Barack Obama At Invesco Field--History Or Fiasco?

That's a question that won't be definitively answered until at least after the DNC has been concluded, and most likely not until after the election itself.

But speculation is the stuff of which blogs are made . . .

Rampant backchannel speculation and vague sources (at least initially) talking about a possible venue switch of monumental proportions for Barack Obama's acceptance speech on August 28 were confirmed earlier today by Obama's campaign. Logistical, security, and fundraising questions that have so far hounded the city and the DNCC in recent weeks were dismissed in a Monday conference call with DNC chair Howard Dean and Obama campaign staff. Dean, Obama staffers, Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper and the U.S. Secret Service all believe they can pay for the event and tackle the logistical nightmare it represents--approximately $3 million extra. However, given the nearly 11th hour decision to change the venue (Coors Field was also briefly under consideration) and the DNCC's not exactly stellar record of performance, Denver residents and political observers (among others) will continue to call into question the city and host committee's ability to pull the event off smoothly. Traffic congestion and questions about the DNC's economic impact continue to be of concern to media types and regular Denver residents and businesses as well.

Then there's the MSM. Changing venues with so little lead time may cause the networks to give priority to the Invesco Field event and shortchange the rest of the convention schedule and Pepsi Center preparations in favor of focusing on the sheer Super Bowl-like spectacle that will likely be hyped over the next seven weeks. The MSM has already grumbled about accommodations during the convention (and threatening bad press), and were not pleased by the city's decision to place the Public Demonstration Zone in Parking Lot A of the Pepsi Center, right next to the media tents. If the DNC really does become more of a "coronation" of Obama--now that the path to the nomination has been cleared--then the more "mundane" convention events will be eschewed in favor of the main event. Media logistics and costs will no doubt dictate the final decision over prioritization of convention coverage.

DemConWatch (a lefty blog with good insider info) asserts that the real reason for the announcement Monday was to quell MSM complaints and ease concerns ahead of the rescheduled media walkthrough tomorrow that had been postponed last month, a rather reasonable supposition at this point, and more convincing than other, more political explanations. Convention preparations and Pepsi Center construction also, coincidentally, began Monday. They also have a few more media-related logistical questions for the Invesco Field shindig.

And the event itself? Will it rain on Obama's "super-sized arrogance"? Or will the open-air venue provide undeniably "stunning visuals" in spite of security concerns? Will the sight of tens of thousands of Americans screaming "Yes, we can" in unison be an inspiration and demonstrate the "change" that appears to be craved by the electorate, or a disquieting scene of unsavory "groupthink" and political theater that isn't very becoming in republic? At least one YouTuber has already invoked Godwin's Law (and taken a swipe at Recreate '68 in the process) with a very Nurembergian comparison. Of course it doesn't help that Obama promotes mandatory volunteerism, or a "civilian national security force."

More details will be forthcoming in the next few weeks, as plans for staging, admission, media participation, and decorations/embellishments (flyovers, fireworks) are released--giving Denver a better idea of what will happening in the largest outdoor venue in Colorado, and fueling even more blogospheric discussion. There won't be a repeat of the emptiness that occurred at the LA Coliseum in 1960 (extremely unlikely), but the increased possibility of attending an "historic" event will likely bring even more Obama supporters to Denver in hopes of snagging a ticket to the event or simply being in the immediate area--to say "I was in Denver." At the very least, more media coverage (and an altered protest zone set up in the vicinity of Invesco Field) might draw an even more sizeable contingent of media-seeking protestors, some of whom might attempt to infiltrate the stadium, a possibility that was formerly closed due to the stringent admission requirements at the tightly controlled Pepsi Center. And be sure to look for more helicopter flyovers and blimp-cams covering the mass of vehicles--are they green?--and people shuffling into Invesco Field, as the MSM announcers repeat the capacity of the stadium at least 1000 times.

It seems apparent that, cynicism aside, both Obama and his campaign advisors have determined that a "public" acceptance speech and subsequent rally (still tightly controlled but much more expansive) will more helpfully propel the campaign's perceived momentum and build on the Obama brand of "change." Any possible logistical hassles or negative public backlash have been ruled out or determined to be of little consequence. A public swell of support and positive post-convention bounce are clearly expected and, depending on coordination and positioning, down-ticket benefits as well.

