The BDN Opinion section operates independently and does not set news policies or contribute to reporting or editing of articles elsewhere in the newspaper or on bangordailynews.com.
Robert M. Shrum is the Carmen H. and Louis Warschaw Chair in Practical Politics and director of the Center for the Political Future and the Unruh Institute of Politics at the Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences at the University of Southern California. He wrote this for InsideSources.com.
The consensus that conventions are an anachronism, a historical relic that no longer has any meaning, is credible, is becoming increasingly widespread – and is wrong.
Nominations are no longer decided at party conventions, but they can have a decisive and influential impact on shaping national policy.
First, conventions can make or break the course of a presidential campaign. With his acceptance speech in 2000, Al Gore gained 13 to 18 percentage points in the polls, depending on which polls you believe. On the Saturday after the speech, Gore, who had previously been behind by double digits, was suddenly in the lead.
Similarly, four years later, George W. Bush used his September party convention in New York City, just dozens of blocks from Ground Zero, to forcefully underscore his central message: In the face of the terrorist threat, he was the safest choice to protect America.
Sometimes convention maneuvers that could boost a campaign fizzle out later. A typical example of this is John McCain’s attempt to nominate the then-unknown Sarah Palin as his running mate in 2008.
Her acceptance speech impressed delegates and the country, and McCain took the lead in the polls over Barack Obama. But Palin soon became a liability, and her punch line raised doubts about McCain’s judgment as she spectacularly botched basic questions in interview after interview.
And such blunders can happen at the convention, too. One example is Mitt Romney’s invitation to Clint Eastwood to speak at the 2012 Republican National Convention. Eastwood criticized an empty chair that took Obama’s place, overshadowing Romney’s remarks that evening.
Two decades earlier, Pat Buchanan’s sulphurous tirade on social issues overshadowed Ronald Reagan’s final appearance at a Republican convention and poisoned the first George Bush’s plan to use his week in the spotlight to drum up support for his re-election. The look on Barbara Bush’s face as Buchanan thundered his jeremiad was painful – and priceless.
Second, a convention can produce a new star or change the dimensions of the next campaign. This happened in 1956, when a little-known senator from Massachusetts addressed the Democratic caucus three times and nearly won an open race for the vice presidential nomination. Had John F. Kennedy not lost at the end of the vote, his Catholicism would have been partly blamed for the crushing defeat of his campaign. Instead, he then took a lead in the Democratic polls that he maintained until 1960.
History repeated itself with Obama’s stunning keynote speech at the 2004 party convention. Although he was not Hillary Clinton’s front-runner in the next presidential race, he had emerged as her most likely rival.
Even well-known politicians can be buoyed by a convention where they fail to win. Ronald Reagan’s powerful words in 1976, delivered after his acceptance speech at Gerald Ford’s unusual invitation, made him the front-runner for the 1980 nomination. Ted Kennedy’s loud commitment to Democratic values and the value of his campaign after his 1980 defeat to Jimmy Carter had the same effect on Democrats, even though he chose not to run again.
Third, a convention can herald or accelerate major changes in public policy or national life. Reagan in 1980 placed supply cuts at the heart of the Republican orthodoxy that remains in place today. Kennedy’s successful insistence on a gay rights item in the 1980 Democratic platform—the first in the history of either party—was seen by many as too far-fetched; today, the cause is consensus among Democrats and a majority of Americans. Walter Mondale’s choice of Geraldine Ferraro as his running mate was another first. In 2020, three women ran for president. One of them became vice president and may soon be elected to the highest office in the land.
Conventions are essentially about the message. This year, after the assassination of Donald Trump, there was supposed to be a new, “kinder and gentler” Trump, who was supposed to make his debut at the Republican National Convention. Instead, Trump has added to the darkness of anger and resentment with his choice of JD Vance and his abrupt decision to abandon the teleprompter during his acceptance speech.
Now Kamala Harris and Tim Waltz will likely use their convention as a joyful defense of freedom and democracy and a hopeful call to a new future. In November, we will find out which message convinced more Americans – and which convention was more important.
