Democratic National Convention

cristoir

On Tuesday so begins the Democratic National Convention where US President Barack Obama will receive his party's nomination for re-election. The Convention will be held in Charlotte, North Caroline.

The Keynote will be given by Julian Castro, the Mayor of San Antonio in Texas.
Other Notable Speakers include:

Elizabeth Warren
Michelle Obama
Bill Clinton (who will nominate Obama)
Rahm Emmanuel.
Charlie Crist (Former Republican Governor of Florida who left the GOP in 2010)

Of all the speech's I think Crist's could be the most interesting. He is a moderate Republican who fell victim to the Tea Party.

matthew8

cristoir wrote: »

Of all the speech's I think Crist's could be the most interesting. He is a moderate Republican who fell victim to the Tea Party.

More like a career politician who doesn't believe in anything.

Einhard

matthew8 wrote: »

More like a career politician who doesn't believe in anything.

Sounds pretty much like Romney so.

Amerika

It’s looking more and more that the Democrats are set to move Obama's Thursday DNC acceptance speech from the 74,000-seat outdoor Bank of America stadium to a much smaller 20,000-seat indoor arena. There is concern that they can’t fill the big venue and footage of a plethora of empty seats would be politically disastrous. Even though a Democratic official said that the speech would be given in the outdoor stadium “rain or shine,” they now are using the weather and 30% chance of thunderstorms as an excuse to move it to the much smaller arena. I certainly would agree a storm is coming, but not necessarly the kind that’s weather related.

And an update to the Democratic Convention. Seemingly, the party will officially adopt an extreme position on the issue of abortion today. “The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to make decisions regarding her pregnancy, including a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay.” ”Regardless of ability to pay” simply means taxpayer-funded abortions. It seems the party also endorses the unrestricted right to “Abortion-On-Demand.” And what's the will of the majority of Americans regarding tax-payer funded apportions, and unrestricted abortion-on-demand, you may ask (but probably won't)?

Amerika

Are there any Democratic prime-time speakers at the DNC convention tonight worth watching?

Conas

They had a tribute to Ted Kennedy at the convention tonight. It's so sad what happened to that amazing family. JFK, RFK, John Junior. Had JFK lived, and Robert Kennedy became president in 1968 thousands of lives would have been saved in Vietnam, and it's scary how different America would have been today in my opinion. The American dreamed died that day in Dallas. Found this very popular JFK video on You Tube today, worth a listen. RIP JFK, Ted, RFK, and John Junior.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhZk8ronces

Amerika

Did they really show a video at the DNC convention with the line "The Government Is The Only Thing We All Belong To?" The Internet and political pundits are sure going to jump on that one. What were they thinking?

Fr Tod Umptious

Conas wrote: »

They had a tribute to Ted Kennedy at the convention tonight. It's so sad what happened to that amazing family. JFK, RFK, John Junior. Had JFK lived, and Robert Kennedy became president in 1968 thousands of lives would have been saved in Vietnam, and it's scary how different America would have been today in my opinion. The American dreamed died that day in Dallas. Found this very popular JFK video on You Tube today, worth a listen. RIP JFK, Ted, RFK, and John Junior.

Off topic I know and possibly should be dealt with in History form, but could you explain that one please ?

Min

I thought it was rather unfortunate when Michelle Obama was speaking last night about the right of women to control their own bodies, then for the camera to show a child clapping like crazy and then to focus the camera onto a baby in the audience.
Seemed a bit contradictory.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Denerick

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Jesus Christ I'm getting sick of this stupid posturing. The government is the only thing that all Americans belong to. America has a plethora of unique churches, social groups, political organisations, families, individuals, police stations, schools, universities... What binds them all together? The nation. The government is the representative organisation of the nation, chosen by the people to carry out the work of the people. Anyone who decides to get offended at this is so far in hock to the radical right that I would begin to question their level of sentience.

On another note, its becoming more and more distressing to remember and bear in mind that Ronald Reagan would be considered a liberal pinko in the modern Republican party. Let America burn, let its republic collapse, it'll frogmarch into its own demise if it follows through with this radical crap. Obama is the last hope of sanity in an increasingly bizarre conservative political scene.

Now for a little historical perspective. Romney = Sulla, Obama = Marius. Think of that what you will.

joseph brand

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Those in the DNC view government as a coordinating and authoritative entity, providing direction as opposed to development by way of a spontaneous order. This romance with centralized authority is why those in government, including their apologists and cheerleaders, so often enact legislation that harms the people. Minimum wage laws create unemployment, subsidies increase costs, and public schools fail to provide adequate education.

