Not much to add, but that was about as strong of a speech - and as well delivered - as I have ever had. Very very impressive.
Has there ever been a presidential election with such a clear distinction between the 2 candidates? Just wondering how anyone could possibly say, “They are both the same.” And if anyone chooses Chump, I seriously have to question their values and perception.
Kinsinger was awfully impressive as well. What a shock to have so many speakers from the opposite party.
Hate to introduce a downer thought, but the correct choice just seems so blindingly obvious to me, that I fear it will be all the more crushing should my fellow citizens choose Chump.
Just want to follow up - I know it is common to appreciate affirmation, but it is just SO WONDERFUL to hear politicians say exactly what I am thinking on so many (all?) issues, and to express it as no more than plain common sense. I always felt that way about Obama, and Harris/Walz brought it in spades. (I loved Walz’s Golden Rule, “Mind your own damned business!”)
God heavens, am I in danger of becoming patriotic again?
(Only shortcoming was her failure to propose an immediate bullet to the head for any/all chanting idiots in the audience! ;))
The ‘mystery guest’ did two things - got some new eyeballs tuning in to see who it was going to be, and put some slop into the schedule so they could Harris on stage at a reasonable time for the east coast people.
So probably never was one, but it would be hilarious if they Lindsey Buckingham’ed Beyonce or Taylor Swift: Sorry, we ran late and we need to get Kamala on stage to make the 11 o’clock news.
And among some still on the fence — those who could make a difference in a tight contest — Ms. Harris’s words did not make immediate converts. They said they needed more specifics.
There is more nuance in the article and some reason to be hopeful, but I do think we here in this thread (myself included) remain in a bit of a bubble about the effects of this convention. Many of the speakers emphasized that there is still a lot of work to be done, and despite how euphoric we all are about how well this convention went, it appears that they are absolutely right.
I also want to echo some posters above about how wonderfully the convention was run from a logistical standpoint. I work in the theater and I know how difficult it is to run a big production like this: the amount of detail and behind-the-scenes effort it takes to pull something like this off is no mean feat. And remember that you are producing an event that has to work for both in-person attendees and a television audience. There is very little room for error, and while it was not flawless, it was very close to it and there were no significant, event-blowing errors. The DNC hired some serious pros to manage the hell out of that and all those backstage folks deserve a standing ovation, too.
They spoke with less than a dozen undecided voters, included the former chair of a Republican party, and some dude who’s written publicly about how he supports Trump. They did NOT specify how they chose these voters, how they decided to declare them “undecided”, whether there were others that they didn’t include, or anything like that.
The parameters of the article made it trivially easy for them to put forward any thesis they wanted. Give me the resources, and I could write exactly the same article, choosing a different dozen voters, to show that the convention sufficed to turn them toward Harris.
I’ve really been trying to give NYTimes some grace, but they’re making it hard to do, and I’m just about out of patience with them.
I’m concerned that there will be dirty tricks at the polls, that people will not be allowed to vote. That polling places will be closed down and there will be restrictions on groups of people going to the polls together. Vote, Yes but if you have been blocked from voting, then that is a serious problem. I think we’re going to see more of that than we’ve ever seen before.
Also, I wish there had been more emphasis on voting to make sure both houses of Congress have Democratic majorities! Without that, Harris will be in an Obama-style deadlock.
I don’t disagree with anything you wrote here, but setting aside the NY Times for a minute, it is in fact useful to remember that not everyone is responding to the convention the same way we are (i.e. with hope and enthusiasm). There’s a lot of work left to be done to get Harris/Walz over the finish line.
Same here. I used to think she sounded a bit off-putting, but now, she’s hitting all the high notes. That’s a big part of what worried my with replacing Biden. I didn’t think the Harris of four years ago could pull off going toe-to-toe with Trump and not sounding like a scold or condescending. I’m not sure what changed - maybe she tried to sound different four years ago, looking for a “presidential” tone, and it didn’t work, or something.
Well, I think “merely” is doing a lot of heavy lifting there.
The one big rule in an event like this is, “Don’t overshadow the candidate”. While I think Biden is great, and would still have been a good choice to be the next President, it’s also clear that he doesn’t have the same energy as a lot of the younger people we’ve seen this week. So you either skip those people, or you ask them to tone it down.
But by switching to Harris, they gave themselves more room to work. You saw how fired up she got by the end last night. Now, those other people can be let off the leash, to really show what they can do - and what they bring to the Democratic Party, and will bring to help a Harris administration. And that’s what really made the difference.
I thought Harris did a reasonable job in threading the Israel-Gaza needle. A wee bit too much in favor of Israel for my taste but I hope the protesters realize that things would be 1000x worse for Gazans if DJT wins.
Hats off to the logistics folks at the DNC. Getting signs and placards in the hands of thousands of delegates right on time surely isn’t a trivial job but they pulled it off.
I agree with that – but will add that, in common with about every person in or aiming for that office for many years now, she will not be able to thread that needle in practice without considerable simultaneous assistance from both Israel and Palestinians.
Which nobody in all that time has been able to more than temporarily get. And it appears to be difficult right now even to get temporarily.
So yes I think she did a beautiful job in that speech – of making an excellent promise which she may well not be able to keep.
Of course, that’s pretty standard for convention speeches.
[the “she” referenced is Pelosi]
I should try to find where I read this – that Harris had been for years building a list of the contact info for influential people who she thought she could call on; aiming originally for a 2028 campaign, although she’d started doing this some years ago; but when Biden resigned she had that list right there and ready and immediately started using it.
A combination of what was originally long-term thinking and an ability to seize the moment.
I thought that was really impressive – both impressive that they were able to get them, and impressive that they were willing and eager to have them.
I saw quite a bit of that. Maybe it depended on just when one was watching?
That was my one criticism of the viewing parties depicted on the big screen. They were all Electoral College battleground states. They should have also highlighted groups in the purple parts of deep red states. That’s where those precious few flippable house seats are to be found.
After seeing a bunch of reactions from those I know on social media I was going to say something similar. The convention accomplished what it was supposed to do. It energized her base. It’s not going to get many converts. Those that didn’t like her still won’t. Most of those who could have benefited the most from it didn’t watch. It’s fine to fell good about things but don’t expect it to do much more than what conventions have always done, give a small temporary bump. It’s a foundation to build off of but that’s all it is.
That’s true, but clips of the speakers will be appearing all over the place for the next two months, and that has to get through to some people, even if they weren’t keen on watching four days worth of it.
And there were so many good moments. It would be hard to decide on the single best one, but “the affirmative action of generational wealth” encapsulates so much of the discussion in one line, that it’s got to be a contender.
