2020 Democratic National Convention

[Texaspython 231]

20 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

Dumb fucks bitching about Kasitch are wasting their time and ink being outraged. Writing articles, chastising, what a fucking joke. Democrats will drive 15 miles out of there way to shoot themselves in the dick. Every. Damn. Time. It’s done. He served a purpose. Cut up his shit and paste it into commercials and campaign sound bytes the next 2 months. Instead they want to write about pooooor AOC, the future of the Democratic Party. If we don’t win this election there won’t be a fucking future of any party other party. Get back on point, dipshits. 
 

note, that screed was directed less at posters here and to the idiots wasting time writing articles and op eds online. But some posters here could use a sharp slap to the face as well. 

 

 

Couldn’t agree more. I’ve watched this happen so many damn times. People need to grow up.

[Hank Kingsley 21626]

So i caught Bernie's convention speech online (it was excellent), and there was one part I found pretty interesting. 

When he spoke of and to his millions of supporters, he basically said another 4 years of Trump would seriously hurt the future of the progressive movement. I think that's something that needs to be discussed a bit more with the left. 

Would 4 more years of Trump give us a MORE conservative D candidate than Joe Biden in 2024?  At that point you're completely desperate to get rid of Trumpism, and assuming Don Jr. or Ivanka ran in 2024 there would be people practically ecstatic to vote for a fucking Joe Lieberman type of candidate. It's possible that the D party would have to move right to win the White House. 

In order to keep the progressive movement strong and heading into a more powerful position, Joe Biden HAS to win. Get him in office. THEN hold his feet to the fire. 

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

7 hours ago, Hank Kingsley said:

I fucking love Bernie. 

 

As I stated previously, if we ranked the candidates in the primary (I voted for Warren) then I had him as my number two even though I knew the GOP had him in their sights. He is sharp as a tack and I don't mind a curmudgeonly leader if that fire is directed towards those that need a boot up their butt.

5 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

So i caught Bernie's convention speech online (it was excellent), and there was one part I found pretty interesting. 

When he spoke of and to his millions of supporters, he basically said another 4 years of Trump would seriously hurt the future of the progressive movement. I think that's something that needs to be discussed a bit more with the left. 

Would 4 more years of Trump give us a MORE conservative D candidate than Joe Biden in 2024?  At that point you're completely desperate to get rid of Trumpism, and assuming Don Jr. or Ivanka ran in 2024 there would be people practically ecstatic to vote for a fucking Joe Lieberman type of candidate. It's possible that the D party would have to move right to win the White House. 

In order to keep the progressive movement strong and heading into a more powerful position, Joe Biden HAS to win. Get him in office. THEN hold his feet to the fire. 

This was my takeaway. We don't get another chance and I am not sure this chance is going to be realized with all that is occurring.

[Ghost of LL 15674]

1 hour ago, Hank Kingsley said:

So i caught Bernie's convention speech online (it was excellent), and there was one part I found pretty interesting. 

When he spoke of and to his millions of supporters, he basically said another 4 years of Trump would seriously hurt the future of the progressive movement. I think that's something that needs to be discussed a bit more with the left. 

Would 4 more years of Trump give us a MORE conservative D candidate than Joe Biden in 2024?  At that point you're completely desperate to get rid of Trumpism, and assuming Don Jr. or Ivanka ran in 2024 there would be people practically ecstatic to vote for a fucking Joe Lieberman type of candidate. It's possible that the D party would have to move right to win the White House. 

In order to keep the progressive movement strong and heading into a more powerful position, Joe Biden HAS to win. Get him in office. THEN hold his feet to the fire. 

I definitely feel like there are a lot of people in both parties (#bothsides) who don't realize that in electoral politics, the goal is to win the election.  They'd rather sit there and be ideologically pure as the driven snow and never have power.

Kasich is important.  There are a bunch of people out there who may or may not consider themselves Republicans today, but who are disgusted by Donald Trump.  And at the same time, they're surrounded by Republicans.  And so no matter how much they may despise Trump, they'll vote for him because of that social pressure.

