We're gonna all spend a ;lot of time wondering about this and I'm gonna be especially curious about the Denver possibility, but remember: Where parties hold their conventions means nothing in electionshttps://twitter.com/aseitzwald/status/994325520224538625 …
-
-
-
Replying to @SeanTrende @NickRiccardi
Doesn’t necessarily mean votes but the symbolism means a lot to the parties. Why my money’s on Milwaukee.
1 reply 0 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @DavidMDrucker @NickRiccardi
Yeah, I don't entirely agree with Nick on the underlying points. It often telegraphs what the parties think the strategy for the fall will be.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @SeanTrende @DavidMDrucker
I think this is true sometimes but not others. How did Philadelphia, for example, telegraph HRC's strategy? Fingers crossed for Milwaukee, it's one of the better summertime options.
5 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Milwaukee would be cool but does it have enough hotel/airport capacity? Feel like it might become a de facto Milwaukee-slash-northern-suburbs-of-Chicago convention.
2 replies 0 retweets 7 likes -
That's sort of why I think Birmingham is the worst of the bunch. Some nice hotels, but I can easily see myself winding up in a Holiday Inn in Sylacauga because I booked late.
4 replies 0 retweets 7 likes -
All of them seem like logistical nightmares of one kind or another except maybe Denver: Traffic hell: ATL, MIA, SF Security hell: NYC Hot as hell: HOU, BIR, ATL Hurricane risk: MIA, HOU Not enough hotels: MIL, BIR Small/shitty airports: MIL, BIR, MIA Expensive as hell: NYC, SF
6 replies 2 retweets 21 likes -
4 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
-
Or Chicago! There's a reason why Vegas and Chicago are the top two convention cities.
2 replies 1 retweet 3 likes
I think @NateSilver538 might have hit upon a perfect compromise, centrally located to boot.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.