Obama's speech will likely tap into MLK's 1963 "I Have a Dream" speech that coincidentally took place on the same date, August 28. Direct comparisons to JFK's outdoor acceptance speech in 1960 also make use of the "change" element. It is interesting that a candidate so overtly in favor of "change" would so overtly channel two 1960's icons and their legacies. The question will be how closely the speech imitates or explicitly references those symbols and nostalgic memories, and how that imagery and rhetoric will play in the days and weeks following the DNC.

While this is still a recent development, it seems logical and even expected. As Obama gained traction and built momentum "breaking the mold" of Presidential aspirants, yet another predictable convention hardly seemed adequate. Convention protestor shenanigans aside, Obama's acceptance speech--for better or worse--will provide the iconic cap to a convention week Denver will not soon forget.

Howard Dean Worried Clinton-Obama Battle Hurting Dems' Chances In November

**Update--by July 1st.

And he wants a nominee before the Democratic National Convention in August:

Democratic Party chief Howard Dean says Barack Obama, Hillary Rodham Clinton and their supporters should beware of tearing each other down, demoralizing the base and damaging the party's chances of winning the White House in November.

In an interview with The Associated Press, Dean also said he hopes the Democratic nominee will be determined shortly after the voting ends in early June and that he will encourage the superdelegates who will play a role to make up their minds before the August convention in Denver.

Dean said the charges and countercharges between Clinton and Obama have gotten too personal at times. He declined to say how they have crossed the line, but he said he's made it clear privately when it has happened.

"You do not want to demoralize the base of the Democratic Party by having the Democrats attack each other," he said Thursday during the interview in his office at Democratic National Committee headquarters. "Let the media and the Republicans and the talking heads on cable television attack and carry on, fulminate at the mouth. The supporters should keep their mouths shut about this stuff on both sides because that is harmful to the potential victory of a Democrat."

The only ones frothing with negativity right now are the Democrats--apparently Dean's theory that only Republicans and pundits are part of an attack machine is failing, miserably.

The demoralization has already begun. And telling supporters to "keep their mouths shut" so as not to create disarray?

So much for free speech in the Democrat party.

It's not gonna look good to have a Presidential loss on your resume, is it now Dean?

Dem Superdelegate Mini-Convention To Precede Denver's Democratic National Convention?

Interesting, but unlikely in any format or scenario. Last week, Tennessee Gov. Phil Bredesen proposed a mini-convention--a caucus of super-delegates--to resolve the Democrats' internecine nomination battle:

WE Democrats have a problem, but it’s one we can fix.

We are blessed with two fine candidates, but it’s entirely possible that when primary season ends on June 3, we will still lack a clear nominee. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton could each still believe that the nomination could be his or hers at the national convention in Denver in August.

In that situation, we would then face a long summer of brutal and unnecessary warfare. We would face a summer of growing polarization. And we would face a summer of lost opportunities — lost opportunities to heal the wounds of the primaries, to fill the party’s coffers, to offer unified Democratic ideas for America’s challenges.

If we do nothing, we’ll of course still have a nominee by Labor Day. But if he or she is the nominee of a party that is emotionally exhausted and divided with only two months to go before Election Day, it could be a Pyrrhic victory.

Here’s what our party should do: schedule a superdelegate primary. In early June, after the final primaries, the Democratic National Committee should call together our superdelegates in a public caucus.

Of course, Denver's MSM is a little slow on the uptake, and had this story today, obviously with the angle of the proposed June super-delegate caucus usurping Denver's role as host for the Democratic National Convention:

Talk is building in some Democratic circles that the party needs to hold a "mini-convention" of super-delegates shortly after the final caucuses and primaries in early June to settle on a nominee before a prolonged battle takes a politically fatal toll on the eventual nominee.
. . .
"I think what we should do is try to get the super-delegates together, once the primaries are over in June, and see if we can't come to some resolution as to who the nominee is, and then spend the summer not fighting each other," and preparing to elect a Democratic president, Bredesen said in an interview Tuesday.
. . .
Bredesen said such a meeting could not - for obvious reasons - take place in Illinois or New York, and might best be staged somewhere neutral with easy airport access, such as Dallas and Atlanta.

