally, with impunity.

[maxsolomon]

4. NOT in the same city as the GOP

NYC allows the Dems to own the stage of 9/11. and they should.

the GOP is going to get rural and folksy & run away from the GWOT. not this time.

[MrCoffee]

8. You sold me. i voted NYC.

[Democrat 4 Ever]

5. I have a bone to pick with the Dem on their scheduling of the

convention. I thought historically the Dems and Repugs swapped back and forth on who holds their presidential conventions each election cycle. In 2004 the Dems went first, got a nice bounce and then Chucklenuts and the Cabal came in later and rode just enough of a bounce after their convention to pretend the polls were supporting them enough to steal the election. I don't trust the repugs as far as I can throw any one of them - and I believe that bounce after the convention will be needed to carry Dems through to Nov. We can't afford to hand them a single advantage.

Okay, somebody set me straight. Have I got the swapping of convention dates wrong?

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

13. I believe you do have it wrong.

Party in power always goes last.

[lonehalf]

14. I always thought that the party of the President went last n/t

[liberal N proud]

7. Let if be New York

New York can show the world what they are made of and it will give the Dem's the opportunity to pay proper respect to the victims of 9/11 with out all the photo-op political bullshit.

[VOX]

9. Of the 3 listed so far, NY is the better choice...

Major media hub, 9/11 echoes, etc., etc.

[dback]

10. Why isn't Seattle on the list? Didn't they have their act together?

It's a very blue city in a purple state (half deep blue, half crimson red), but doesn't have the "liberal" baggage label of SF, New York, Los Angeles, etc. High-tech central, home to Starbucks, gorgeous, would be a logical candidate to host. Oh well, maybe 2008.

Have we had our convention in Miami recently? That'd shore up the Latino vote nicely.

[SDDEM06]

11. NYC

If only so I'll have an excuse to travel to NYC :)

Denver might be the better choice for political reasons, however.

[FogerRox]

12. I voted NYC out of selfish concern, I could go.

I like Montana, an ode to Gov. Brian Sweitzer.

[Dulcinea]

15. None of the above.

I vote for New Orleans!

[Ignacio Upton]

16. Denver

It would symbolic our gains in the Mountain West, and send a message to libertarian-leaning voters in the area that they're welcome in our tent.

[MissMarple]

17. Denver has climate and location going for it. And Denver is blue.

Well bluer than the rest of Colorado. El Paso County has the lock down on red. But even we have pockets of very blue. And conventions are good for business. Many of our Republicans are business men and women. Democrats can be good for business, actually even far better than this current crop of GOPers. They are only good for certain businesses, especially ones with deep pockets. We are also about to elect a Democratic governor, and right now we narrowly control both the house and the Senate in Denver.

And besides, then I could go. :)

[On the Road]

18. Democrats Might Do Well To Make Gains in the West

and to do so by driving a wedge between the Far West and the Southeast. Colorado fits that scheme nicely.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

20. I completely agree with that assessment.

I see the West as a place where Democrats can make some inroads, and this would be a good place to start.

[On the Road]

24. One of the Trends That Favor Democrats

is the increasing infringement of civil liberties by Republicans. A lot of DLCers are afraid of standing against the worst parts of the Patriot Act because of independent support for Bush in the Southeast. I believe this is misguided.

The secret is to change the image of the party from the Rush Limbaugh caricature to one more acceptable to Westerners. This includes support for civil liberties. It also includes stewardship of the environment -- not giving it over to corporations, but taking a common sense approach to management that can resonate with a wide variety of voters. A lot of issues can be reframed like this.

All it takes it one strong candidate with a vision. I don't know if Howard Dean has the best resonance with the voters, but he has the right ideas, and he is the right person to lead the effort. In fact, it may already be starting to work. We'll find out in November.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

26. Couldn't have said it any better.

That's exactly how I feel about it.

The thing that sickens me, however, is the continuing need to pander to the South. We aren't going to win the South. The South has rarely ever voted with the North. It's that simple. The West (and Midwest) is absolutely ripe for the taking though, and yet we have spent so little of our focus on it. I'm not saying we should completely abandon the South, but our strategies should be more towards winning the West instead.

Colorado, Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, the Dakotas, Montana... we could swing those states into our column if we follow your plan. Perhaps they won't ever be stalwart states for us, but we could at least count on getting them to swing our way once in a while, more often than they do now and more often than the Southern states do.

[tkmorris]

19. Vancouver, BC

OK I'm kidding, but I must say that none of those options appeals much. I suppose New York isn't too bad but....

[beaconess]

21. NEW ORLEANS!

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

22. NO withdrew their application. (nt)

[MaineDem]

23. Denver

Time to move back to the West.

[AtomicKitten]

25. San Francisco

And you all can stay at my house.