Quite a Convention

So I will post more in the morning (I mean the real morning… not the 3am morning). But as it is 3am, I’m going to stay up just in case Hillary calls. Actually, I don’t think Hillary ever said who will call. Maybe I should call her.

So… I have mixed feelings about the speech today.

The day was marvelous (I was on the floor next to the North Carolina delegates and took 380 pictures). I’ll charge the camera overnight and post a few tomorrow from the airport. Amazing visuals, some great mini-concerts, and a series of good addresses. Though if I were ranking for my week here: Michelle Obama, Cory Booker, John Kerry (!), Brian Schweitzer, Donna Brazile, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Bill Richardson, and Al Gore. And then a LOT I just don’t remember.

Obama’s speech is a little tough to digest at the moment – in part because the electricity in the stadium makes it nearly impossible to objectively dissect without a few hours of sleep. But also because all of Obama’s speeches are to some extent – his delivery frequently overcomes some shoddy writing – he’s usually far better than the text. But he was a bit different tonight – somewhat subdued in parts, feisty in others, and lofty in others. I have to read it to see how well the sections connect and the themes work. In the stadium, everything worked. But I’d like to be a bit more analytical. So I need to read the text. It seemed a bit disjointed, but there were parts that were exactly on point and parts that seemed to wander in search of a theme.

So MY theme for tomorrow’s post… “there’s no going back” – this election will permanently transform American politics. Aside from the usual rhetoric that asserts this, I do think this will be a defining election (it’s already historic) but it will cause a break in our politics. Obama just “played” a sold out football stadium. I watched people weep, and dance, and scream, and rejoice, and participate in politics that I have NEVER seen. And don’t expect to see next week. If Obama wins, it will be hard to imagine the old politics – by which I mean non-democratic, non-participatory, elite-driven, traditional media dominated, presidential elections occurring again. This will change the game. And if he loses… I fear that we will lose a generation.

A Historic Candidacy, Right?

Why is it that after three days, the only reference to an historic candidacy has been to Senator Clinton’s second place finish. I’m not questioning the significance (she did get farther than any woman candidate in history).

But, Barack Obama won the nomination. I have heard no “on camera” references to him being the first African American candidate in history. His father and his Kenyan background is not part of the bio.

The Republicans have the Obama campaign fearful. The notion that Obama “played the race card from the bottom of the deck” by noting that he doesn’t “look like the presidents” on currency was absurd in the extreme. But it’s got the campaign spooked.

It is one thing to recognize and celebrate that Obama is a transcendent figure and that his multiracial heritage and capacity to negotiate a world in which racial inequalities structure economic and social opportunities allows him to renegotiate the color line and it’s meaning. It is another thing entirely to de-racialize Senator Obama. A capacity to transcend racial division is not the same as pretending they do not exist.

In a convention where just about everything seems to be well-scripted (tonight even the speeches ended on time… something unheard of in past conventions… and Bubba spoke tonight. But it’s getting a little airbrushed. And not just the history of the Clinton administration – I do not have to remind people that he committed war crimes and violated the Constitution by expressly acting against the will of Congress (they have the power to declare war) in Yugoslavia. But the historic nature of this campaign.

Joe

Tonight was Joe’s night. He’s the new second fiddle.

Which means based on my highly rigorous analysis of past Democratic Veep nominees that he’s now prepping to A) cheat on his wife with a campaign staffer B) bolt to the Republican Party and support the Republican nominee and speak at their convention, o C) win an Oscar.

It’s fun to play Dem Veep roulette, isn’t it?

More or less what we expected from Joe. A compelling life story, an upfront guy. And some attacks. I’m not convinced the attacks are penetrating (except for the partisan Dems in the room) but they’re trying. Kerry had the best speech of the night. Unfortunately Kerry delivered it.

The Obama surprise was just that. People around me started getting text messages that he was “backstage” yet nobody believed it until a second or two before it happened. That was probably the best visual of the convention. And Bill and HIllary Clinton both seemed genuinely moved by Obama’s gracious words. Yes, I used the words genuine and Clinton in the same sentence.

Bill’s Night

Bill Clinton destroyed his legacy.

Bill Clinton diminished himself and undermined his party in a petty effort to use southern racial narratives to dismiss Barack Obama.

Bill Clinton’s ego-driven politics of fear replaced his unflagging optimism in a cynical attempt to preserve his place in American political history.

And you know what, I think I was the only person in the arena tonight who thinks that way. So either I was wrong about the lasting implications of his actions and speech during the bitter primary or the Democrats forgive and/or forget very easily.

