Is the Exhaustive Democratic Convention Convincing Voters?
If a person was forced to pick one word to describe the third night of the Democratic National Committee it would probably be “exhausting.”
It was nearly 11 pm, three hours into the prime-time portion of the day, when our monotonous Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg finally hit the DNC stage. Now, I’m not a professional political advisor, but one highly doubts that voters — most of whom would be waking up for work on Thursday – were clamoring to hear from the bungling head of the least important bureaucracy in the country.
Mayor Pete had just followed the governor of Maryland, Wes Moore, though both men hit nearly the same exact themes that scores of other Democrat speakers had already gone over.
Surely Buttigieg was going to introduce vice presidential candidate Tim Walz next, and put us out of our misery?
Nope. Welcome John Legend and Sheila E! The duo covered Prince’s music, because the later singer, like Walz, called Minnesota home. So I was hopeful this nightmare was coming to an end.
Next up, to my chagrin, was Minnesota senator Amy Klobuchar. This time you could really feel the build-up. All signs point to Walz’s big moment . . .
Well, except for the Minnesota high school marching band and former high school football players coached by Walz. And, also, a movie narrated by Walz’s wife, glorifying his life.
It often seemed as if the entire point of the DNC was to shove as many Democrats in front of the camera during prime time as humanly possible.
Cory Booker and Stevie Wonder and Mindy Kaling and Nancy Pelosi and Bill Clinton and scores of lesser-known politicians and activists and law enforcement officials all made forgettable appearances. The sharpness of the Democrats’ message was blunted with every new speaker. These events have become a grind.
Even stronger speeches, like the one delivered by Oprah Winfrey – a billionaire who lamented the unfairness of “income inequality” – were overshadowed by the sheer crush of speakers.
Follow along with The Post’s live reporting of the Democratic National Convention in Chicago.
Who in America is being convinced by these affairs?
Is four straight hours of Democrats hammering the same talking points more effective than three hours or two?
Conventions were once raucous events where parties made momentous decisions. They are nothing but a coronation today. Shouldn’t coronations be entertaining?
Anyway, I began to wonder if the Democrats were going to push their vice-presidential nominee’s speech into the midnight hour as they had done with their 81-year-old president on the convention’s first night. But Walz finally appeared shortly before 11:30.
The candidate delivered a short, loud speech imbued with his everyman schtick and attack dog persona.
Was it good? I’m not sure. Frankly, at this point, like most of America, I could barely keep my eyes open.
