Howard Dean did something right? Dem Convention date picked
Democrats choose dates for late 2008 convention
from 
JoeUser Forums
JoeUser Forums
Normally I'd be hard pressed to find something that Howard Dean did that I could acknowledge as being a smart decision. I don't claim he's a stupid man, but he has made some stupid moves in the past. For the move documented in the news below, I I think I have to give the man his due. It's a smart choice, and could wind up being a very smart choice and key decision when the 2008 Presidential Election is held.
Choosing when to hold the party convention has, at least in recent memory, been a key decision that the party and it's leader makes. Hold the convention too early and the "bounce" from the convention can be wasted away completely by bad news cycles or even slow news cycles between the two parties conventions. By the time the second convention is held, the momentum starts shifting fairly heavily over to the party with the later convention, and any lead that was gained by holding the early convention is completely lost.
Such was part of the problem for John F. Kerry. His party held their convention, but it was mostly a ho-hum affair, there was only a small bounce, and by the time the period between conventions had passed, the slim lead (if he had one at all) was gone, with President Bush taking back momentum via his own parties convention, and the natural lead that is normally held by the incumbent party and President.
It seems that Mr. Dean learned well from that lesson. He has choosen, in a move that seems very wise, to hold the Democratic convention for 2008 late in the political cycle. It should help blunt the Republican convention reaction, and help to give his party equal footing with them. While a lot of the reaction to the convention will depend entirely on the candidates that are choosen by the parties, and by world events in the time preceeding those conventions, holding the later of the two conventions generally leads to more momentum going into the general election.
From The Washington Times, headline will be linked. Please read original materials for complete story, rather than just the snippets here. More comments and questions for readers after the snippets.
Democrats choose dates for late 2008 convention
By Donald Lambro
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
November 5, 2005
Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean said yesterday that his party's 2008 presidential convention will be held at the end of August, only a few days before the Labor Day kickoff of the general election campaign.
DNC officials said Mr. Dean's decision to hold the national convention on Monday, Aug. 25, through Thursday, Aug, 28, "will allow the Democrats to host their convention after the 2008 Summer Olympics in Beijing," which will be held in mid-August.
"After consulting with Democratic leaders and recent presidential candidates, Governor Dean decided that the late August time frame was in the best interest of the party and the ticket in 2008," DNC spokesman Josh Earnest said.
Republican Party officials were unmoved by the early nature of the announcement, though they noted its unusual timing -- nearly 34 months before their next party gathering.
"It's the Democrats' prerogative when they choose their convention date, however early in the process. We are looking forward to announcing our date next year," said Tracey Schmitt, the Republican National Committee's chief spokesman. Mr. Dean consulted recently with former President Bill Clinton whose wife, New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, is the early front-runner for the 2008 nomination, party officials said yesterday.
But there were other factors that entered into the Democrats' decision to emulate the Republicans' 2004 strategy. Last year, in a sharp break with tradition, the GOP held its convention from Aug. 30 through Sept. 2, more than a month later than the Democrats, who met July 26-29.
That decision not only put President Bush's nomination in the middle of the Labor Day weekend, when the country began focusing on the election, but it helped fundraising, too. Under the federal campaign financing laws, candidates who accept public financing in their general election campaign must stop raising private funding once they have been nominated. Thus, by starting later than usual, Mr. Bush had more than a month longer to raise private funds than did Sen. John Kerry, his Democratic opponent.
... more at linked article
Whether or not Mr. Dean has made the right decision will be decided by time. Personally, I have to tip my hat to Mr. Dean. He's choosen a date late in the cycle, very close to the general election, yet not quite into the "new" TV season, when the Democrat's friends in the MSM would have to watch their new shows pushed back because of politics.
By announcing the dates early, he is firing a shot across the bow of the GOP, who will have to now determine when to hold their own convention without ceeding any momentum over to their opponents.
This move could lead to cries by some for conventions to be held concurrently, or very close to concurrently so that neither side gets an advantage via the media. Of course that would impact upon first ammendment rights and a host of other issues that would probably preclude such forced policies.
Thoughts from the readers?
Choosing when to hold the party convention has, at least in recent memory, been a key decision that the party and it's leader makes. Hold the convention too early and the "bounce" from the convention can be wasted away completely by bad news cycles or even slow news cycles between the two parties conventions. By the time the second convention is held, the momentum starts shifting fairly heavily over to the party with the later convention, and any lead that was gained by holding the early convention is completely lost.
Such was part of the problem for John F. Kerry. His party held their convention, but it was mostly a ho-hum affair, there was only a small bounce, and by the time the period between conventions had passed, the slim lead (if he had one at all) was gone, with President Bush taking back momentum via his own parties convention, and the natural lead that is normally held by the incumbent party and President.
It seems that Mr. Dean learned well from that lesson. He has choosen, in a move that seems very wise, to hold the Democratic convention for 2008 late in the political cycle. It should help blunt the Republican convention reaction, and help to give his party equal footing with them. While a lot of the reaction to the convention will depend entirely on the candidates that are choosen by the parties, and by world events in the time preceeding those conventions, holding the later of the two conventions generally leads to more momentum going into the general election.
From The Washington Times, headline will be linked. Please read original materials for complete story, rather than just the snippets here. More comments and questions for readers after the snippets.
Democrats choose dates for late 2008 convention
By Donald Lambro
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
November 5, 2005
Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean said yesterday that his party's 2008 presidential convention will be held at the end of August, only a few days before the Labor Day kickoff of the general election campaign.
DNC officials said Mr. Dean's decision to hold the national convention on Monday, Aug. 25, through Thursday, Aug, 28, "will allow the Democrats to host their convention after the 2008 Summer Olympics in Beijing," which will be held in mid-August.
"After consulting with Democratic leaders and recent presidential candidates, Governor Dean decided that the late August time frame was in the best interest of the party and the ticket in 2008," DNC spokesman Josh Earnest said.
Republican Party officials were unmoved by the early nature of the announcement, though they noted its unusual timing -- nearly 34 months before their next party gathering.
"It's the Democrats' prerogative when they choose their convention date, however early in the process. We are looking forward to announcing our date next year," said Tracey Schmitt, the Republican National Committee's chief spokesman. Mr. Dean consulted recently with former President Bill Clinton whose wife, New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, is the early front-runner for the 2008 nomination, party officials said yesterday.
But there were other factors that entered into the Democrats' decision to emulate the Republicans' 2004 strategy. Last year, in a sharp break with tradition, the GOP held its convention from Aug. 30 through Sept. 2, more than a month later than the Democrats, who met July 26-29.
That decision not only put President Bush's nomination in the middle of the Labor Day weekend, when the country began focusing on the election, but it helped fundraising, too. Under the federal campaign financing laws, candidates who accept public financing in their general election campaign must stop raising private funding once they have been nominated. Thus, by starting later than usual, Mr. Bush had more than a month longer to raise private funds than did Sen. John Kerry, his Democratic opponent.
... more at linked article
Whether or not Mr. Dean has made the right decision will be decided by time. Personally, I have to tip my hat to Mr. Dean. He's choosen a date late in the cycle, very close to the general election, yet not quite into the "new" TV season, when the Democrat's friends in the MSM would have to watch their new shows pushed back because of politics.
By announcing the dates early, he is firing a shot across the bow of the GOP, who will have to now determine when to hold their own convention without ceeding any momentum over to their opponents.
This move could lead to cries by some for conventions to be held concurrently, or very close to concurrently so that neither side gets an advantage via the media. Of course that would impact upon first ammendment rights and a host of other issues that would probably preclude such forced policies.
Thoughts from the readers?
