Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-08-2014, 11:11 PM
 
409 posts, read 257,451 times
Reputation: 511

Advertisements

GOP wanted to have the convention in June and Dallas couldn't host it until July. Thats about all there is to it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-09-2014, 12:46 PM
 
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,452 posts, read 16,378,207 times
Reputation: 5957
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnUnidentifiedMale View Post
I hope they choose Columbus. That would certainly make things interesting. It would neutralize the argument that having a convention in a state gives a party an advantage on Election Day.
Again, i dont think i have ever met anyone who made that argument.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2014, 02:02 PM
 
4,412 posts, read 3,946,075 times
Reputation: 2325
You can't have a Texas based and themed convention without the national news outlets talking about the wacky recently passed Texas Republican Party Platform is not what the RNC needs right now. Let's focus on talking about a hardscrabble working class city instead of... you know, our beliefs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2014, 02:21 PM
 
Location: Barrington
63,919 posts, read 46,545,277 times
Reputation: 20674
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper 88 View Post
That's peculiar, because the GOP almost never wins the state they have their convention in
1992 was the last time the GOP won the state they chose for a convention.
That was Houston and a sure thing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2014, 02:34 PM
 
Location: Barrington
63,919 posts, read 46,545,277 times
Reputation: 20674
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
That is a good question, it would be interesting to see each city a convention is held and to see if that state went for that party or not.
I went back 20 years.

States which hosted the Democrat Convention voted Democrat in all but the 2012 election when the convention was held in the swing state of NC.

States which hosted the GOP Convention voted Republican only in the 1992 election when the convention was held in Tx, a sure thing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2014, 05:16 PM
 
Location: Phoenix
29,982 posts, read 18,814,970 times
Reputation: 25930
Quote:
Originally Posted by mwruckman View Post
If you really want punishment hold the GOP Convention in Indianapolis Indiana. It is the most boring place I've ever had to go to attend a national meeting of a scientific society!
Only way Cleveland would be less boring is if you get mugged there
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2014, 05:20 PM
 
Location: Phoenix
29,982 posts, read 18,814,970 times
Reputation: 25930
Quote:
Originally Posted by middle-aged mom View Post
I went back 20 years.

States which hosted the Democrat Convention voted Democrat in all but the 2012 election when the convention was held in the swing state of NC.

States which hosted the GOP Convention voted Republican only in the 1992 election when the convention was held in Tx, a sure thing.
Since Repubs won the election in 2000 & 2004 while losing the conventions state and Obama won the election in 2012 while losing the state where the convention was held, it seems that where a convention is held has little impact on the election...anybody see it differently?

May as well have the convention where they throw the best party...I vote New Orleans.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2014, 06:49 PM
 
3,326 posts, read 8,832,030 times
Reputation: 2034
Quote:
Originally Posted by casimpso View Post

IMO it's academic. Unless they're able to field a palatable candidate, Electoral College numbers do not favor them. I've studied politics for over 40 years, and Romney, with his almost-daily gaffes, was one of the worst candidates I've ever seen. Unbelievably, a number of Republicans are behind another Romney run in 2016. PLEASE.


It doesn't get much more moderate, safe, or palatable than Romney in either party, unfortunately. If his awkward moments seemed more frequent, it's solely due to the fact the media and SNL largely gave Obama a pass for some pretty absurd things during crunch time.
But would it have been any different than the gaffe Pez Dispenser that was Obama/Biden?




Good for Cleveland. Those good ol' rustbelt towns deserve the attention.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2014, 08:23 PM
 
Location: Laurentia
5,580 posts, read 7,974,267 times
Reputation: 2442
I'm sure it was because Dallas wasn't in a swing state and Cleveland is, and the symbolism and good press of reaching out to blue/red America for the Republicans/Democrats is quite appealing to them. Also, the national party is what is showcased at a national convention, not a state party; they get their time in the sun during state conventions. Applying the same logic, the North Carolina Democratic Party isn't as insane as, say, the Vermont, Washington, or California Democratic Party, so they must have chose Charlotte in 2012 because they wanted to stuff the left-wing crazies in the closet; there's actually more evidence to support that assertion than the OP's, given the experience of the 2004 convention in Boston with all the coverage of those far-left peaceniks roaming about.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2014, 09:03 PM
 
21,402 posts, read 10,477,941 times
Reputation: 14066
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smash255 View Post
As crazy as Perry's rants I don't think it had any impact on the GOP choosing Cleveland over Dallas. Quite simply from a logistical standpoint, holding the Primary in a swing state they desperately need makes more sense.
Did you hear this supposed "rant" or just read about it? It wasn't crazy at all. He was very sane. The crazy one was Martha Raddatz, who seems to think this is all George Bush's fault because he signed a law in 2008 (introduced by a Democratically controlled congress btw). There weren't many thousands of kids coming here on a daily basis at that time. Then she had the gall to say that Obama's telling them not to come because he put some commercial on this week, when this has been happening for a few years now and Obama knew that. Gov. Perry knows very well what's happening on that border.

