Republican National Convention **live commentary thread**

[Ebsy]

Aren't the latest FEC numbers supposed to be out real soon?

If another report drops during this convention of Trump's pisspoor campaign funding, I can't imagine the atmosphere on the floor getting more dire

The July monthly will be put up in the evening on Wednesday.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

Aren't the latest FEC numbers supposed to be out real soon?

If another report drops during this convention of Trump's pisspoor campaign funding, I can't imagine the atmosphere on the floor getting more dire

The July monthly will be put up in the evening on Wednesday.

And they should tell us whether he's actually forgiven his loans to the campaign or not. My money is on "no". (They'll probably claim it was an oversight, and they'll do it "soon".)

[senyor_brownbear]

To the native Americans here:

What exactly does the phrase "Trump digs coal" really mean ?

"Digs" means "loves" in this context, although this slang is very much out of date.

[Classic Conservative]

To the native Americans here:

What exactly does the phrase "Trump digs coal" really mean ?

He likes and supports coal and coal mining jobs.

[Interlocutor is just not there yet]

I guess Trump is now arriving back to Cleveland via helicopter

[Gass3268]

To the native Americans here:

What exactly does the phrase "Trump digs coal" really mean ?

He likes and supports coal and coal mining jobs.

I really don't know why on the night that was supposed to be about jobs, the economy, and work that they didn't have a group of coal miners speak. That seems like a big miss to me.

[swf541]

To the native Americans here:

What exactly does the phrase "Trump digs coal" really mean ?

He likes and supports coal and coal mining jobs.

I really don't know why on the night that was supposed to be about jobs, the economy, and work that they didn't have a group of coal miners speak. That seems like a big miss to me.

Completely agreed, that would have been a great and fitting optics attack on clinton which they once again missed and screwed up.

Having coal miners talk about how Clinton wants to take their jobs would have been a decent attack

[muon2]

My sense is that the Trump campaign is more interested in tracking with what will play best, rather than stay locked on a consistent schedule. It seems they concluded that the negative speeches against Hillary would work better for them than the original pro-jobs message. They left a few of the original message speeches in, but those seemed to be from speakers who were non-politicians who only fit that message. They also get a bit of both worlds this way as casual observers might read there was an evening about jobs, but would hear the attack message.

[Gass3268]

My sense is that the Trump campaign is more interested in tracking with what will play best, rather than stay locked on a consistent schedule. It seems they concluded that the negative speeches against Hillary would work better for them than the original pro-jobs message. They left a few of the original message speeches in, but those seemed to be from speakers who were non-politicians who only fit that message. They also get a bit of both worlds this way as casual observers might read there was an evening about jobs, but would hear the attack message.

I agree, its just you could have done both with coal miners.

[Beet]

Maybe the Republicans ditched the jobs message because when they started doing research for their speeches, they realized Obama has a pretty good record on jobs, particularly given what he started with. They don't want to remind people that there are more job openings today than there have been since the last Clinton administration.

[DINGO Joe]

In a way, last night was about jobs for an insular groups of Republicans, attacking the Clintons has been a cottage industry for the last twenty years.  A seemingly endless supply of rightwing billionaires willing to donate big bucks to sham organizations to pursue such ends.  Now it doesn't generate jobs of the general public, but for the insiders, who cares.  Now, one could make the argument that they would need Hillary to win to stay employed.

[Erich Maria Remarque]

My sense is that the Trump campaign is more interested in tracking with what will play best, rather than stay locked on a consistent schedule. It seems they concluded that the negative speeches against Hillary would work better for them than the original pro-jobs message. They left a few of the original message speeches in, but those seemed to be from speakers who were non-politicians who only fit that message. They also get a bit of both worlds this way as casual observers might read there was an evening about jobs, but would hear the attack message.

They want to unify the party.
And it seems, that the only thing that unifies them is hating Hillary /:

[psychprofessor]

My sense is that the Trump campaign is more interested in tracking with what will play best, rather than stay locked on a consistent schedule. It seems they concluded that the negative speeches against Hillary would work better for them than the original pro-jobs message. They left a few of the original message speeches in, but those seemed to be from speakers who were non-politicians who only fit that message. They also get a bit of both worlds this way as casual observers might read there was an evening about jobs, but would hear the attack message.

They want to unify the party.
And it seems, that the only thing that unifies them is hating Hillary /:

Let's also remember that Trump and his minions planned this - they had no experience with conventions and how things should run / operate. Speakers are slotted at wrong times; themes are not being addressed cohesively; the flow from one speech to the next makes no sense - it's a whiplash of emotions. The normal, day to day running of a campaign is in flux with Trump and this was highlighted with his VP selection and rollout and now convention.

Wait til next week at the DEM convention when you see overarching themes reinforced; speakers discussing Hillary's strengths and why people should vote for her; even the scheduling of speakers will fit - they know who to put in 10pm for max effect and prime time audiences...

I just think that this campaign logistically has no experience or foresight. The only theme that they have run with so far is "Lock Her Up." This is now the "Lock Her Up" Convention.

[Likely Voter]

a GOP convention, and especially this one, is to unify the support for the nominee. The idea is to basically get at least everyone who voted Romney and/or McCain on board.   There have been two weak ares for them, real Christian conservatives (the Ted Cruz wing) and educated  semi-moderates (the Kasich/Romney wing). The idea being they have a lot of time to go beyond that to reach swing voters, especially with the debates.

