Minneapolis in convention lead for both Democrats and Republicans in 2008?
Ever since New Orleans dropped out of the running for the Democratic National Convention in 2008, Denver has been the presumptive front-runner, despite a fantastic push by Mayors Rybak and Coleman for Minneapolis/St. Paul.
Denver knew from the start it would have to resolve its lack of unionized labor, particularly in their hotel industry. Could it increase unionization across the city before 2008? Would the DNC accept a lower level of unionization?
Colorado Confidential is reporting that progress on the “union question” has slowed, propelling Minneapolis/St. Paul into first place:
The political “buzz” about the location of the Democratic National Convention has Denver slipping into second behind St Paul/Minneapolis because of Union problems and lack of facilities, according to sources within the national party circle. They acknowledged that Denver Mayor Hickenlooper is working on the labor problems, but with the DNC decision expected in November, will he have enough time to solve the problems?
I doubt anyone could put together a fail-safe plan for an increased union presence in Denver by 2008 by November. It will come down to either the DNC accepting Hickenlooper’s promises on faith, or putting the meme of a resurgent Democratic party in the Mountain West above union problems.
They better stick to that November deadline because the Republicans are also taking a very hard look at Minneapolis/St. Paul. Rybak and Coleman have made it clear that Minneapolis/St. Paul is first come first serve - they will withdraw their bid for the Democrats if the Republicans pick them and vice versa.
Info on Minneapolis/St. Paul becoming the Republican favorite underneath the fold:
According to Times Union blog via the Democratic Convention Watch:
A New York Republican who’s attending the Republican National Committee summer meeting in Minneapolis, Minn. called in to say the current buzz is that Midwestern city has an edge over New York, Cleveland and Tampa for the party’s 2008 convention.
That speculation is due in part to the fact that this is the RNC’s first-ever meeting in Minnesota.
(The theme of the meeting is “Defining the Difference,” which could mean both the difference between Republicans and Democrats and the difference between Republican candidates and the unpopular Bush administration).
This Republican noted the RNC’s 2003 summer meeting had been in New York City, which was subsequently tapped for the 2004 convention.
Rybak makes a good point in his stump speech for the conventions. If the Democrats come, think how amazing it will be to nominate the next President of the United States in our hometown. If the Republicans come, think how much fun we’re going to have protesting!
August 10th, 2006 at 11:08 am
I don’t know. I’d rather see more people unionized than have the convention here. If we can leverage the convention into stronger unions in Denver, that takes my vote.
August 10th, 2006 at 11:31 am
I agree: if it was a simple choice between “More union members in Denver!” and “Have the convention in Mpls/St. Paul!” that’s an easy choice.
I just don’t think that Hickenlooper has that kind of leverage, even with the DNC at his back. The hotel companies are weighing what they perceive to be the total cost of allowing more unions vs. the one time benefit of the convention. I just don’t know if the math will add up for them.
The alternative is that Hickenlooper can try and get a legislative or ordinance solution to the problem through but he just doesn’t have enough time. And if the DNC chooses Mpls/St. Paul, he can then say “We would have had it if we had more unions - let’s not loose the next one” and use that as a rallying cry for change.
August 10th, 2006 at 1:39 pm
Sure, more Unions are good, but it won’t happen in the given time frame.
I am very excited about the chance of the DNC coming here, and it sounds like we have a VERY good chance of that now!