The DNC does not want individuals to have power. They want collective groups (whom they favor) to have power at the expense of others. This is in stark contrast to what the founders had in mind, and goes against the very principles this country was founded upon.

Minimum wage laws keep people out of poverty, I would have thought? I'm all against subsidies for the oil industry, just like Obama.

President Barack Obama announced he is supporting a bill in the Senate that removes subsidies for oil companies. CBS News reports the legislation, sponsored by Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., was voted down in a procedural move. Menendez needed 60 votes to pass the bill but only got 51 votes to move forward. The bill would have ended oil subsidies to large companies such as ExxonMobil, Chevron, BP, ConocoPhillips and Royal Dutch Shell.

Would this have anything to do with the fact that the Koch bros are donating millions to Romney's campaign? (apart from the whole 'lowering of taxes for the wealthy').

Did the founding fathers envision Billionaires (Koch bros and Adelson) attempting to buy a government? What could possibly go wrong with this idea.

Duck Soup

Michelle Obama was superb last night. Deval Patrick just plum brought the house down.

Duck Soup

Elizabeth Warren and the Big Dog himself, Bill Clinton, on tonight. Really looking forward to Elizabeth Warren's speech in particular. Damned smart and the hall will love her.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Amerika

Denerick wrote: »

Jesus Christ I'm getting sick of this stupid posturing. The government is the only thing that all Americans belong to. America has a plethora of unique churches, social groups, political organisations, families, individuals, police stations, schools, universities... What binds them all together? The nation. The government is the representative organisation of the nation, chosen by the people to carry out the work of the people. Anyone who decides to get offended at this is so far in hock to the radical right that I would begin to question their level of sentience.

I know what I heard, and it was truly a revealing moment of today’s Democratic core philosophy. It’s becoming a rather sad joke over here that we are to ignore what Democratic politicians actually say, and have to wait a day to find out what their spin-doctors tell us they "really meant." The values described in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution are a better summary of what we belong to. And those documents are not the government. Rather, they provide us the right to assemble, speak out against our government, and change it through our votes. The government belongs to us... not the other way around.

Eliot Rosewater

Denerick wrote: »

Jesus Christ I'm getting sick of this stupid posturing. The government is the only thing that all Americans belong to. America has a plethora of unique churches, social groups, political organisations, families, individuals, police stations, schools, universities... What binds them all together? The nation. The government is the representative organisation of the nation, chosen by the people to carry out the work of the people. Anyone who decides to get offended at this is so far in hock to the radical right that I would begin to question their level of sentience.

In fairness, there is a difference between the government and the nation. While every American belongs to the American nation, saying a partiuclar American belongs to the government has a different connotation. It implies that they in some sense support its current direction or any direction it is likely to take. To put it in a context you might sympathize with: if you were born and lived in China would you say you belonged to the government of China? I really doubt it. Just because the United States is a democracy of some kind does not change the point: many people do not believe that their government reflects their values and desires enough to "belong" to it.

20Cent

Michelle Obama's speech transcript

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/transcript-michelle-obamas-democratic-convention-speech/story?id=17155898#.UEdRNrJlTQ4


Great line here sums up well

And he believes that when you've worked hard, and done well, and walked through that doorway of opportunity…you do not slam it shut behind you…you reach back, and you give other folks the same chances that helped you succeed.

Amerika

I watched a lot of the DNC convention last night. My God, these Democrats really love abortions. Can someone please tell the DNC that the American people want to hear about increasing jobs and improving the economy… not about taxpayer subsidized abortions-on-demand.

Also, Hillary Clinton is half a world away, and we pretty much know why. Andrew Cuomo is one of the most prominent Democratic Party’s shining stars, and could possible be POTUS one day… why is he not at the DNC convention?

20Cent

Amerika wrote: »

I watched a lot of the DNC convention last night. My God, these Democrats really love abortions. Can someone please tell the DNC that the American people want to hear about increasing jobs and improving the economy… not about taxpayer subsidized abortions-on-demand.

Also, Hillary Clinton is half a world away, and we pretty much know why. Andrew Cuomo is one of the most prominent Democratic Party’s shining stars, and could possible be POTUS one day… why is he not at the DNC convention?

Hillary Clinton is secretary of state so is probably busy, if she returned to attend the conference you know the reps would be bangin on about her leaving her post to attend. Anyway I think that the sec of state is banned from participating in political activities while on duty.

Never heard of Cuomo.

matthew8

I hate this idea of a first lady having to give a speech at the convention.

Amerika

Thursday’s acceptance speech for the DNC by Barack Obama is now officially being moved from the 75,000 outdoor stadium into a 20,000 indoor stadium. Hmmm... So are they going to have to turn a whole lot of people away?

