I was very surprised that McCarthy was even there.
I took one for the team and listened to the Trump speech. He started out with a detailed description of the assassination attempt and how God saved him. He had a mild nod to unity but quickly went back to his usual talking points. A few “high” points:
Illegal immigrants are taking 107% of the jobs
They are taking the jobs of black people and hispanics.
We had the best economy in the history of the world
No one has ever seen anything like it (about 20 times)
They used Covid to steal the election in 2020 (also referred to the “China virus”)
I built almost all of the wall. I took money from the military to do it.
Illegal immigrants are killing hundreds of thousands of people.
If other countries don’t want to do what we want we will impose tariffs of 100-200% on all of their goods.
We will cure cancer very quickly
I like myself. Yet I still watched Trump speak.
It started off emotionally. Trump has changed. A call to unity. A moving tribute to those at the rally.
Followed by the usual divisional rhetoric. Trump has not changed much.
The crowd loved it. Many statements were made, and some of them were true. I had forgotten how brightly the sun shone before Biden became President.
Trump barely mentioned Biden and Pelosi, though the context was a wee bit divisionish. I doubt Biden could beat Trump. On the plus side, ice cream will taste sweeter. The birds will sing with greater vibrancy. Mankind will once again unite under a banner of solidarity and flourishing. Trump will turn swords into ploughshares into common stock and the world will know peace for the centuries to come.
About time!
How could I forget!
They had the jacket and helmet of the man who was killed in the assassination attempt. His name was on the jacket and presumably also on the teleprompter. Trump still managed to get it wrong.
Then, after a moment of silence he went up to the mannequin, bent down and kissed the helmet. It was bizarre.
I haven’t been following this thread or the convention, but this seemed like the best place to ask this question.
Here on the Dope, we follow trump closely and we’ve heard all of his rants and lies for almost 10 years. The MAGAts who are glued to FAUX news have also heard it all, but of course, they like it and believe it. And then there are regular, normal people (not Dopers, obviously 
) who do pretty much follow the news and know trump is a bombastic liar. Okay.
What about people who only follow politics in a presidential election year and may have seen the new, improved, extra-grandiose trump for the first time last night? Were they shocked?
Something I read on Axios this morning raised this question in my mind:
Trump tramples unity theme in two-act convention speech
…
Zoom out: From there, Trump fell into a familiar stump speech — veering off Teleprompter as he railed against a migrant “invasion,” accused Democrats of “cheating” in the 2020 election and praised foreign autocrats.
At 92 minutes, it was the longest televised presidential acceptance speech in U.S. history, packed with the same false claims, vicious rhetoric and personal grievances that have defined Trump’s political career.
It was a standard Trump rally performance — but one that most politically unengaged Americans probably aren’t used to seeing.
I’m asking about the part I’ve bolded, namely, the “politically unengaged” people and their reaction to seeing the post-resurrection trump. They won’t have heard/read the trump line over and over and watched him like we do here.
Question: do you think some of them were shocked when they actually heard, possibly for the first time or for the first time at such length, what he really thinks now and what he stands for now?
Do you see what I’m asking? How much of a shock would it be for someone who was just drifting along not paying much attention to political news to see trump in action after accepting the nomination, to hear him spew his rhetoric, and to see the sycophantish behavior of his worshippers?
I guess the next question is: could this change some votes? Or get someone out to vote who may not have realized what this election could mean?
Historians of the future will read the Acceptance Speech given by Donald Trump before the Republican National Convention of 2024 and ask:
“What the hell? Who’s this ‘Hannibal Lecter’ guy?”
Most people will not have watched the speech and would be unaware of its length. It would not be the ideal place to learn of Trump’s intentions should he be reëlected.
This article is very negative but clear eyed and hard to argue. One hopes Trump is changed.
This article is much more positive.
Quoting the article:
And already the article is laughably wrong.
The National Post is like that.
I’m not politically unengaged but I can pretend to be one pretty easy since I hate politics and politicians. I would only watch any political convention if you put a gun to my head. Even pre-Trump they are incredibly cringy. There is no way someone politically unengaged is sitting through Trump’s speech or probably a minute of the convention. At best they will get a filtered version.
Conventions on the whole have always felt cult-like and sycophantic. They are weird constructs. The politically unengaged will avoid it like the plague. And unlike when I was growing up it’s now easy to avoid it on TV. College Football 25 came out last week.
I watched most of it. It was a typical stump speech with all the good (if you support him) and bad (if you don’t) that entails. We’re going to fix everything on Day 1 (no idea how). Rambling tangents. All the normal stuff.
I am fascinated how he says the quite parts out loud (it’s like dark humor). I’m paraphrasing, but he said “Wisconsin, I’m here to buy you’re vote.” The context was holding the convention in Wisconsin. I thought it was humorous (as did the convention) because that’s pretty much why conventions are held in strategic locations. We understood the (dark) joke.
However, even in context, you really don’t want to say that sentence out loud. There was more of that kind of stuff.
Late: It was also boring. That’s why I stopped watching. Usually I get riled up, but this just left me more bored than anything else.
For any who are curious…
RNC convention audience (playing the home game):
1st night: 18.1 million
2nd night: 14.8 million
3rd night: 18 million
4th night: 23.8 million
“That total, measured during the 10 p.m. ET hour, accounts for 12 broadcasters and cablers: ABC, CBS, NBC, Scripps News, Telemundo, CNN, Fox Business, Fox News Channel, MSNBC, Newsmax, NewsNation and PBS, with Nielsen noting that Telemundo only aired 9 minutes of RNC coverage.”
Just considering the 2020 election, where ~155 million voters cast their ballot, IMHO, that is not a particularly impressive audience for the RNC hate-fest.
What’s more relevant is how many people watched four years ago.
ETA:
Nielsen estimates 18.13 million viewers tuned in to the first night of the Republican National Convention, the company said in a Tuesday release.
In 2020, the first day of the RNC saw approximately 17 million viewers, according to Nielsen.
ETA2:
Nielsen estimates nearly 18 million viewers tuned in to the third night of the Republican National Convention, the company said in a Thursday release.
In 2020, the third day of the RNC saw approximately 17.3 million viewers, according to Nielsen.
Sounds like a mixed bag.
Those are pretty good numbers, especially since nothing of import was ever going to happen.
I’m with Loach, conventions are giant cringefests to me. And so are debates in their current formats.
NM.
I had a bad source for the 2024 4th night TV audience. I’ll keep looking.
I’d add State of the Union to that.
Yup, forgot that one.