Should we have party conventions? Why or why not?

[jgruber]

There doesn't seem to be much point to conventions anymore.  The platform has been written and the candidates selected.

Why bother?

[Freak]

Well there is the right to assemble, but as for why to bother the states do get some local political help from the conventions.

[jgruber]

I'm not suggesting they should be prohibited.  But why should people spend all that money to put on a dog and pony show?

Well there is the right to assemble, but as for why to bother the states do get some local political help from the coynventions.

[Freak]

It motivates the core of the party, kind of a emotional rally to help them put forth the tremendous grass roots effort to get the parties' candidates elected.

[jgruber]

that's an awful lot of money to motivate the party.

Frankly, I think the only purpose it serves at this point is to get free air time.

It motivates the core of the party, kind of a emotional rally to help them put forth the tremendous grass roots effort to get the parties' candidates elected.

[Section Eight]

Personally, I believe the conventions to be a great thing.  Certainly, they are a joyous occasion for the parties; however, I think their biggest impact is upon the people who normally don't play a role within our nation's political system.  Perhaps the incredible media outlet that exists during the conventions may help get citizens of our country more involved with the electoral process.

I do understand that they are simply ceremonial anymore and that the candidates are already selected beforehand; yet, I see first-hand people (usually younger people who were not old enough to vote last election) deciding to be a part of the system and vote in part due to the press the conventions receive.  I believe, regardless of partisanship, people acting upon their rights to vote will help our country grow and prosper.

[buster]

They put the "party" in "political party." 

There doesn't seem to be much point to conventions anymore.  The platform has been written and the candidates selected.

Why bother?

[The ZAPINATOR]

edit

[jgruber]

ZAP, you're right but even more than you think.

I worked on the '80 Kennedy campaign and picked up on some attitudes.

Party workers saw the national convention as a reward for hard work.  A big party to pay them back for all the envelope stuffing and phone canvasing.

[Freak]

That basically sums up the American value system, shoot that sums up most peoples' value systems; we are shallow in general, always have been always will be.

Because the elites in politics like free beer.  They like free wine.  They like any kind of free party (and as delegates, they get all this stuff free).  I agree with you that conventions are wasteful and useless in many regards... they really do fire up partisans, but few else.  You have to think there'd be a better way to fire up the base than to have a huge convention that's boring to watch for most people who aren't there.  But as long as elites keep putting their free wine and their status/ego-trips above the people they serve, you're going to have conventions.  Sad fact.  Even sadder, I know several people who were seriously talking about going to the Democratic convention and sneaking into parties with the delegates they knew, etc.  Once again, it was just because they wanted to attend a big drunken party.  I think that's incredibly shallow and that it misses what conventions should actually be about if they actually mattered at all, but that's just me.

ZAP