Kasich creates that permission structure not to vote for Trump.  He's somebody that most Republicans know.  Hearing a bona fide Republican say "it's ok to vote for Joe Biden" is hugely important to creating that psychological permission that will allow them not to vote for Trump.

They don't even have to vote for Biden.  If just a few of them in Ohio don't vote for Trump, Biden will will Ohio.  And if Biden wins Ohio, this thing is fucking over.

[bad_teammate 13485]

2 hours ago, Hank Kingsley said:

 Get him in office. THEN hold his feet to the fire. 

How?

[Pig Bellmont 8880]

1 hour ago, Ghost of LL said:

I definitely feel like there are a lot of people in both parties (#bothsides) who don't realize that in electoral politics, the goal is to win the election.  They'd rather sit there and be ideologically pure as the driven snow and never have power.

Kasich is important.  There are a bunch of people out there who may or may not consider themselves Republicans today, but who are disgusted by Donald Trump.  And at the same time, they're surrounded by Republicans.  And so no matter how much they may despise Trump, they'll vote for him because of that social pressure.

Kasich creates that permission structure not to vote for Trump.  He's somebody that most Republicans know.  Hearing a bona fide Republican say "it's ok to vote for Joe Biden" is hugely important to creating that psychological permission that will allow them not to vote for Trump.

They don't even have to vote for Biden.  If just a few of them in Ohio don't vote for Trump, Biden will will Ohio.  And if Biden wins Ohio, this thing is fucking over.

Yup. Also the headlines are all over the news. 
 

 

[Hank Kingsley 21626]

46 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

How?

Continued activism. Constituents talking to their representatives. Representatives working with the administration. 

Requiring Biden to make promises or go further left in the lead up this general election vs. Trump doesn't seem like the best strategy. 

 

These excerpts from Chomsky are pretty enlightening. To me at least.

 

Edited August 18, 2020 by Hank Kingsley

[bad_teammate 13485]

7 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Continued activism. Constituents talking to their representatives. Representatives working with the administration.

OK, so who is going to actually be doing that?

It's not the people here, generally. If you were to make a Venn diagram of "People Who Scold the Left on Surly" and "People Who Will be Phone-banking for the Green New Deal in Off-Years" there is somewhere between 0.00%-0.01% of overlap.

What progressive agenda items will you guys honestly, really, and truly, be actually taking to your representatives about once the elections are over? What are your actual, real-life histories in doing this work on the ground?

I might be dead wrong, but something tells me Ghost of LL isn't going to be stuffing mailers for abolishing private prisons in 2023. That's fine, that's his business, but it dulls the edge of his critique. (Just using him as a stand-in.)

Because without your active participation, "elect him, then we'll hold his feet to the fire" actually means, "elect him, then keep yelling and we'll all ignore you until the next time we need to scold you for your votes in the mid-terms because the looming threat of Republican fascism will always exist".

You don't have to be an ally. That's your business, but don't talk like an ally unless you're actually an ally.

Quote

Requiring Biden to make promises or go further left in the lead up this general election vs. Trump doesn't seem like the best strategy. 

Seems good to me because it would secure a lot of voters who are left-of-center/young and seem completely unenthused about Joe Biden. But the collective wisdom here is to just hate those voters and tell them to go to hell while making goo-goo eyes at Iraq War cheerleaders, carceral state cheerleaders, and economic conservatives who kindly don't want gays exterminated, i.e., the people at our Thanksgiving table that we want to be able to talk to more comfortably.

Why are right-wing voters more worthy of genuine outreach than left-of-center and youth voters?

[Hank Kingsley 21626]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

OK, so who is going to actually be doing that?

It's not the people here, generally. If you were to make a Venn diagram of "People Who Scold the Left on Surly" and "People Who Will be Phone-banking for the Green New Deal in Off-Years" there is somewhere between 0.00%-0.01% of overlap.

What progressive agenda items will you guys honestly, really, and truly, be actually taking to your representatives about once the elections are over? What are your actual, real-life histories in doing this work on the ground?