"I don't want in any way to take away form the convention in Denver. I really want to make it more successful," said Bredesen. "Obviously, the convention in Denver would have more drama if we were all fighting each other tooth and nail.

"But I'm much more interested in electing a president, than keeping all the reporters happy in Denver, with a dramatic fight going on."

Bredesen admitted that Democratic National Committee Chair Howard Dean is lukewarm to the idea. DNCC spokeswoman Natalie Wyeth, said organizers of the Aug. 25-28 Democratic National Convention in Denver are not taking Bredesen's idea seriously, and expect the lone gathering of suer-delegates will be the one long scheduled to take place on the floor of the Pepsi Center at the end of August.

Ann Althouse correctly diagnoses the problems with this plan:

It sounds like a very sensible idea, which is why my sense is that this won't happen. Think about why not. One candidate or the other stands to benefit from waiting until August, and that candidate and some number of her supporters will resist the caucus. How can it happen without widespread agreement?
. . .
If it's possible to do this, isn't it possible to line up the superdelegates behind the scenes and force them to make firm, public commitments? That would achieve the same result. Also, if you have this assembly when the nominee is still unknown, you're inviting strong partisans to a huge national stage — it will be far more dramatic than any political convention we've seen in our liftetime — and who knows what bloody chaos will play out?

Democratic National Convention chair Howard Dean has pretty much crushed the idea, but that isn't likely to quell calls for pre-DNC resolutions to the Democrats' nomination woes.

Who knew the road to Denver's Democratic National Convention would be so complicated--and oh so interesting?

Howard Dean Kicks Off Denver DNC Countdown

"The road to the White House goes through the west."--DNC Chair Howard Dean

At least we can agree on that.

Highlights of today's Democratic National Convention Countdown, including Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper, Governor Bill Ritter and DNC Chair Howard Dean. Rep. Mark Udall was surprisingly not in attendance (nor even mentioned for that matter) and given that his high-profile race for Colorado's open Senate seat should garner him a key speaking role in next year's convention, his omission was surprising. Dean discusses potential seat pick-ups in the West, but Udall is never mentioned.

Drunkablog has an excellent photo roundup and some commentary on the Democrats as we stood, baking in the sun, waiting for Chairman Dean to arrive.

"Any Democrat is better than any Republican running," said Dean. Typical political boilerplate at events such as this--and when Dean started listing states that he believes are shifting to the left, once could feel a scream coming on. Too bad about those record low approval numbers for the Democratically controlled Congress.


Introductions from Leah Daughtry, CEO of the DNCC


Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper
--Democrats "pro-business, pro-environment", the most "green" convention


Governor Bill Ritter
--Highlights economic benefits of the convention, Democratic gubernatorial wins


Howard Dean, Part 1


Howard Dean, Part 2
--Democrats "cut-and-run" strategy, omits Democrats' own "culture of corruption", "act differently" than Republicans (not just talk about global warming, but act to end it--as long as that doesn't mean giving up the limousine liberal lifestyle, of course)

Fisking Howard Dean's DNC Speech

--Dean should know his history; he mentions the "Cross of Gold" speech delivered by thrice-defeated Democrat William Jennings Bryan as coming from the 1908 Denver Democrat National Convention, when in fact Bryan made his comments a mere 12 years earlier in Chicago; perhaps the thought of yet another ignominious defeat clouds his memory

--Dean says Democrats won't be afraid to be in every single state this time around; however, Fox News is another matter

--Dems a party of "American values", works for everyone, not just rich Democrats Republicans

--"tough" but "smart" foreign policy, translation: cut and run

--change direction? RUN AWAY!

--mentions the deplorable Walter Reed fiasco, promises to make pathetic governmental agency not so bad, no doubt in anticipation of "universal health care" run by the same government bureaucrats

--calls for honest government, accountability; touts Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, shocked he didn't mention Sen. Diane Feinstein, continues GOP "culture of corruption" meme

--"restore America to its moral greatness" blather

Wow. A staggering, thought-provoking, galvanizing 4+ minutes! The mind boggles!

PS--YEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!