As far as I'm concerned, he was nicer than I would have been. To think that hundreds of minors from non-contiguous countries coming here on a daily basis when there just so happens to be a law saying we can't turn away kids from non-contiguous countries is just some coincidence is insane. These kids crossed several borders along the way, and Mexico enforces their southern border better than we do. This is coordinated by people in all these countries, including the United States, or all these countries have decided to get rid of some of their criminals like Castro did with the Mariel boatlift in 1980.

'This Week' Transcript: Gov Rick Perry - ABC News

Quote:
RADDATZ: Now, we turn to Texas Governor Rick Perry, who also testified at that special hearing this week.

You heard what the bishop said. He talks about compassion. You're a religious man.

What do you do about this?

GOV. RICK PERRY (R), TEXAS: Well, for over two years, we've drawn the attention of this issue to this administration. As a matter of fact, in May of 2012, we sent a letter, laid out what was happening with the unaccompanied minors that were showing up at the border. And we told them, we said, if you do not address this, here is what's going to happen.

And we're seeing that become reality today. This is a failure of diplomacy. It is a failure of leadership from the administration in Washington, DC. And it was -- messages have been sent now for multiple years.


In -- in 2010, I asked for the president to put 1,000 National Guard troops in place along the border to secure the border so that we could train up 3,000 Border Patrol agents to augment and to permanently secure that border.

RADDATZ: You just heard the...

PERRY: That has been the...

RADDATZ: -- you heard the commissioner...

PERRY: -- the real issue.

RADDATZ: -- of the Customs and Border Patrol say he is confident they have enough resources on the border. They've added...

PERRY: He is...

RADDATZ: -- people.

PERRY: -- he is absolutely and totally wrong. For one thing, there is a Border Patrol agent -- I should say, 15 Border Patrol agents per mile from El Paso to California. In Texas, that number is seven Border Patrol agents totally per mile. So the idea that there's equity and there's enough Border Patrol agents is totally and absolutely...

RADDATZ: But -- but...

PERRY: -- incorrect.

RADDATZ: -- but Governor, this -- this is about a law. This isn't necessarily about Border Patrol. This is about a law. You heard in Jim Avila's piece, they have to let these people into the country when they're from non-contiguous nations, when they're from Central America or South America.


Should that law be changed?

PERRY: The rule of law is that "The Constitution" requires the United States to secure the border. And we're not doing that. We haven't done it for years. And we are paying a huge price.

When you have catch and release policies that send...


RADDATZ: But -- but, Governor, please...

PERRY: -- a message to people...

RADDATZ: -- go back to the law...


PERRY: -- in Central America...

RADDATZ: -- the 2008 law that was signed into law by George Bush.

Isn't this is a backlog in the courts?

Doesn't that have to be addressed first?

PERRY: What has to be addressed is the security of the border. You know that. I know that. The president of the United States knows that. I don't believe he particularly cares whether or not the border of the United States is -- is secure.

And that's the reason there's been this lack of effort, this lack of focus, this lack of resources...

RADDATZ: He's telling people not to come.

PERRY: -- and...

RADDATZ: He's telling them in ads not to come into the United States, not to leave their homes.

PERRY: About -- about five years too late would be my response to that. The president has sent powerful messages time after time...


RADDATZ: You know, Governor...

PERRY: -- by his policies, by nuances, that it is OK to come to the United States and you can come across and you'll be accepted in open arms. That is the real issue.

RADDATZ: But, Governor, you've made -- I -- I want to go back to an interview you did on Fox News. You re--- you recently made some pretty serious allegations against the federal government.

Let's -- let's listen to what you said to Fox News.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PERRY: The federal government is just absolutely failing. We either have an incredibly inept administration, or they're in on this somehow or another. I mean I hate to be conspiratorial, but I mean how do you move that many people from Central America across Mexico and then into the United States without there being a fairly coordinated effort?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RADDATZ: Governor, do you really believe there's some sort of conspiracy to get people into the United States by the federal government, by the Obama administration?

PERRY: When I have -- when I have written a letter that is dated May of 2012, and I have yet to have a response from this administration, I will tell you they either are inept or don't care, and that is my position.

We have been bringing to the attention of President Obama and his administration since 2010, he received a letter from me on the tarmac. He sends -- I have to believe that when you do not respond in any way, that you are either inept, or you have some ulterior motive of which you are functioning from.

So the issue is, this president understands now that we have a huge problem on our southern border. We have to deal with it. And I don't think you're going to be able to address it until you put the resources there, and that's boots on the ground. We're asking for the FAA to allow for drones to be used.

Unless we secure our southern border, this is going to continue to be a massive amount of individuals that are coming to the United States. And, frankly, we don't have a place to house them as it is. And if we have a major event, a hurricane that comes in to the Gulf Coast, I don't have a place to be housing people who are displaced.

RADDATZ: OK, governor, I'm going to have to stop you there.

PERRY: This administration is housing them.

RADDATZ: I'm going to have to stop you there. But thank you very much for joining us.

PERRY: Martha, thank you. Yes, ma'am.

Last edited by katygirl68; 07-09-2014 at 09:15 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top