The best quote on the matter I’ve read so far was this:

It looks more like the attendance forecast was partly gloomy, with a large chance of Eastwooding at Bank of America Stadium.

And it went on to ask a simple question regarding the Democrats use of the small chance of bad weather as the basis for their decision... "if you had a Panthers game, Concert or Soccer match with a 20% chance of storms would you cancel 24 hours prior to the event?"

FatherTed

Watched a bit last night, thought the Ted Kennedy tribute was good. I thought it was interesting how Michelle Obama painted hers and the President's background and how it compares to the Romneys'.

Denerick

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

If you don't recognise the state you live in you are essentially an anarchist. As for your political views, which you are more than entitled to, you need to recognise that you're very much in a fringe minority.

southsiderosie

Amerika wrote: »

I watched a lot of the DNC convention last night. My God, these Democrats really love abortions. Can someone please tell the DNC that the American people want to hear about increasing jobs and improving the economy… not about taxpayer subsidized abortions-on-demand.

What? The President of NARAL is going to talk about choice - that is her job. And support for access to abortion is a part of the Dems platform - just as opposition to abortion in all cases was a GOP plank.

Amerika wrote: »

Also, Hillary Clinton is half a world away, and we pretty much know why. Andrew Cuomo is one of the most prominent Democratic Party’s shining stars, and could possible be POTUS one day… why is he not at the DNC convention?

The Cuomos are a known commodity in American, and particularly Democratic politics. The Castros are not. Castro gave the keynote speech last night for the same reason Obama did in 2004 - he is a young, fresh face for the party with a great backstory - and it does not hurt that he is Hispanic and from Texas, a state that will plausibly go 'purple' in the next decade.

There have been a lot of rumors about the Clintons challenging Obama, etc., but if the rest of the DNC goes as well as yesterday did in terms of rallying the base around re-electing Obama, the Clintons will suck it up for the good of the party.

20Cent wrote: »

Never heard of Cuomo.

Andrew Cuomo is the Governor of New York, and the son of Mario Cuomo, the former governor of New York who gave an electrifying speech at the 1984 convention but never ran for President himself.

Duck Soup

Amerika wrote: »

Thursday’s acceptance speech for the DNC by Barack Obama is now officially being moved from the 75,000 outdoor stadium into a 20,000 indoor stadium. Hmmm... So are they going to have to turn a whole lot of people away?

Yes, they are. There are 65,000 people who had tickets for the outdoor event.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

20Cent

Must be going well if the only complaints so far are a sentence form a video and that they want to keep out of the rain. Has anyone done an Eastwood yet?

Amerika

20Cent wrote: »

Must be going well if the only complaints so far are a sentence form a video and that they want to keep out of the rain. Has anyone done an Eastwood yet?

Going well??? Ask yourself what was missing yesterday? Last night the Democrats were either in denial, or they don’t realize we are in a financial crisis. I guess the empty chair was reserved for the massive debt load, budget crises, unaffordable and underfunded public pension obligations, and how to pay (when we are broke) for the lofty goals of investing in education and public sector jobs. But unlike Eastwood, the Democrats didn’t even bother to engage. Last night was truly terrible IMO.

southsiderosie

Amerika wrote: »

Going well??? Ask yourself what was missing yesterday? Last night the Democrats were either in denial, or they don’t realize we are in a financial crisis. I guess the empty chair was reserved for the massive debt load, budget crises, unaffordable and underfunded public pension obligations, and how to pay (when we are broke) for the lofty goals of investing in education and public sector jobs. But unlike Eastwood, the Democrats didn’t even bother to engage. Last night was truly terrible IMO.

The point of the DNC is to rally the party base, and they are loving it.

Itssoeasy

Now according to a contributor on fox news, Bill Clinton wont show his speech to the Obama camp ahead of his speech tonight.

Duck Soup

It's been trailed all week on MSNBC that the Clinton speech hasn't been vetted. I'm guessing that as a 2-term Democratic president, you get to dictate terms when people ask you to speak. As such, it has the potential to be the off-message highpoint of the week and I'm sure the right-leaning press will be looking to parse every sentence. On the other hand, it could just be a bit of stage management and misdirection by the DNC, with every pause scripted. We'll see.

