300 replies to this topic

[monsoon]

Yeah, we did not compete for the Minneapolis/St Paul one.   The Mayor at the time said there was too much construction in the city and we would not be able to host the one this year.  He made a valid point.

[Commoner]

monsoon, on Aug 28 2008, 12:27 PM, said:

I was once a registered republican in NC and voted for Jessie Helms and Ronald Reagan. I have never been a delegate to either party so hence have not attended such a thing. I was however at the hotel where Jessie Helms gave his winning speech in 1990 and from what I saw at the time, it could be described as the country club crowd. Very white, very conservative, very well off. In comparison I was also at the Harvey Gantt HQ (also in Raleigh that year) and it was an extremely diverse crowd.

I stand by my words. Maybe you can explain how the GOP is now a multicultural enterprise that would for example accept, for example, Gay people such as myself. I don't think you would be able to.

I have since gotten better sense and switched parties. Aside from that, I think either party's convention in Charlotte would be good from an exposure and economic standpoint.

I don't think that need a multicultural enterprise to not be a country club crowd.  There's a middle ground.  

Not that I wouldn't like a few more constituencies under the GOP tent!  To answer your question, the party certainly accepts gay people.  Not everyone is a single-issue voter.  That being said, I certainly don't blame any who decides that in spite of their views on taxes, assertion of U.S. objectives abroad, easing of federal regulation in favor of vesting discretion in state governments, etc. that they would join the Democratic Party because of the GOP's prevailing views on gay rights being obviously contrary to their personal interests and views on justice as a whole.

I agree that the majority of gay people are not Republicans, but they're in the party.  They're not as likely to carry the flag - partially because they don't want to and partially because some (not most) wouldn't be pleased to see it.  That being said, the Republican party and its delegation is a lot more diverse than you're giving it credit for (solely upper income, white, country club members).  If its wasn't as diverse, there's no way they'd have governerships in states like Alaska and there's no way they would have won the White House 5 of the last 7 times.

[monsoon]

Commoner, on Sep 2 2008, 08:31 AM, said:

...  To answer your question, the party certainly accepts gay people.  Not everyone is a single-issue voter. ....

Actually it doesn't.   Let's keep in mind the GOP has demonized Gays to gain the evangelical vote.   The present head of the GOP, George Bush, has tried twice to amend the Constitution to deny Gay and Lesbians equal rights.   While this was mostly a political stunt it isn't a matter of being a single issue.  It's a matter of life and death.  If you don't understand that then I will be glad to discuss it off line.  Closer to home our own Mayor Pat McCroy, who also pulls the party line, has vetoed giving domestic benefits to Gay & Lesbian Charlotte city employees.

Commoner, on Sep 2 2008, 08:31 AM, said:

....If its wasn't as diverse, there's no way they'd have governerships in states like Alaska and there's no way they would have won the White House 5 of the last 7 times.

Actually the GOP has won the popular vote only once since 1992.  I think that speaks enough about their support.

----------------------------------

I am thinking now that Charlotte would have been much better served if it could have had an event such as Obama's speech on Thrusday night.  38 million people watch that live.   I am not so sure that we would do so well for what is going on in St. Paul.

[Commoner]

monsoon, on Sep 2 2008, 01:22 PM, said:

Actually the GOP has won the popular vote only once since 1992. I think that speaks enough about their support.

Okay - that encompasses four presidential elections, not including this one.  The GOP won the popular vote once, in 2004.  That is also the only election during that stretch where either party won a majority of the popular vote.  (The last winner of a majority of the popular vote was the President's dad, in 1988.)

The Democratic winners' popular vote margin over the Republican candidates in the other three elections was 0.5 percentage points, 8.5 percentage points and 5.5 percentage points.  Note that there was a significant third-party challenger (receiving at least 1% of the popular vote) in each of those years except 2004 (the year the President won an outright majority of the popular vote).

Please tell us:  what does the GOP's performance in the popular vote since 2002 "speak" about their support?

Edited by Commoner, 02 September 2008 - 02:27 PM.

[monsoon]

Commoner, on Sep 2 2008, 04:26 PM, said:

.....

