Why don't the Democrats move their convention to a period of a few weeks

[DaveSZ]

Why don't the Democrats move their convention to a period of a few weeks later?

Surely there is still time to change plans, or no?

[rogerashton]

1. These things have to be arranged years in advance.

eom

[DaveSZ]

3. I see

That's a shame.

Well, we can sit back and watch the march at the GOP convention in NY - or participate in it.

[punpirate]

2. That also presents the same problem the Bushies...

... encountered by setting their convention so late, which is one of the statutory limits in the states to have a candidate on the ballot.

M'self, I'd like to see the campaign season much shorter--it would negate the very large influence money has on campaigning, and would spare us being unindated by political advertising for many months at a stretch.

[genius]

4. Good idea. But there are contracts. They don't want to offend businesses

Better to offend businesses than lose the election.

[Goose3five]

5. Re: Why don't the Democrats move their convention...

I don't think it is logistically possible to do this. If for no other reason, all of the delegates were chosen during the primaries and I am certain that they have already booked their travel and lodging arrangements. It would be a nightmare.

[notbush]

6. Correct me if I'm wrong

Doesn't the challenging party always hold their convention first?
I thought there were some other "hard" rules for setting convention dates.

[sofa king]

7. I'll bet one of the "hard rules" is agreement upon an alternate date

Otherwise opposition could shitcan an entire convention simply by promising to cause enough trouble around that date. Certainly there must be a "Chicago '68" clause?

Frankly, I'm not worried about it. Plan for the "July Surprise"--the capture or death of Osama, finding the WMDs, a terrorist act on domestic soil, personal revelations about the candidate, whatever it is--by spoiling it early in the press and using our far more eloquent voice to broadcast it in advance. Warn the people to expect dirty tricks.

An expert campaigner like John Kerry really has more to worry about a potential Sirhan Sirhan than he does the President--unless the President sends a Sirhan Sirhan.

Money is important, but when you're dealing with a doofus like Bush, you can reasonably expect that he has to spend three bucks to your one just to dry-clean his suit. So take the disadvantage, hype it, show how fat-assed companies like Timken fucked the people by donating to Bush while cutting their jobs, and we're home free in the executive branch.

But if we don't take the House back, we're still screwed.

[displacedtexan]

8. There are no "hard rules" concerning conventions. In fact, ...

if JK waits to accept the nomination after the convention, he's actually restoring the original "rules," which were followed until 1932.

The nominee used to go home and wait for a delegation to knock on his front door and officially ask him to accept the party's nomination. FDR was the first nominee to accept at the convention, which was a major change in "rules."

JK and the convention planners can do whatever they want to. We don't have to do anything just because the repukes do it a certain way.

Screw them!