Here in Boston, the bill forthe upcoming DNC is expected totop $100 million! And, because of the location and the necessary security, the city will be effectively shut down for 4 days. The economic loss to the city will be in excess of $50 million. So, with this in mind, are these things worth it? Consider the following:
-the Democratic candidate is already known (Kerry)
-the party “platform” isn’t written in stone (at the convention). In fact it changes as soon as the election is over.
-the selection of the VP is a pretty trivial event, the office is of little real importance
So,given the huge expense and inconvenience, why do we still have these conventions? It would be better to drop them and use the savings to reduce the national debt! 
Out of curiosity, why do we CAPITALIZE words in every thread title?
You silly, silly little person. Don’t you know that it’s of no consequence what each party spends for the big shindig? It’s little more than a big blowjob to whomever gets the nomination. The reason cities want either party to have the masturbatory glad-handing (Yup, new word 
) is to get some money. Forget the conventions, gimme the debates.
ralph, that was uncalled for, my apologies.
Speaking for myself, I do not.
Although the Democratic nominee is known, there is always the chance of a brokered convention in the future.
Also, I am quite sure there will be some behind the scenes, “Dump Cheney” talk at the Republican conventions.
Although conventions can look like large scale infomercials, they still show the American people a snapshot of the party and their candidate.
I hope C-span shows some of their footage of old conventions this summer.
Conventions are important because of the big speeches by the vice president and president candidates. They are pretty much the only time our terrible TV “news” (no such thing as TV news, really, it’s all fluff and crap, real news is in print) allow candidates to speak at their own pace, without hacking their words into soundbites. The rest of the conventions are crap, and I don’t care if they are shown on TV, or even if they occur (though important work on party platform is done off-camera at the conventions).
But we owe it to our democracy to give the candidates these solo, uninterrupted forums. So not only are the Conventions good, because they give us that: they should also be required of all networks to broadcast during the Prez and Veep speeches, without commentary or spin.
I like to watch them. But I’m a political junkie. It does give the nominee a chance to make his speech on national television and serves to officially kick off the fall campaign. Plus it gives the local hookers a big boost in their income.
Heck, you’ve got thousands of people toiling away in their respective pary’s administrations, doing tedious scut-work for little pay, and often considered by the public at large at roughly the same level as Jehovah’s Witness telemarketers.
Without the big party of the convention, how else you gonna reward them?