I might be dead wrong, but something tells me Ghost of LL isn't going to be stuffing mailers for abolishing private prisons in 2023. That's fine, that's his business, but it dulls the edge of his critique. (Just using him as a stand-in.)

Not sure why you're framing your argument around this message board. Surly isn't going to change policy. I'm talking about the electorate in general. 

The general activism and pressure over the last 4-5 years has molded a Biden platform that is way more progressive than anything he would have presented if he ran in 2016. The party has been moving left. It will continue to move left with Biden as President. I'm not sure that's the case if we get another 4 years of Trump. 

It feels like you're under the impression that a clear vote for Joe Biden is an acceptance of whatever he does. It's not. Get him in. And if he falters, give him hell. 

 

 

 

[bad_teammate 13485]

52 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

The party has been moving left. It will continue to move left with Biden as President. I'm not sure that's the case if we get another 4 years of Trump.

Disagree completely.

Biden himself rejects the leftward movement of the party and he will hold the keys. The centrist commentariat will adore his moderate politics as will his donor base. He will have zero motivation when in power to move left. Obama was more internally progressive than Joe and Obama did not move left in office.

As you mention, activism is what will move things left and that will happen completely independently of Biden or Trump being president. If anything, the progressive movement will have a lot more energy under Trump 2 than under Biden because people will still hate Donald.

The transition from "We can't move left before the election!" before the election to "Don't let great be the enemy of good!" after the election will be completely seamless.

1 hour ago, Hank Kingsley said:

And if he falters, give him hell.

Why wait? The Democrats will ALWAYS be up for elections against Republicans. It will never stop. Why will it be OK to withhold participation in the 2022 midterms or 2024 election but not now?

 

[Ghost of LL 15674]

1 hour ago, bad_teammate said:

What progressive agenda items will you guys honestly, really, and truly, be actually taking to your representatives about once the elections are over? What are your actual, real-life histories in doing this work on the ground?

I might be dead wrong, but something tells me Ghost of LL isn't going to be stuffing mailers for abolishing private prisons in 2023. That's fine, that's his business, but it dulls the edge of his critique. (Just using him as a stand-in.)

For the record, I'm not a progressive.  But I do fucking hate private prisons.

But here's the thing--there's not a goddamned thing Joe Biden is going to do about private prisons because that is a state issue.  The Bureau of Prisons runs its own shit at the federal level.

But if you're talking about the state level, I gotta tell you--your fucking mailers don't do shit.  Taking your money and promising to give to a primary challenger is what gets shit done.  And on that, yeah--I'll absolute do that.  AFTER we take the House.  Because if we don't take the House, then nothing changes with TDCJ.

[Pig Bellmont 8880]

Stolen from elsewhere: Nobody is asking b_t to marry Joe Biden- just get on the bus. The bus may not get you exactly where you want to be, but it’s going your direction. 

[bolverk 30257]

8 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

For the record, I'm not a progressive.  But I do fucking hate private prisons.

But here's the thing--there's not a goddamned thing Joe Biden is going to do about private prisons because that is a state issue.  The Bureau of Prisons runs its own shit at the federal level.

But if you're talking about the state level, I gotta tell you--your fucking mailers don't do shit.  Taking your money and promising to give to a primary challenger is what gets shit done.  And on that, yeah--I'll absolute do that.  AFTER we take the House.  Because if we don't take the House, then nothing changes with TDCJ.

BoP has contracts with a number of private prisons, including my hometown where the GEO group runs 3-4 units. He could, like H.Clinton, pledge to end those contracts, which would put a number of private prisons out of business. Then there's the matter of ICE housing undocumented folks at private detention centers across South Texas.

Edit: By the way, this isn't a knock on Biden - simply a factual follow-up. I don't know his stance on the use of private prison contracts for federal prisoners and detainees. I just know that Hillary had made a promise to end those contracts, which caused a bit of an uproar in my hometown since the GEO group employs something like 500 people there.

Edited August 18, 2020 by bolverk

[bad_teammate 13485]

Just now, Ghost of LL said:

For the record, I'm not a progressive.  

Yes, this is my point.

