Tonight I'll be hosting the post-DNC live show! I plan on spending a good three hours explaining why Josh Shapiro would have been better than Tim Walz, because I know that's the kind of content you want. 😉
I'm joking because I like it.
I'll be joined by Joe Perticone, Andrew Egger and (maybe?) Sam Stein and we'll break down what should be a pretty big moment for the campaign as Coach Walz introduces himself to America and sets the stage for the mood Kamala wants for her big night.
Come spend some time with me on our YouTubeimmediately after Walz's conclusion.
Also: Sarah and I are doing a special Secret Pod today! I hope I'll have it for you by mid-afternoon. Kisses
I said the Waltz party was pretty big, but is that true?
No. But also yes.
Conventions never have a direct, causal A→B impact on elections, and individual speeches are never determinative. But it is useful to think of a convention as a tennis racket, where the individual speeches are the strings and the campaign is the ball. When you hit a tennis ball, all the strings play a role in transmitting the effect. This effect influences the trajectory of the ball, sometimes in radical and important ways.
Most of the time you only notice the impact of an individual string if it breaks and causes a nasty hit.
What I want to talk about today is the power of a convention to influence the trajectory of a campaign and how Bill Clinton and Tim Walz might do that.
The first objective of a convention is: do no harm. The worst convention in modern history was the 1968 convention in Chicago, which ended in chaos. This year, it was not. This year's protests were a farce. The Democratic Party is united.
The second goal is: maximize momentum. The second and third worst conventions were George H. W. Bush's in 1992 and John Kerry's in 2004. Let's see what happened to them.
In 1992, the Democrats held their convention in mid-July and Bill Clinton had a real blowout. He had run in a tie with President Bush before the convention and won 1.5% of the vote. based on your survey between 16 points And 27 pointsIt was a historic rebound and Clinton never looked back. President Bush's rebound later that summer was a paltry 5 points.
In 2004, John Kerry had a good showing against the other president Bush, but Kerry's convention left no trace. His numbers remained flat or checked back by a point. Kerry was unable to build momentum as Bush moved forward, achieving a small but real success at his convention in New York.
So where are the Democrats so far on goal #2?