Please tell us:  what does the GOP's performance in the popular vote since 2002 "speak" about their support?

This is really off-topic.  If you want to discuss it, there is a topic on the matter in the Urban Planet Coffee House.   You can bring it up there.

[uptownliving]

Here we go again...Charlotte is putting itself in the running for the 2012 Democratic Convention.

More info here:
http://www.demconwat...=site selection

Assuming that Obama would run again in 2012 this could be a huge deal for Charlotte. If we get it I think it would be the largest event we have hosted since the Final Four back in the 90's.

[jednc]

uptownliving, on Oct 16 2009, 01:05 PM, said:

Here we go again...Charlotte is putting itself in the running for the 2012 Democratic Convention.

More info here:
http://www.demconwat...=site selection

Assuming that Obama would run again in 2012 this could be a huge deal for Charlotte. If we get it I think it would be the largest event we have hosted since the Final Four back in the 90's.

Reading that blog and seeing several southern cities vying for the RNC makes me wonder if both parties would choose a southern city as the host city. I realize one party wouldn't make their decision based on the other party's choice, I just am not sure both parties would go with a southern city in the same year. I know Denver hosted the DNC last time...who hosted the RNC (I'm not a very good republican for not remembering this).

[mallguy]

jednc, on Oct 16 2009, 05:09 PM, said:

I know Denver hosted the DNC last time...who hosted the RNC (I'm not a very good republican for not remembering this).

Minneapolis/St. Paul

[krazeeboi]

jednc, on Oct 16 2009, 06:09 PM, said:

Reading that blog and seeing several southern cities vying for the RNC makes me wonder if both parties would choose a southern city as the host city. I realize one party wouldn't make their decision based on the other party's choice, I just am not sure both parties would go with a southern city in the same year.

Let's not forget just how geographically large the South is. Denver and Minneapolis--cities in two different regions of the country--are about 700 miles apart, while Charlotte and San Antonio (an RNC candidate city)--both located within the South--are over 1,000 miles apart. Now if by "south" you really mean "southeast," then that would eliminate the Texas cities and I could see what you're getting at.

[beyonce245]

I think it'd be great if Charlotte hosted the DNC convention.  I think it would have a positive impact on the entire state.  

But beyond geography, I think the choice of host city will depend a lot on next year's midterm elections and the political climate heading into 2011.  Denver was a good choice for Democrats in 2008 because they had made inroads in the mountain west in 2006 and sought to further capitalize on that in 2008.  Its tough to say whether the same thing could happen here, especially since most every state surrounding NC is solidly red.

But I'll be rooting for Charlotte nevertheless.  Best of luck!

[JerseyBoy]

Honestly, Charlotte makes the most sense for the DNC in 2012. North Carolina turned blue for the first time in 2008 since 1976. With Charlotte becoming increasingly liberal and the Democratic powerhouse that exists in Raleigh/Durham because of RTP, NC stands a very good chance. Not to mention that the dems would love to hold on to this state in 2012. I think Susan Burgess has already submitted a proposal to the DNC? Tim Kaine will make the decision in 2010, so we'll see...

[uptownliving]

One detractor for 2012 in Charlotte would be our airport which theoretically would be in the middle of a major renovation. I envision the parking decks for the rental cars still being under construction then...and even if those are done I envision the whole ticketing lobby and baggage claim as one big mess. It is already a clusterphuck and they havnt even started construction.

[Commoner]

jednc, on Oct 16 2009, 05:09 PM, said:

Reading that blog and seeing several southern cities vying for the RNC makes me wonder if both parties would choose a southern city as the host city. I realize one party wouldn't make their decision based on the other party's choice, I just am not sure both parties would go with a southern city in the same year. I know Denver hosted the DNC last time...who hosted the RNC (I'm not a very good republican for not remembering this).

I could see both parties looking at the Midwest and Southeast - whether they put them in the same region would be conincidental but not a strategic accident.  Much like 1988 (New Orleans and Atlanta).

