Mayor Jim’s Weblog

Normally I do not venture into State or national issues.  After all, my position as Mayor is that I am Mayor of the entire city, not just the Democratic Mayor.

But all this talk about why the race for the Democratic nomination should end bothers me.  For years we have complained that the Democratic and Republican conventions are shams– mere photo ops to coronate a victor chosen much earlier.  Fewer and fewer people watch, and fewer networks carry the event.

What if we had a real convention?   What if the Democratic nominee were really chosen at the convention and if the convention really decided something?  Would that be so terrible?

Think of it for a moment.  Millions of people would tune in.  It would be, easily, the most widely watched convention in history.  When the two candidates kissed and made up at the end, and ran as a team the momentum would be incredible. 

There hasn’t been a convention since 1952 which went beyond the first ballot (this one won’t either), but in the grand scheme of things, it is the Democratic tradition to chose people at the convention. 

It is a myth to believe that a “divided convention” leads to defeat.  Sometimes it does, as in 1924, which we would not have won in any event. 

But in In 1932, Franklin Roosevelt won at the convention on the 4th ballot over the early favorite Al Smith.  In 1960,  John Kennedy won at the convention over Senators with far more experience, Lyndon Johnson and Hubert Humphrey.  Both Roosevelt and Kennedy, as we know, went on to win and to be great Presidents.  

Two of the most divided conventions of all time were the 1948 convention, where Dixicrats walked out, and the 1964 convention where the Mississippi Freedom delegation walked out.  In both cases, the Democrats won.

The one convention where I was a delegate was in 1972 in Miami.  That convention was unified, and decided ahead of time for George Mcgovern.  The result was one of the greatest landslide losses in history. 

So I ask you, dear readers, what is so wrong with a real convention?

Jim Fiorentini

After watching Frontline’s show, Bush’s War, I am longing for good books about the Iraq war.  I read Woodward’s book, “Plan of Attack” but it is a bit outdated.

 Does anyone have any recommendations? 

 If you missed “Bush’s War” on Frontline, it is a must see about how we got into this mess.  You can watch it on line on PBS.  (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/bushswar/)
 Jim Fiorentini

There is talk that the “super-delegates”, delegates who are not elected as delegates, could sway the Democratic national convention.

Ever wonder who the “super delegates” are?  The Globe did a story on them, http://www.boston.com/news/politics/gallery/021208_superdelegates/ , you can see the delegates and brief profile.  You’ll know lots of them: Senator Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, and Deval Patrick.  Others are more obscure unless you are party activist– Gus Bickford, and Mary Xiafaras for example.

There are a lot of theories about how super delegates should vote.   John Kerry, an Obama supporter, says they should stay neutral, and let the elected delegates decide the race. 

Others say they should vote the way their State voted– Massachusetts favored Hillary Clinton, but not by a landslide proportion. 

Senator Ted Kennedy, an Obama supporter,  asked rhetorically in a recent interview if super-delegates should perhaps be divided proportionally according to how the State voted.

Nikki Tsongas, who represents Haverhill, and John Tierney, Congressman who represents Amesbury and Newburyport are both super-delegates and both are neutral thus far in the race. 

How do you feel super-delegates should vote at the convention?