If the Democrats choose Birmingham, Alabama to host the 2016 Democratic National Convention, I will eat my hat. My money is on Brooklyn, although personally I would advise them to pick Columbus.
About The Author
BooMan
Martin Longman a contributing editor at the Washington Monthly. He is also the founder of Booman Tribune and Progress Pond. He has a degree in philosophy from Western Michigan University.
I think Wichita, Kansas, would be lovely in 2016.
Unless they are going to Freedom Ride and do a statewide GOTV canvass before the delegates march en masse to Birmingham, yeah, that’s a stretch.
Columbus is good; it doesn’t aggravate the folks in Cincinnati too much.
Brooklyn requires accountability for Sandy relief, which could put a positive turn on things. And it appeals to all the old white men who still miss Duke and the guys at Ebbets Field. There are some cameo appearances for you.
However, Democrats better start concentrating on 2014 as the main event. It’s July already. And August is when the GOP rolls out their wars. Pre-emption sometime?
Columbus, please. Brooklyn would be good for more of the Big Money Boyz, I guess, but doing everything we can to turn Ohio into a blue state is verrrry important.
Oh yes!!!
Brooklyn!!!
It’s so fashionable now!!!
Gentrified to within an inch of its life.
A perfect fit for today’s faux Dems.
All glitz but no hitz.
My wise son has a name for the new Brooklyn hip bourgeoisie.
Yupsters.
Perfect.
Dems…ya wanna win? Really?
Bring the convention to da Bronx!!! That’s where the real action lies. Convince the working classes of all races that you are on their side. Take off the $3000 power suits, shuck the Hawaii vacations and get down on the real street.
But NOOOOOooooo…Brooklyn it will be.
Bet on it.
$10 donuts with extra big holes.
The Obamanut.
Nice.
AG
But Columbus would be better. I am surprised San Antonio is not on either party’s radar this time around.
Would you compare a Democratic convention in Brooklyn to a Republican convention in Dallas?
What makes Columbus better than Cleveland?
Cuyahoga County (Cleveland is the county seat) went for Obama over Romney 68% to 30% in 2012. Franklin County (Columbus is the county seat) went for Obama by similar margins. The vote was closer in Hamilton County (Cincinnati is the County Seat). Dems don’t do so well in down-state counties.
Not sure what the strategy is, or even if there is a strategy for picking a city for the convention.
Columbus has maybe one-third or one-fourth of the infrastructure that would be needed to host a convention.
Which in turn is about double what Birmingham has. The entire state of Alabama doesn’t have anything close to the infrastructure for a convention of that size. Half the convention would need to commute the three hours from Atlanta.
It was a stretch for both Denver and Charlotte, and those are Top 25 markets. The only saving grace for Columbus is that it’s used to hosting OSU football games, but even then only a fraction of the people coming from other parts of the state stay overnight in the Columbus area. I can’t imagine it has the hotel rooms, let alone the upscale hotel rooms, a national party convention would require.
I think out of that list Phoenix might be an interesting choice. Maybe help out in AZ and with the rest of the Mountain West.
Dunno, Obama lost Arizona in 2012 by ten percentage points. Does the choice of a convention city actually sway elections?
I don’t think so, but it tends to build party infrastructure. Plus it would be interesting to see how a Democrat who isn’t the President fares there as the rest of the mountain west seems to be moving in the Democrats direction
Why not Florida?
How soon we forget…
GOP held their 2012 convention in Tampa, and had to scramble to re-schedule things at the last minute because Hurricane Isaac was headed their way.
I’m partial to either Brooklyn (being a NYCer) or Philly (where I went to school). Don’t think it matters a damn where you hold your convention with regards to picking up additional votes.
Found a 2012 article that suggests that the choice of a convention city does affect the vote:
http://whichwaync.com/2012/09/11/democrats-trump-republicans-in-swaying-convention-cities-votes/
Obama/Biden carried NC in 2008 and lost NC in 2012. Just sayin.
Sadly, increased Dem turnout doesn’t always mean a Dem victory.
I’ll go with “None of the above.”
Forced to choose: Philadelphia.
If an OH city must be on the short-list, Cincinnati puts it in a more purplish location. And if Grimes takes out McConnell in November it would reinforce a blue tide meme.
Cincinnati has the largest metro population in Ohio, and with Dayton to the north is becoming a multi-metro area like Dallas-Ft. Worth. Of course, I’m biased towards Cincinnati anyway.
I’m totally unbiased. Worked with the people in a Cincinnati field office for a couple of years and made a couple of brief visits to the office and city. Any positives or negatives I could speak of would be about the individuals and have nothing to do with the city on which I have no opinion because I didn’t see much of it. It just seems to me to be geographically a reasonable place to hold a DEM convention. Although with Kasich and Portman sniffing around to get on the GOP ticket, would eliminate OH as a whole this time around.
Birmingham? Why would they put it in a state where the state party is such a mess? And why is it a bad idea? Read this:
http://thesouthlawn.wordpress.com/2014/06/09/this-is-why-we-cant-have-nice-things-why-anywhere-is-be
tter-than-birmingham-for-dnc-2016/
Remember that cities used to want to have conventions because it brought in money from outside.
Since 9/11 what it brings is security clamp-downs, para-military police in the streets, and traffic jams at rush hour.
And it is not sure whether Charlotte gained more than it cost. And the Democratic mayor was indicted for bribery and extortion.
Conventions are mixed blessings.
why the phuck would the Democrats go to ALABAMA?
G-T-F-O-H
Choose Columbus.
Brooklyn is New York City, and that’s expensive.
Why? Because maybe it would show us DFH’s what it’s like down there. And it what would show people there that we aren’t the Faux Noise caricature of what they think liberals are. But the reason against can be read at the link I posted above. The state Democratic Party needs to pull its head out of its ass first.
Alabama makes no sense. (You have no idea how long I have waited for a chance to say that here, neither does Mississippi- but I digress). Ohio is a logical choice. Cincinnati is probably big enough, but quite conservative. That leaves Cleveland, final answer.
Alabama makes no sense. (You have no idea how long I have waited for a chance to say that here, neither does Mississippi- but I digress).
It makes no sense only because the state party is in shambles. And why doesn’t the DNC have them get their house in order?
Cincinnati proper is fairly liberal. It gets really conservative once you get outside the city limits. Northern Kentucky is literally a stones-throw across the river, and Clermont/Warren/Butler counties are really conservative.
Just not Chicago. That would indicate Clinton is in the bag.
A good blog always comes-up with new and exciting information and while reading I have feel that this blog is really have all those quality that qualify a blog to be a good one.I learn a lot from it. I wanna appreciate you for this great effort.
http://www.hopy-2.com/
http://www.frivhot.com/