The Phoenix Network:
 
 
 
About  |  Advertise
Adult  |  Moonsigns  |  Band Guide  |  Blogs  |  In Pictures
 
Media -- Dont Quote Me  |  News Features  |  Talking Politics

Is this thing on?

Rather than get a bounce  from his convention, Obama might actually be hurt by the Democratic nominating event
By STEVEN STARK  |  July 9, 2008

080711_tote_main

In the modern age, America’s major-party conventions are love fests, feting their preselected nominees. But that may not be the case this year for Barack Obama, which means the Democratic Convention even has the potential to derail his chances for victory in November.

The press has been slow to notice the potential trouble ahead, but the Obama camp has not. In the past week, the media has rather dutifully reported that the key final night of the Democratic convention (Thursday, August 28) — the night Obama will give his all-important acceptance speech — will be moved out of the convention hall and into a stadium.

The story being spun is that the Obama team wanted to share its Thursday-night magic moment with the masses, and take a page from the playbook of John F. Kennedy, who pulled a similar move when he accepted his nomination in 1960 in an outdoor venue. In truth, the Kennedy homage likely had little to do with the decision.

Before the change, Obama was scheduled to give his speech in a hall half full of hardcore Hillary Clinton supporters who don’t particularly like him. So odds are that Obama was looking for a larger venue in which Clinton’s supporters would be only a small portion of the crowd. If things had gone ahead as scheduled, Obama might well have given a stirring address, only to have it met with indifference on the floor — and that would be too big a story for the media to downplay.

Already, even under the best of circumstances, the first three days of the Democratic National Convention aren’t going to give Obama the boost he’d like. He undoubtedly has to give Clinton a chance to deliver a prime-time speech and, no matter how nice she is to Obama, she (and not he) will be the focus of that evening’s broadcast. Bill Clinton, as is the custom for a former president — especially a popular one — will have to be given a choice speaking assignment, as well.

On top of that, Obama will likely have to share the stage — and further reduce his leading-man stature — by carving out time to honor the ailing Ted Kennedy (if not a speech by the Massachusetts senator, then some sort of program to celebrate him). Sure, all these speakers will praise Obama to the hilt, but his candidacy will still be playing a supporting role at his own convention.

This is the problem faced by other modern-era nominees who’ve only narrowly secured their party’s nod. Gerald Ford gave a barnburner of an acceptance speech in 1976, but was still upstaged by primary opponent Ronald Reagan’s address a few moments later. In 1980, Jimmy Carter’s acceptance speech was overshadowed by Ted Kennedy’s address two days earlier. Sure, Obama is a much better speaker than Carter or Ford. But even Cicero would have a hard time firing up a nation when the live audience in front of him has been on an emotional roller coaster for three days — and when many of them support someone else.

Stadium Barack
So, without a doubt, that’s why the acceptance-speech venue was changed. But moving it into a stadium creates a new set of problems for the Obama campaign.

1  |  2  |   next >
Related: Alma Obama, The ‘A’ word, Ridge to the future, More more >
  Topics: Stark Ravings , Barack Obama, Elections and Voting, Politics,  More more >
  • Share:
  • Share this entry with Facebook
  • Share this entry with Digg
  • Share this entry with Delicious
  • RSS feed
  • Email this article to a friend
  • Print this article
Comments
Re: Is this thing on?
I think this thing IS on. Clinton will be fine. You can expect the kind of support from her she's been giving Obama of late as opposed to vaunting of her "Simply the Best" concession speech. The Clintons are nasty principally when they act in tandem, with the "two-headed monster" effect. When they can be pushed into being part of a team, they are apt players.
By gordon marshall on 07/14/2008 at 12:19:27
Re: Is this thing on?
unfortunately for the dems, howard dean continues to play a role in their party. denver? please!! obama's crew's decision to roll out in a football stadium was wise at best. the party of the donkey (jackass) continues to find more and more creative way to run off a cliff.drag, yes?
By jefferymcnary on 07/14/2008 at 2:31:31

Today's Event Picks
ARTICLES BY STEVEN STARK
Share this entry with Delicious
  •   MEN PLUS MONEY EQUALS MESS  |  May 14, 2009
    Since Iceland is something of the epicenter of the global financial crisis — its government being the first to essentially go belly up — it's probably not surprising that the Icelanders have come up with the most novel and interesting theory as to what caused the meltdown. And they may be right.
  •   ARLEN THE FAMILY  |  May 11, 2009
    So, Arlen Specter is now a Democrat. That's old news.
  •   SPARE CHANGE?  |  April 28, 2009
    A tension lies at the heart of the Obama presidency. After 100 days in office, the public still seems uncertain how to interpret the historic nature of the election last November.
  •   COURTHOUSE MARRIAGE  |  April 21, 2009
    While political analysts understandably regard elections and politicians as the key forces of social change, nongovernmental forces are the ones that most often actually influence and transform our culture.
  •   MAN BITES NEWSPAPER  |  April 19, 2009
    It's not news that newspapers are in huge trouble — victims of technological change and a mini-depression. What is news is the unadorned glee that is greeting the demise of newsprint.

 See all articles by: STEVEN STARK

MOST POPULAR
RSS Feed of for the most popular articles
 Most Viewed   Most Emailed 



  |  Sign In  |  Register
 
thePhoenix.com:
Phoenix Media/Communications Group:
TODAY'S FEATURED ADVERTISERS
Copyright © 2009 The Phoenix Media/Communications Group