The prisons thing was a throwaway example, but the ultimate point is that many of our left-scolding "allies" will be very eager to abandon us entirely either the day after the election or right before the 2022 mid-terms when a lot of more moderate Republicans show up and start talking about compassionate conservatism and don't have an inflammatory Twitter account and read teleprompters instead of ranting out of pure narcissism.

And that's fine. But it's the fox condescending to the sheep and other sheep saying, "Listen to him! He is acting like he likes us!"

I see you. They don't. You don't want what I want. You don't have the same interests and values I do. Your party is full of Trump feces and you're happy to hollow out my party to use as a shovel to get him out. What's left behind doesn't matter. And some of my fellows are so desperate for bourgeois unity that they'll help you shape the shovel.

[Ghost of LL 15674]

18 minutes ago, bolverk said:

BoP has contracts with a number of private prisons, including my hometown where the GEO group runs 3-4 units. He could, like H.Clinton, pledge to end those contracts, which would put a number of private prisons out of business. Then there's the matter of ICE housing undocumented folks at private detention centers across South Texas.

Edit: By the way, this isn't a knock on Biden - simply a factual follow-up. I don't know his stance on the use of private prison contracts for federal prisoners and detainees. I just know that Hillary had made a promise to end those contracts, which caused a bit of an uproar in my hometown since the GEO group employs something like 500 people there.

I did not know the BOP had private contracts.  I stand corrected.

I was aware of ICE's contracts.  But then, I favor abolishing ICE.  So that's a somewhat separate discussion.

[TwiceHorn 32014]

10 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

I did not know the BOP had private contracts.  I stand corrected.

I was aware of ICE's contracts.  But then, I favor abolishing ICE.  So that's a somewhat separate discussion.

I wasn't either.  There are quite a few "halfway houses" that are privately contracted as well as pretrial detention centers.  But more actual prisons than I thought.  https://www.bop.gov/locations/list.jsp?facilityType=CI&addAlphabet=false&sortDescending=false&rmvePhyCmplxLocs=false&addStates=false&addRegions=false

 

Agreed on private prisons.  Prison is a core governmental function that just cannot be contracted out.  If it's too costly, fucking good, do something about reducing the rate of incarceration.  But society needs to PAY for its failures.

Edited August 18, 2020 by TwiceHorn

[WhatTheBuck 28904]

5 hours ago, Hank Kingsley said:

So i caught Bernie's convention speech online (it was excellent), and there was one part I found pretty interesting. 

When he spoke of and to his millions of supporters, he basically said another 4 years of Trump would seriously hurt the future of the progressive movement. I think that's something that needs to be discussed a bit more with the left. 

Would 4 more years of Trump give us a MORE conservative D candidate than Joe Biden in 2024?  At that point you're completely desperate to get rid of Trumpism, and assuming Don Jr. or Ivanka ran in 2024 there would be people practically ecstatic to vote for a fucking Joe Lieberman type of candidate. It's possible that the D party would have to move right to win the White House. 

In order to keep the progressive movement strong and heading into a more powerful position, Joe Biden HAS to win. Get him in office. THEN hold his feet to the fire. 

He should've given that speech four years ago. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

48 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Yes, this is my point.

The prisons thing was a throwaway example, but the ultimate point is that many of our left-scolding "allies" will be very eager to abandon us entirely either the day after the election or right before the 2022 mid-terms when a lot of more moderate Republicans show up and start talking about compassionate conservatism and don't have an inflammatory Twitter account and read teleprompters instead of ranting out of pure narcissism.

And that's fine. But it's the fox condescending to the sheep and other sheep saying, "Listen to him! He is acting like he likes us!"

I see you. They don't. You don't want what I want. You don't have the same interests and values I do. Your party is full of Trump feces and you're happy to hollow out my party to use as a shovel to get him out. What's left behind doesn't matter. And some of my fellows are so desperate for bourgeois unity that they'll help you shape the shovel.

A frustrating thing about these discussions is how oblivious most folks are to how far right our politics has gone over the past 40 years.  You have to be somewhat progressive just to get back to the idealistic rhetoric of Ronald Reagan. In many ways the progressive movement is also a resistance movement simply because there’s nothing formidable standing in the way of our continued dive towards fascism. I mean, it would be great if more people gave a shit but many still do not.