The general consensus appears to be that the DNC got off to a much smoother, more convincing start than the RNC. It's also been noted, left and right, that there appears to be much more enthusiasm in the hall in Charlotte than there was in Tampa. Personally, I thought that Michelle Obama's speech last night made Ann Romney's look very weak by comparison. "I luhve yoooooou women!" is sounding more and more like Howard Dean's "Yeaaahhhhhh!!!" moment.

joseph brand

Amerika wrote: »

Going well??? Ask yourself what was missing yesterday? Last night the Democrats were either in denial, or they don’t realize we are in a financial crisis. I guess the empty chair was reserved for the massive debt load, budget crises, unaffordable and underfunded public pension obligations, and how to pay (when we are broke) for the lofty goals of investing in education and public sector jobs. But unlike Eastwood, the Democrats didn’t even bother to engage. Last night was truly terrible IMO.

I suppose they could cut defence spending overseas.

The Wall Street Journal’s Gerald Seib asked Ron Paul about the “major” defense cuts he wants to make citing that it would inevitably cost South Carolina jobs. Ron Paul responded, “Your question suggests you’re very confused about my position.” Paul clarified that he wants to cut “overseas money” and not defense money. “I want to bring the troops home,” he said.

Paul also brought up an example of spending a billion dollars on an embassy in Baghdad. He said, “You consider that defense spending. I consider that waste.” He reiterated that “we need to have a strong national defense but we don’t get strength by diluting ourselves in 900 bases, 130 countries.”

They're some large figures.

Another way to help pay for education and public sector jobs would be to implement The Buffet Rule.

The Buffett Rule is a tax plan proposed by President Barack Obama in 2011.[1] The tax plan would apply a minimum tax rate of 30 percent on individuals making more than a million dollars a year.[2][3] According to a White House official, the new tax rate would impact 0.3 percent of taxpayers.

Paul Krugman, a New York Times columnist and Nobel prize winning economist, wrote in January 2012 that "such low taxes on the very rich are indefensible".[20] He stated that "the economic record certainly doesn’t support the notion that superlow taxes on the superrich are the key to prosperity." He also stated that since the U.S. economy added 11.5 million jobs during President Bill Clinton's first term, when the capital gains tax rate was over 29 percent, he thinks there's no real reason to keep from raising the tax rate.[21]
A CBS News/New York Times poll released in January 2012 found that 52 percent of Americans agreed that investments should be taxed at the same rate as income.[22] A Gallup poll released in April 2012 also found that 60 percent of Americans support the rule. A similar poll released later that month by CNN found that 72 percent of Americans support the idea.

Warren Buffet. Typical socialist liberal. :rolleyes:

Duck Soup

Apparently, the crowd capacity for the outdoor Bank of America stadium was 65,000 (down a little from usual, owing to the stage, PA, security etc). All the tickets were sold and there was 19,000 people on the waiting list.

This leaves them (a) with the problem of who gets in to the 20,000 capacity indoor arena and (b) how do they re-jig the presentational aspects to the new venue. The strategic intent of the convention seems to be to re-launch the enthusiasm and unity they had in 2008.

One major difference between the RNC and DNC is that the RNC speeches and content were about rallying around conservative values, with the candidate tagged on at the end, whereas the DNC is much more Democratic/liberal values as embodied by the President. Could be seen as a risky tactic, bearing in mind all the cráp and vitriol that's been thrown at Obama over the past 4 years, but they know he's a proven political performer.

Republicans on the other hand are almost hiding Romney, asking you to vote Republican in spite of him, rather than because of him.

southsiderosie

Duck Soup wrote: »

It's been trailed all week on MSNBC that the Clinton speech hasn't been vetted. I'm guessing that as a 2-term Democratic president, you get to dictate terms when people ask you to speak. As such, it has the potential to be the off-message highpoint of the week and I'm sure the right-leaning press will be looking to parse every sentence. On the other hand, it could just be a bit of stage management and misdirection by the DNC, with every pause scripted. We'll see.

The general consensus appears to be that the DNC got off to a much smoother, more convincing start than the RNC. It's also been noted, left and right, that there appears to be much more enthusiasm in the hall in Charlotte than there was in Tampa. Personally, I thought that Michelle Obama's speech last night made Ann Romney's look very weak by comparison. "I luhve yoooooou women!" is sounding more and more like Howard Dean's "Yeaaahhhhhh!!!" moment.

I have to admit, I'm a bit worried about tonight. Last night went so well, but Warren and Clinton? They have very different views on regulation. It would be nice to know that everyone is singing from the same hymn sheet.

The first NFL game of the season is tonight, so I'm guessing DNC viewership will be down a bit...

Duck Soup

southsiderosie wrote: »

I have to admit, I'm a bit worried about tonight. Last night went so well, but Warren and Clinton? They have very different views on regulation. It would be nice to know that everyone is singing from the same hymn sheet.

The first NFL game of the season is tonight, so I'm guessing DNC viewership will be down a bit...

