Convention went according to script

30 July 2004

For Boston, the convention was easier than imagined, disappointing for retailers but a solid piece of public relations. For Democrats it brought unity, clarity of purpose and some jarring moments. It's doubtful the week in Boston fundamentally changed the minds of the much sought-after undecideds. Still it made for a worthy kickoff to what should prove an intense campaign.

The whine of the moment is that restaurants and bars were empty. City streets were like Disney World in the offseason - great if you happen to be visiting; lousy if you own the place. The reason is easy to understand. The scare campaign worked: 35,000 conventioneers showed up while easily triple that number of people stayed away.

But the bigger fears never materialized. Rather than dramatic losses in productivity brought about by workers idling in massive traffic jams, people adjusted. Many went on vacation, others worked from home, and those who needed to show up had easy commutes. Meanwhile, rather than World Trade Organization-like violence in the streets, the comparatively few demonstrators were largely peaceful, indeed, except for yesterday, almost invisible. (In retrospect, that makes sense. After all, the last four years are hardly the Democrats' fault.)

The true dread, of course, was a terrorist incident. Were the security measures put in place overblown? Perhaps. Still, they worked.

And the upside? Assessing the full economic effect of the convention will take a while, but my bet is it nets out a positive. Empty shops were balanced by behind-the-scenes businesses such as caterers, event planners, hotels, cabbies and the like that were running flat-out. TV was picturesque and kind. National publications had special sections extolling the city. Convention booster and John Hancock (soon to be ex-) chair David D'Alessandro think the week's success probably reversed Boston's national image as a second- or third-tier venue. That in turn should yield long-term dividends for the new South Boston convention center.

For the Democrats who visited, however, the week was less about Boston and more about the party: healing divisions, crafting a message and reaching out to a national audience. On the first measure, the week was undoubtedly successful. John Kerry's opponents during the primary season fell into line, extolling his virtues to such a degree one almost forgot they once had differences. Even Dennis Kucinich and the Rev. Al Sharpton joined the Kerry-for- president mantra, united quite clearly by their intense desire to get rid of George W. Bush.

The message also became more honed. Particularly striking were the elements that had a nonpartisan cast to them. Democrats sounded direct appeals to Republicans, asking them not to abandon their party PER SE,yet urging a Kerry vote because when it comes to traditional GOP strengths on issues of national security, Bush has failed. John Edwards' vow to al-Qaeda that "we will destroy you" matched if not bettered Bush's own rhetoric. And using Ron Reagan as their spokesman, Democrats attacked the president's ban on embryonic stem-cell research, cleverly creating a wedge issue of their own. All of this made for smart politics. Democrats must earn the votes of those who in good faith supported Bush in 2000. These themes are the right way to reach out, and in his elegant speech last night - good job, Bob Shrum - Kerry touched on them all.

There were some surprises and missed opportunities as well. Senate candidate Barack Obama of Illinois delivered a stunning keynote address that put him on anyone's list of future presidential contenders. Yet Obama's speech, while electrifying, was short on substance and long on platitudes (albeit, refreshingly delivered platitudes). It was like a great dining experience whose menu you can't recall the next day: delicious, but you're not sure why. In any event, Obama eclipsed the much-hyped Edwards, whose smirk, waggling tongue and courtroom-style delivery didn't connect with those at home or in the FleetCenter.

And then there was Teresa Heinz Kerry's speech, which advanced her own biography quite adeptly yet did little to humanize her spouse (that task was left to Kerry's daughters). Compared to the homage of love Elizabeth Edwards delivered on behalf of her husband, that shortcoming was obvious. "Love" - heck, even affection - was not part of Heinz Kerry's vocabulary. If her job was to give us insight into Kerry as a human being (instead of simply as a politician), she failed.

Still, these are almost quibbles. Overall, the week left delegates girded for the battle ahead. True, TV ratings suggest fewer people than ever watched the show and one wonders if any meaningful bounce will materialize. That may be OK, however. This was scripted theater, after all. Nevertheless, it set the stage for this fall's unscripted reality show. That's when Kerry and Bush (and Edwards and Dick Cheney) meet face-to-face in their debates - a time, one suspects, when undecideds really will pay attention.