Edited August 18, 2020 by Hugo Stiglitz

[bad_teammate 13485]

For those of you who fancy yourselves pundits...

 

[Bama Chick 28596]

Well, hot damn!

[SydneyCarton 49425]

5 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

Well, hot damn!

 

Hmm. Almost 25% of American households. 

[honolulu horn 6221]

2 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

Hmm. Almost 25% of American households. 

29 million Americans, not households. 

[SydneyCarton 49425]

1 minute ago, honolulu horn said:

29 million Americans, not households. 

I understood the difference. But At the same time, I just assumed the numbers can correctly count cable streams and unique IP addresses, not eyeballs, so I assumed Households was as good a metric as any. Yes, that's being optimistic. I guess the answer is probably to split the difference between households and population. Call it 12% of America, then?

 

Honest question, is 12% of America an exciting number? I'm legitimately asking not trying to be a dick. Obviously the world has changed but 80% of America used to tune into MASH. 

[GopherRock 1773]

26 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

For those of you who fancy yourselves pundits...

 

To be fair, Bill Clinton delivered a fantastic speech at the 2016 DNC. 

[Voldemort86 2259]

47 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

Well, hot damn!

 

Do you guys think DNC ratings will beat RNC ratings?

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 

[bad_teammate 13485]

1 hour ago, Voldemort86 said:

Do you guys think DNC ratings will beat RNC ratings?

Pretty much the only thing Trump will care about.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

If only...

[BradInATX 9208]

1 hour ago, SydneyCarton said:

I understood the difference. But At the same time, I just assumed the numbers can correctly count cable streams and unique IP addresses, not eyeballs, so I assumed Households was as good a metric as any. Yes, that's being optimistic. I guess the answer is probably to split the difference between households and population. Call it 12% of America, then?

 

Honest question, is 12% of America an exciting number? I'm legitimately asking not trying to be a dick. Obviously the world has changed but 80% of America used to tune into MASH. 

The question is, what percent of that 12% isn't either already 100% voting for him, or hate watching so they can go to their Lions Club meeting and bitch to their buddies about him tomorrow?

I'd wager the percentage of our population that falls outside of those two groups and watched wouldn't even round up to 1%.

[Pescado_Rojo 19571]

40 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

Bobby Jindal should sit the fuck down and shut the fuck up after all the damage his ideas caused the State of Louisiana. 

[Voldemort86 2259]

54 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Pretty much the only thing Trump will care about.

Going to do my part by NOT watching the RNC.  I don’t want to hear trumps Nuremberg hate speech for the millionth time.

[Ghost of LL 15674]

28 minutes ago, Voldemort86 said:

Going to do my part by NOT watching the RNC.  I don’t want to hear trumps Nuremberg hate speech for the millionth time.

I mean, it's just not new.  Donald Trump has committed the one unpardonable sin in entertainment--he has become boring.

[Voldemort86 2259]

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/08/18/rnc-dnc-virtual-conventions-2020-398149
 

it’s funny how Trump slams democrats so much, but in the end he wants to be just like democrats.

his bogus campaign is watching the DNC and taking notes because they can’t come up with their own plan and their own ideas for anything. Notice how Trump is responsible for “win red”?  It’s a conservative rip off of the democrats act blue fund raising system.

 

trump was even trying to get rid of the GOP term limits on leadership positions in the house because he didn’t like people retiring after their terms were up.  Ohhhhh yeah..... you mean how democrats don’t have any term limits on their house members in leadership positions?

 

this fat ugly orange fuck is a joke. He’s not very intelligent. All he does is rip off the work of more talented and intelligent people, then pretend it’s his own. Anyone who takes Trump seriously is a pathetic loser. Just like him.

Edited August 19, 2020 by Voldemort86

[Hank Scorpio 17924]

 

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

We’re going to give it a watch again tonight. 