My favorite loyal, partisan, liberal Democrat, my father, says “forgive and remember”. Not on this night.

Bill was warmly received. More than that. An he gave a mediocre speech (at least for the first ten minutes) where he seemed disinterested, disconnected, and maybe sedate. He drank from a water glass repeatedly. His voice flagged. His words were not his own. The old Bill was gone – no gestures, no thumb pointing, none of the Clinton swagger. But he warmed up. He seemed to embrace his role as party elder while bashing McCain and the Republicans, and by the end, Bill war rolling. The color back in his face, the old Clinton style (Bubba and all) back in full swing, he suddenly regained his footing and made the first reference I can recall to the simple fact that some of the attacks leveled against Obama were once made against him. And the man who once said, if one candidate appeals to you to vote for your hopes and the other to vote your fears turned from the race-baiting 3am calling southerner to the man from the place called Hope.

Clinton has a stunning proclivity for self-destruction. But once again, he got the love.

This man has an unreal capacity for self-regeneration.

I was wrong.

Vote Hope

By day three, the convention speeches are getting awfully redundant. Each of the Democratic Senate challengers get their time tonight and it’s “more of the same”.

Today’s highlight was a luncheon hosted by Steve Phillips, PowerPAC, and Project Vote Hope. Steve is a San Francisco guy – former member of the SFUSD Board and candidate for Assembly. And PowerPAC is an Oakland-based political organization designed to empower, register, and turn out underrepresented voters throughout the state.

Their newest project, Vote Hope raised $7.5 million to conduct an independent campaign for Senator Obama in the primary election. In addition to keeping this effort going, they are trying to identify, recruit, fund, and elect young progressive leaders across the country. Some of those leaders were on display this afternoon in an event billed as “We Still Have a Dream” in concert with tomorrow’s anniversary of Martin Luther King Jr.’s address in Washington.

Some of the people to watch are already household names: SF’s District Attorney, Kamala Harris and NAACP President (and Oakland resident) Benjamin Jealous.

And some aren’t. But will be: Assemblyman Hakeem Jeffries of Brooklyn and Subodh Chandra a candidate for Ohio Attorney General. These two exceptional young leaders have the skills and passion and ability to craft compelling narratives that make them worth knowing better.

But the highlight of the day… the highlight of just about every day is Mayor Cory Booker of Newark. Last night I had the opportunity to meet some of the country’s progressive mayors: Menino in Boston, Nichols in Seattle, Newsom in San Francisco. But this guy is sharp (I hate to recognize this characteristic in Stanford graduates), and able to connect. He would have been a far superior choice to be the keynote speaker. But New Jersey isn’t a “swing state”. And Cory Booker is African-American. But he and Michelle Obama are the only two speakers to answer the question “why”. Booker’s why is rooted in spirituality, scholarship, and community. He moved into public housing and lead a hunger strike while on the city council. At the time, I remember buying the mainstream media’s portrayal of this as grandstanding. But this guy is genuine.

Progressive mayors have begun reshaping their cities across the country. While the feds neglect cities, demonize its residents, and subsidize flight to the suburbs and gentrification and displacement rather than community development, mayors bear an enormous brunt. As an urban scholar, I am (by training) pessimistic about the future of cities. But change is happening in cities – universal health care (SF), climate change (Sea), open space (Chicago), living wages (Baltimore), and real crime prevention (Newark).

I don’t subscribe to the great man theory of history (which makes sitting through dozens of convention speeches comparable to a Novocain-free root canal). So I do not attribute these innovations simply to the “great” mayors of our cities. Rather, the network of progressive mayors, public intellectuals, think tanks, urban scholars, community organizations, and activists are rescuing neighborhoods from crime and blight and displacement. Mayor Booker’s success in Newark depends on an awful lot more than simply his skills, but he is a visionary urban leader and someone uniquely capable of leading a city like Newark.

Protests (?)

I’ve been asked several times about the protests going on in Denver and unfortunately, I have seen just about none of them. When an “unauthorized” protest is nearby (as it was this afternoon) the convention and hotels goes into “lockdown” mode. So while we see media reports of protests in town, these are so far removed from the downtown that they are difficult to find, let alone accidentally run into. My guess is that most delegates are oblivious to the protest activity.

While the election of 1968 has been raised by many commentators as the most direct analogy to this election (and one such reference was an unfortunate one made by Senator Clinton in explaining why she was staying in the race) it is clear that the Democratic Party learned a lesson about allowing discontent at the convention to obscure the convention messages.