The Obama campaign runs a tight ship, so the only one with the potential at all to go off script is Bill. I know what you mean about regulations, but the advance word is that Bill's speech is going to be about the broad sweep of the economy - growing the middle class in particular.

The RNC spent a lot of their time last week trying to paint Obama as Carter and Romney as Reagan (which wasn't really picked up, so you'd have to say it wasn't terribly successful). They also contrast Clinton's tenure with Obama's, with, I suppose, an implicit suggestion that Romney would be the real inheritor and continuer of Clinton's pro-business, strong jobs growth policies.

If Bill's going to do a job of work for Obama, it would be to say that his policies were all about the growth of middle class and Obama is the sole inheritor of that focus and worldview.

Chris Matthews makes a convincing argument, that goes as follows. The consensus is that the US economy will strongly rebound from 2013 - 2016. When Romney claims that he has "a plan to create 12 million jobs", he's not telling you that Moody’s Analytics, in an August forecast, predicted 12 million jobs will be created by 2016, no matter who is president. And Macroeconomic Advisors in April also predicted a gain of 12.3 million jobs.

So whoever wins the election is on a winner. Matthews' argument is that if Obama wins, Hillary gets to stand in 4 years as the custodian of successful Democratic policies. If Romney wins, she's got a much tougher job trying to unseat an incumbent president with the wind at his back. It's really very much in the Clintons' interest that Obama wins.

Just watched Sister Simone Campbell (her of Nuns On The Bus) getting a standing ovation. The guys better start stepping up to the plate, because the Democrat women are taking the convention by storrm.

Atlantis50

Day two of the convention has been a disaster for Democrats.

A big flip flop by the Democratic Party has replaced what was perceived as a big snub to Israel.

It was a stunning development. The party had dropped the assertion that Jerusalem was the capital of the Jewish state, but on Wednesday evening the Democrats had a change of heart. The vote went down just before 6 p.m. and it was quite contentious on the floor. It needed a two-thirds majority and it took three votes to get it, CBS 2’s Marcia Kramer reported.

And even after the vote, many thought the crowd of delegates on the floor was split 50-50, rather than delivering the two-thirds majority needed.

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2012/09/05/democrats-fumble-israel-issue-put-jerusalem-as-capital-back-in-platform/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cncbOEoQbOg

They're lucky Bill Clinton will divide media attention from this fiasco when he gives his speech in a few hours.

DrumSteve

Anyone know what time Bill is on?

Duck Soup

DrumSteve wrote: »

Anyone know what time Bill is on?

After Sandra Fluke, so within the next 10 to 15 minutes.

Duck Soup

Correction. Elizabeth Warren, then Bill. The main networks cover the conventions live between 10 to 11 their time, 3am to 4am our time, so the main speeches will have to be concluded by then if they want maximum media exposure.

Hilary Clinton is so cool.

DrumSteve

Bill hittin all the right notes here.

FatherTed

Clinton is such a brilliant orator. Way better than anybody else at these 2 conventions.

DrumSteve

Jesus itll be hard to follow that...

Duck Soup

Absolutely superb. Worked his socks off too - on all the policy points, false charges, political outlook, the lot. "We can't afford to double down on trickle down" will be quoted everywhere tomorrow. Different class.

southsiderosie

Random thoughts on Clinton:

Lawd that was long!

That Arkansas boy came out tonight; I love that he said "fixin to".

My favorite comment of the night (from a friend):
"I'm waiting for Joe Biden to bring Bill Clinton a cape, James Brown-style." :cool:

Overheal

watching it now on youtube.

nailing it to republicans: ostracizing party members for daring to vote along with democrats; their focus on getting Obama fired, not getting Americans hired.

Overheal

2 true so far:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/sep/06/bill-clinton/bill-clinton-says-democratic-presidents-top-republ/

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/sep/06/bill-clinton/clinton-says-obama-cut-taxes-95-percent-people-thr/

Brian?

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

The government is of the people, by the people and for the people. So yes we all belong to it.

No one can harp on about the intentions of founding founders and ignore the above.

YOU don't have the government you want, but guess what? The majority of people in the US don't want the form of government you espouse, which is basically economic anarchy.

Brian?

Bill Clinton was phenomenal. He nailed the GOP on their so called fiscal conservatism.

No one can argue with him when it comes to economics, he made sure everyone knew it too. George HW handed him a bucket of ****, he fixed it and George W filled the bucket right back up again.

jank

joseph brand wrote: »

Did the founding fathers envision Billionaires (Koch bros and Adelson) attempting to buy a government? What could possibly go wrong with this idea.

Ask yourself why they are spending so much money on trying to buy government, which is true of any lobbyist.