[Francisco 2.0 32547]

https://www.thedailybeast.com/broadcast-tv-networks-worried-about-airing-two-hours-of-trumps-convention?ref=home?ref=home

Quote

Over the last few U.S. presidential election cycles, the major television networks have chosen to broadcast just one hour each night from the respective parties’ political conventions, usually out of concern that anything more would impact viewership numbers and ad revenues. 

But this year, another explanation was offered for keeping the broadcasts short: uncertainty over what airing President Donald Trump’s coronation event might look and sound like. 

 

Quote

Multiple sources told The Daily Beast that when Democratic officials met with various broadcast network executives about their convention coverage plans, the executives stressed that they could not broadcast two hours each night in part because they then would have to give the same airtime to Trump, and all the wild unpredictability that might entail from an editorial perspective. 

“We don’t know what that content is going to be,” was the line offered up, according to one source. 

Quote

While the Democrats decided months ago that their national convention would be a virtual event, it wasn’t until July 23—when Trump decided that the COVID-19 pandemic would make his plans for a gathering in Jacksonville unworkable—that the GOP followed suit. The result was that the Democrats provided the networks with a detailed schedule of speakers and videos while the Republicans’ convention schedule is still a moving target. 

Executives at multiple networks told The Daily Beast privately that they were still almost completely in the dark about basic details of next week’s RNC, including its format and its roster of speakers.

 

Spoiler

In the end, the networks have decided to broadcast the conventions from 10 p.m. through 11 p.m. each night (though, often, the events run longer), while cable-news networks have generally said they plan to cover the festivities from 9 p.m. onward. CNN and NBC’s sister cable network, MSNBC, are airing all two hours of the nightly convention, punctuated by on-air commentary, while CBS and ABC are providing full coverage on their digital online outlets, ABC News Live and CBSN; Fox News, meanwhile, did not cover the first hour of the Democrats’ opening convention night. 

The breakdown in coverage plans mirrors what has been done in past conventions. In 2012 and 2016, the three major broadcast networks all opted to air just an hour live. But 2020 has proven different in substantive ways, and not just because of Trump. 

For starters, the conventions themselves have been compressed because of the pandemic, and—if the opening night is any indication—much of the content being presented is now pre-packaged. The networks, moreover, are choosing to air recycled material during the 9 p.m. to 10 p.m. slots rather than any new episodes of their popular shows (as production units have been shut down by the pandemic).

In 2012, for example, the DNC’s lead-in on ABC one night was a new two-hour broadcast of The Bachelor, while its lead-in on NBC was American Ninja Warrior. The two reality-TV shows were the highest-rated programs on their respective networks. On Monday, NBC aired an old episode ofAmerican Ninja Warrior, while CBS aired a months-old episode of courtroom drama All Rise, and Fox broadcast 9-1-1: Lone Star. 

And then there is the predicament that is broadcasting anything Trump-related. 

The president has complicated editorial decisions for TV executives in part because of his penchant for peddling lies, misinformation, and conspiracy theories. Networks have come under intense scrutiny from media critics and Democrats for giving Trump unfiltered air time to spread propaganda and/or failing to fact-check some of his more dangerous claims in real-time. 

That has been especially true during the coronavirus era, during which the president has routinely downplayed the severity of the pandemic, pushed unproven therapies, and attempted to discredit public-health experts that contradict his preferred policies.

The RNC also promises to be a hodgepodge of Trump sycophants, coronavirus skeptics, and alleged victims of “cancel culture.” In addition to a slate of expected speakers, including former UN ambassador Nikki Haley, Sens. Tim Scott and Joni Ernst, and Alice Johnson, the criminal-justice reform activist whose life sentence was commuted by Trump, others reportedly set to address the crowd include the St. Louis couple who were charged with unlawful use of a weapon after pointing guns at Black Lives Matter protesters earlier this year, and Nick Sandmann, a high-school graduate who became a conservative cause célèbre after he sued media outlets for defamation following video of his face-to-face encounter with a Native American activist in D.C.

It’s unclear if those concerns were at the heart of the networks’ decision to keep the broadcasts to one hour in length, or whether they were a fig leaf to rationalize airing more ad-revenue-generating content compared to the telethon-like DNC spectacle. 