[caterpillar2]

monsoon, on Sep 2 2008, 12:22 PM, said:

Actually it doesn't. Let's keep in mind the GOP has demonized Gays to gain the evangelical vote. The present head of the GOP, George Bush, has tried twice to amend the Constitution to deny Gay and Lesbians equal rights. While this was mostly a political stunt it isn't a matter of being a single issue. It's a matter of life and death. If you don't understand that then I will be glad to discuss it off line. Closer to home our own Mayor Pat McCroy, who also pulls the party line, has vetoed giving domestic benefits to Gay & Lesbian Charlotte city employees.Actually the GOP has won the popular vote only once since 1992. I think that speaks enough about their support.

----------------------------------

I am thinking now that Charlotte would have been much better served if it could have had an event such as Obama's speech on Thrusday night. 38 million people watch that live. I am not so sure that we would do so well for what is going on in St. Paul.

Seems as if gays are being used as a pawn by democrats as they are republicans. If I were Obama, I would have kept my promise and opened up the military for gays. I see him doing this a year before election time to ensure he is reelected, despite his obvious not giving a crap. Until the republicans drop issues on abortion, gay rights, and religion, I will remain an independent. These issues need to be in the hands of individuals states. Parties need to stick to the defense, economy, and ecology. I would like to see gays pulling away from the democrats and becoming independents. I know several gays that are only democrats based on gay issues. That is too bad. There are too many other issues around. Someone said, "Democrats are too ignorant, and Republicans are too mean" to be affiliated with either.  I don't think that Charlotte is a place for a Presidential Convention. We should stay nutral.

[edmundblackadder1999]

Charlotte does not have nearly enough hotel rooms to host a convention.  It would make no sense to build a lot because they would remain empty after the Convention since downtown Charlotte draws very few tourists.

Also, there isn't really much to do in Charlotte.

Charlotte is a nice medium-sized city, sort of like Cincinatti or Columbus, OH.  It does not compete with bigger cities like Denver, Dallas and Seattle.

[caterpillar2]

edmundblackadder1999, on Oct 20 2009, 11:25 AM, said:

Charlotte does not have nearly enough hotel rooms to host a convention. It would make no sense to build a lot because they would remain empty after the Convention since downtown Charlotte draws very few tourists.

Also, there isn't really much to do in Charlotte.

Charlotte is a nice medium-sized city, sort of like Cincinatti or Columbus, OH. It does not compete with bigger cities like Denver, Dallas and Seattle.

It may not be a huge tourist center, but it is a huge convention center. That is what sets uptown apart from the aforementioned. And the hotel fill rate is pretty high. What do people do at conventions? They drink. I am sure there is enough to do.

[Urbanity]

Phoenix, Tampa and Salt Lake City are the three finalists for the 2012 RNC  

The three cities to submit official bids or declare their intentions to submit bids for the 2012 DNC are Charlotte, Philadelphia and Phoenix.

That Phoenix just made a finalist for the RNC gives Charlotte the edge for the DNC in my opinion.  The wild card will be Tampa.  If Tampa wins the RNC, I see the Democrats going to Phoenix.

[Urbanity]

According to this blog, there is some insider suggestion about the 2012 DNC going to St. Louis.

Quote

Right now we have no proof that St Louis will be the host city. Call it a hunch from a few people that have years of Democratic National Convention experience. It just makes sense to us.

http://www.demconwat...convention-city

[Urbanity]

Seems St. Louis is going all out for the DNC 2012 Convention.  

Article:  http://www.demconwatchblog.com/diary/3393/st-louis-2012-democratic-convention-bid-preparation-details

St. Louis 2012 Convention Site (Where is Charlotte's 2012 site?!?)  http://stl2012.org/

[caterpillar2]

I hope neither come. If one ever does, I hope it will be the Republicans even though I am not one. The Democrats would tear up the city and bring lots of undesirable trash that we don't need. I am all for keeping Charlotte a thriving business city with excellent cultural venues.  The Republicans would bring a more sophisticated, conservative, cleaner, more intelligent crowd. That is usually the best option. Of course this is my opinion as an independent and most everyone on this message board will disagree with me, but that is their right.