However, are they really using the right tactics to unify Republicans and R-leaning voters? They seem to have decided that they can use Hillary hate to unify, but is focusing on the Fox News/Right Wing radio themes of Behghazi, Hillary for Jail, etc. really helping with their weak areas? It seems to me that it is mostly just throwing emotional red meat at the core demo of angry white working class voters that Trump already has in his back pocket.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

a GOP convention, and especially this one, is to unify the support for the nominee. The idea is to basically get at least everyone who voted Romney and/or McCain on board.   There have been two weak ares for them, real Christian conservatives (the Ted Cruz wing) and educated  semi-moderates (the Kasich/Romney wing). The idea being they have a lot of time to go beyond that to reach swing voters, especially with the debates.

However, are they really using the right tactics to unify Republicans and R-leaning voters? They seem to have decided that they can use Hillary hate to unify, but is focusing on the Fox News/Right Wing radio themes of Behghazi, Hillary for Jail, etc. really helping with their weak areas? It seems to me that it is mostly just throwing emotional red meat at the core demo of angry white working class voters that Trump already has in his back pocket.

And that it could indeed turn off the semi-educateds who are scared of the turns the Republican Party has taken. Visceral hatred can only appeal to so many people before it becomes scary.

[Citizen (The) Doctor]

So apparently Don Jr. reached out to Kasich for the (vice) presidency:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/20/magazine/how-donald-trump-picked-his-running-mate.html?_r=0

[cinyc]

a GOP convention, and especially this one, is to unify the support for the nominee. The idea is to basically get at least everyone who voted Romney and/or McCain on board.   There have been two weak ares for them, real Christian conservatives (the Ted Cruz wing) and educated  semi-moderates (the Kasich/Romney wing). The idea being they have a lot of time to go beyond that to reach swing voters, especially with the debates.

However, are they really using the right tactics to unify Republicans and R-leaning voters? They seem to have decided that they can use Hillary hate to unify, but is focusing on the Fox News/Right Wing radio themes of Behghazi, Hillary for Jail, etc. really helping with their weak areas? It seems to me that it is mostly just throwing emotional red meat at the core demo of angry white working class voters that Trump already has in his back pocket.

The problem for most posters here is that they view the whole convention and most or all of the speeches.  We are political junkies, after all.  I tend to watch the convention more like a normal American - generally only watching what is shown in the 10pm hour (though I'm a sucker for the roll call of the states outdoing themselves because I get to learn "interesting" facts that they are home to the Division 5 champion of Women's Stickball or that they are the real Peach State or that the capital of Nevada is Las Vegas). 

The focus of the 10pm hour has largely been on Trump's family, not so much Benghazi or Hillary for Prison.  This was likely a deliberate choice by Trump to try to soften his image.  The Melania Trump speech arguably backfired due to the plagiarism (unless you think all publicity is good publicity), but Donald Trump Jr.'s speech was a pretty good attempt to make his father look more like a common man than an out-of-touch rich guy like Romney. 

The Benghazi/Hillary for Prison theme has generally only been made in sound bites or talking head panel discussions during this hour.  Christie's speech wasn't in prime time.  Guiliani's speech got some coverage on the broadcast networks.  And they showed Carson and part of General Flynn's speech before dropping it because it was too boring.  That's about it.  The real prime time focus has been on Trump's family, not your usual politicians.  It's an interesting choice, and probably won't pay off, but I understand why the Trump campaign is doing that.

[Likely Voter]

I have also watched the network news version of events and the giuliani and Christie speeches were featured on most that I saw (not live, but they showed significant portions).  And they also grabbed some other stuff during the day. And of course in our current social media culture all the other stuff leaks out via facebook feeds to the non-politicals. 

The risk is that Giuliani and Christie will have a Pat Buchanan/culture war speech effect and turn off the non-Limbaugh types.

Also with regards to both Melania and Don Jr's speeches, I think both suffered from a lack of personal details in humanizing Trump. He has very high unfavorables and needs character witnesses to help him. Same is actually true of Christie who focused too much on Clinton and not why he is backing his long time friend. 

I actually thought Tiffany Trump's speech was the best at revealing the softer side of Trump. One of his biggest weaknesses is with women. I don't think this convention is helping him with women, including women who voted for Romney. Chants of 'lock her up' definitely isn't helping.

[Bojack Horseman]

I can't help but wonder if Hillary will be one of the few candidates to have two convention bounces.

[Dumbo]

I can't help but wonder if Hillary will be one of the few candidates to have two convention bounces.

If the status quo remains in the days after the R-convention it
will be a bounce for Clinton because most people had expected a bounce
for Trump.

[dirks]

You have to realize that most folks aren't looking at this convention through the same hypercritical prism that the rest of us are. There will only be a few lasting memories of it. I mean the Melania controversy subtracted from a nice speech, and she was a true stunner up there.

Giuliani and Christie did well. Last night was a good night for them. They swept the anti-Trump sore losers out the door.

If Cruz endorses and Trump gives a good speech, he might get a good 2-3 point bounce out of it.

But overall yes, the Clinton folks - not their first rodeo. It will be more polished and flow better.

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

I bet every Trump this week will plagerize their speech. It happened Monday and Tuesday, so it will probably happen today and tomorrow.

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

Cruz won't endorse and will give a phenomenal speech. #DelegateRevolt #NewConservativeParty

[ElectionsGuy]

Rubio's "speech" will be an 85 second video message - MSNBC.

[Xing]

Rubio's "speech" will be an 85 second video message - MSNBC.

I'm impressed, I thought 25 seconds was all Rubio could handle.