“I would be very skeptical of that theory of why the networks are carrying them for only one hour,” said former CBS Evening News anchor Dan Rather, who has covered every political convention, Democrat and Republican, since he was a local reporter in Houston (and famously was knocked down by plainclothes security agents as he was broadcasting live from the floor of the 1968 Democratic confab in Chicago). “I’m not cynical about it, but I’m skeptical because the networks in recent times never wanted to give the conventions very much time,” Rather told The Daily Beast, “because they can cram in more commercials with even deadwood content.”

Indeed, it is true that American TV viewers have waning interest in the conventions as of late. According to Nielsen, about 18.7 million Americans tuned into the first night of the DNC convention on the major television networks, a nearly 28 percent drop from viewership during the Democrats’ 2016 convention. 

Rather added that while the Democrats so far have provided well-produced political theater amounting to effective messaging, especially Michelle Obama’s speech, the comparatively disorganized Republicans, under Trump’s reality-show influence, might end up as more exciting—and perhaps surreal—to watch.

“I think it’s one of the things that Trump and the Republicans are banking on,” he said. “It will be unpredictable, will have surprises, and they’ll be hoping that people will tune in just to see what’s going to happen.”

Certainly, the days of gavel-to-gavel convention coverage have now become a distant memory—the broadcast networks starting slashing airtime for the political parties’ quadrennial infomercials in 1984—and we are firmly in the short-attention-span age of the nominating convention-lite.

 

Edited August 19, 2020 by Francisco 2.0

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

The RNC adopting the “Look! A squirrel!” approach is very on brand. 

[Texaspython 231]

9 hours ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Not sure why you're framing your argument around this message board. Surly isn't going to change policy. I'm talking about the electorate in general. 

The general activism and pressure over the last 4-5 years has molded a Biden platform that is way more progressive than anything he would have presented if he ran in 2016. The party has been moving left. It will continue to move left with Biden as President. I'm not sure that's the case if we get another 4 years of Trump. 

It feels like you're under the impression that a clear vote for Joe Biden is an acceptance of whatever he does. It's not. Get him in. And if he falters, give him hell. 

 

 

 

So move him further left than the platform that got him elected? Sounds like a one term presidency.

[bad_teammate 13485]

4 minutes ago, Texaspython said:

So move him further left than the platform that got him elected? Sounds like a one term presidency.

shhhhhh, you're not supposed to tell progressives this until after Joe is elected!!!!

[Texaspython 231]

Just now, bad_teammate said:

shhhhhh, you're not supposed to tell progressives this until after Joe is elected!!!!

I forget, you’d prefer losing and watching Repubs further their agenda while watching from your high horse.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

4 minutes ago, Texaspython said:

So move him further left than the platform that got him elected? Sounds like a one term presidency.

This is like a Herbert Hoover to FDR situation, except Trump is much worse than Hoover and Biden is no FDR. I’m not sure moving left is going to be the liability people think it is.  It all depends on the issues. 

[Texaspython 231]

Just now, Hugo Stiglitz said:

This is like a Herbert Hoover to FDR situation, except Trump is much worse than Hoover and Biden is no FDR. I’m not sure moving left is going to be the liability people think it is.  It all depends on the issues. 

I think you’re right. Gotta be smart about your battles. 

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

Go Sally Go!!

[mchookem 16746]

Schumer bringing heat 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

4 minutes ago, Texaspython said:

I think you’re right. Gotta be smart about your battles. 

It’s going to be a full time job just to unfuck everything Trump did.  Getting any kind of bold legislation through doesn’t appear to be a top priority yet.  It you thought the Obama apology tour was bad after GWB...

[Doc Sam Beckett 5854]

Wait, aoc only getting 60 seconds is legit? Fuck you dnc 

[bad_teammate 13485]

1 minute ago, Doc Sam Beckett said:

Wait, aoc only getting 60 seconds is legit? Fuck you dnc 

Don't worry dude this guy is going to get all the time he needs

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

Bill’s tie is crooked. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 the replies: