The Goldilocks Convention

Not too hot....not too cold. It was perfect

It’s been a surprisingly transformative period for Democrats. For decades they’ve suffered from something hard to define. In about a month, they’ve spontaneously solved the undefinable problem.

They showcased this pretty much flawlessly at the just-completed Democratic Convention. The worst problem they had was speakers going over their allotted times due to excessive crowd enthusiasm. (Don’t get me started on the “hidin’ Biden” conspiracy. By this conspiracy’s logic, they were hiding all the headliners other than Harris).

All the main points you’d hope they’d hammer home during their time in the spotlight got covered: the value of abortion freedom, the threats that Donald Trump and MAGA poses, the horror of gun violence, country over party, etc. But there was also the sense of moving forward into a new future, one of hope and happiness.

There were moments where things could have gotten too dark for comfort. When Hillary Clinton spoke, and the crowd started chanting “Lock him up”, it was a delicious moment, but a vengeful turn was never allowed to take over the hopeful forward-looking messaging. There were the gut-wrenching speeches from rape victims and gun violence witnesses that emphasized the backward nature of some of our laws, new and old.

But these moments of sadness and darkness, while extremely important, did not linger—or rather, they lingered just long enough. Each time they were highlighted the schedule respectfully transitioned to the main point of the convention, which was to move on from them, work on making a world where these things are minimized, if not eradicated, and make American life better.

There were moments of giddiness and joy, but never a sense of overconfidence or complacency, or an underestimation of the task at hand. It was not flat or preachy. It had energized focus, like a laser onto the American electorate.

Democrats have been plagued recently by a lack of effective messaging, and general lack of attention or focus. I wrote a piece several weeks ago entitled “Democrats are Suddenly Interesting Again”. This was written in a completely different context. If I were to write something similar again today, I would call it “Democrats are Suddenly Able to Message Again”.

I’m not one to often succumb to hyperbole, but the convention was a perfect meld of messages in perfect order with near-perfect temperament. The smattering of Republican voices intertwined with traditional Democratic grievances was very well-done and effective. It’s simply hard to imagine this convention going any better.

So, what happened? Where did this Democratic Party come from? Where was it this whole time?

They’ve been mostly successful in recent elections, which is really the end goal anyway. But there’s been something missing. MAGA and Trump were still coming a little too close to power for comfort, and were hogging the spotlight. Republicans still do run the House, and are always on the verge of ruling the Senate. For whatever reasons, the Democratic messages were not getting through to the public the way they needed to.

Perhaps it’s the fact that a crisis focuses the mind, or in this case the collective mind of the Party. But the Democratic Party just came through in a big way.

I can see now that I was too nervous and skeptical about changing candidates this late in the game. But I was basing my risk assessment on recent history. Democrats were a bit of a mess, with a coalition of factions that were coming under pressure, and perhaps on the way to breaking. Issues like the Middle East and Joe Biden’s viability were bringing out the worst in the Democratic Party at the worst time.

So, to be the ultra-focused and united behemoth we are now seeing is quite shocking. Welcome, but shocking. Did anyone really think they had it in them?

Surely, the Gaza protesters, with MAGA-aligned instigators, would divert attention to the streets of Chicago with tear-gas-inducing riots. Or a prominent speaker would have a highly damaging sound bite about half the country clinging to “guns and religion”, or some similar type of rage-inducing quip that MAGA could play in their minds ad infinitum to achieve rageful Zen.

Or maybe an abortion rights advocate would make her voice crack with passion in just the right way to make her seem like a psychotic baby killer to those scrutinizing her every word. Or maybe Tim Walz or Kamala Harris would say communistic phrases like “the collective” or “take care of each other” or “union” too many times, or in just the right way with the right look on their faces to “prove” to independents and the MAGA-curious that they are, in fact, Marxist, or socialist, or whatever.

But these things didn’t happen. Everyone’s speech was great; to the point; emotionally effective without being melodramatic. Walz’s was fun and effective, and likely endeared many skeptical people to him.

I’ve never considered Kamala Harris a great speaker or a particularly powerful orator, but her speech at the end of the convention was both great and powerful. A well-written speech, introducing herself, giving her bio, and addressing all our current issues in just the right way, and executed flawlessly. I admit I was surprised.

In much the same way that Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign needed (and still needs) an analysis of what went wrong, writers, pundits, and political scientists will need to examine and analyze exactly what went right with Kamala Harris’ 2024 campaign (assuming her victory, of course). And Democrats should just do whatever they just did in 2024, again, and again.