We have seen PLENTY of security. An appalling amount, really. I understand the importance of security particularly amid reports of threats on the nominee. But seeing armored vehicles rolling through the streets behind the arena with armed personnel standing on the floor boards is more than a little problematic and disconcerting. I might be wrong, but I seem to recall one of the grievances lodged against King George was something about having armed military in the streets.

Quick Hits on Night Two

Some perspectives on the avalanche of speeches tonight:

Ted Strickland of Ohio continues to shine – I’ve heard him thrice and each time he has a bit of electricity. His line that Bush “came into office on third base and then he stole second” is pretty funny.

Mark Warner gave an uninspired and incoherent keynote (not unintelligible, but with no coherence)

Duval Patrick seemed very toned down, but his quotation of Barney Frank should have been one of the themes of the keynote “government i the name we give to the things we do together”. Unfortunately, the speakers failed to capitalize on what I see as a compelling thread.

The surprise of the night was Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer who began his address to murmurs of “who is THAT?” began to win over the audience who then wondered “who IS that” and concluded with the audience in a full roar. The blogosphere loves the guy – the gun-toting, plain spoken economic populist from Montana. I didn’t get the appeal until the guy with the jeans got through his pep-rally-esqe speech. I gather the TV didn’t carry much of it, but it was a heavily-caffeinated high school gym teacher goes to the convention sort of address. It worked the crowd into a frenzy and he connects with people in a very interesting way. I heard at least a dozen people say (with a surprised tone, “I really like him”. I think he’ll be regarded by the folks here as one of the stars of the convention.

And then the two big moments of the night – Bill Clinton’s entrance (when the camera showed him, the delegates burst into applause… maybe my sense that his behavior in the primary undermined any positive legacy was premature… this guy continues to rehabilitate himself. But we’ll see tomorrow night.

And of course, Senator Hillary Clinton’s speech – which I thought was (in spite of some “down time” in the middle, the right speech at the right time. Not fantastic in the sense of carving out a coherence governing vision, but a thoughtful recap of her positions with a gracious tone. Based on the reaction on the floor, people seem to think it will begin the process of uniting the party.

Last, just because it’s something I’ve cared about for a long time. Nearly every speaker articulated an investment agenda – human capital, infrastructure, etc. I can’t help but think back to Robert Reich and his now decades old book The Work of Nations. My question is whether/how this gets translated from applause line into policy. Reich was Sec. of Labor under Clinton and the investment agenda didn’t make it into the first budget due to fears about how the bond markets might react that the government would invest during a massive deficit. I wonder if these ideas will suffer the same fate?

Republicans at the DNC

It used to be that the opposition party more or less closed up shop during the convention. Not anymore.

We damn near ran over Rudy Giuliani in the bus on the way to the Pepsi Center and apparently Mitt Romney and some other McCain surrogates are not only speaking out, they are doing so from Denver.

Stay turned for the Democratic response to the RNC live from Minneapolis/St. Paul.

Michelle Obama at the EMILYs List Gala

Not surprisingly, Michelle Obama received a hero’s welcome.

She repeated her comments about Senator Clinton: “it is because of her candidacy that she broke so many stereotypes and changed the perception forever” and gave shout-outs to “strong, accomplished, and inspirational women.”

If Senator Clinton were able to connect with audiences in this manner – on an emotional level as well as on a policy level, she’d be speaking on Thursday rather than tonight.

Speaker Pelosi at the EMILYs List Gala

Speaker Pelosi got to be something of an honest broker in the primary because she remained neutral between Obama, Clinton, and Edwards.

And her role at the convention is to try to pull the party together. She’s noted that Senator Clinton will have her name put into nomination on Wednesday and has lavished praise on the Senator from New York.

The Speaker is far more effective in speaking about policy specifically than she is hitting on broad themes, but she is articulating an ambitious agenda for the Congress. The Democrats need to do a better job of framing these issues. On the one hand, Obama is criticized for being overly broad (“change” “hope”) but on the other, the agenda sounds like a bit of a laundry list: “Health of our children, wellbeing of our seniors, security of our country, and respect for our seniors”. Sounds a lot like the Gore themes of “education, the environment, Social Security, and Medicare”. Issues are not themes. As Michelle Obama did last night, Democrats need to frame these issues in moral terms. The laundry list loses to “big government is bad” and “freedom is good.”

This isn’t to say that the Democrats need to dumb down their platform, but they need to put it into the language of a moral imperative and cohesive worldview.