Republicans pick the Twin Cities for the 2008 convention

Posted at 12:19 PM on September 27, 2006 by Tom Scheck (16 Comments)

WASHINGTON (AP) - Republicans have chosen the Twin Cities of Minneapolis-St. Paul for the 2008 presidential convention, a GOP source said Wednesday.
The selection was expected to be announced later today, said the Republican source, who spoke on condition of anonymity.
The choice of the Twin Cities would provide a major political punch for the GOP, capturing the media markets in Iowa, Wisconsin and Minnesota - all battleground states in the 2004 election.
The convention would be held at the Xcel Energy Center in St. Paul, Minn., home of the hockey team.
The Twin Cities are also in the running for the Democratic national convention.
The GOP held its last convention in New York City, where GOP delegates nominated President Bush for a second term.

Comments (16)

I don't think Twin Citians have any idea what a pain in the neck a national political convention is going to be.

Posted by Bob Collins | September 27, 2006 12:45 PM

I believe that we're no longer in the running for the Democratic National Convention now that the Republicans have chosen us.
Personally, I wanted no part of either one of them. It all seemed like WAY too much hassle for such a small benefit.

Posted by MR | September 27, 2006 12:47 PM

Nooooooooooooooo!

We are 100% out of the DNC's eyes now.

Posted by Demrock6 | September 27, 2006 12:50 PM

I'm a Minnesotan in Boston... we had the Dems here in 2004... an absolute madhouse and Beantown-metro is twice the size of the Twin Cities. Good Luck!

Posted by Jesse | September 27, 2006 12:54 PM

The Republicans are trying to force the Democrats into choosing Denver, a non-unionized city. This has the immediate practical effect of pissing off the union PACS which usually end up paying for conventions.

SUMO

Posted by sumoynona | September 27, 2006 12:59 PM

We're gonna need more hookers.

Posted by tom | September 27, 2006 1:15 PM

what is up with the rumor that media outlets were pushing for both conventions to take place in the same city?

Posted by Ag | September 27, 2006 1:17 PM

And I don't know where that Denver/Union stuff is coming from, but recent reports have had the Dems prefering NYC as a first choice, the Twin Cities as a second, and Denver as third.

Posted by tom | September 27, 2006 1:19 PM

There was a rumor that, because the conventions didn't actually decide anything, media outlets wanted both in the same city so that they would only have to do logistics once for both.

Posted by MR | September 27, 2006 1:29 PM

I hadn't heard the media rumor but it wouldn't surprise me. The media logistics are HUGE! Your talking about building studios and running miles and miles of cable and occupying at least two months for each convention. For what? An infommercial.

Posted by Bob Collins | September 27, 2006 1:33 PM

The first ap article said that the city of St. Paul hasn't confirmed yet. Why not have the dems make a counter offer and see what works best for the twin cities?

Posted by EB | September 27, 2006 2:06 PM

My guess is the GOP missed their opportunity. They should have held it here in 2004, if they wanted to gain advantage in the "battlegrounds" of Iowa, Wisconsin & Minnesota. I see the battlegrounds shifting back to the Ds this year; after two more years of Bush I can't imagine a lot of GOP support in the region.

Posted by bsimon | September 27, 2006 2:17 PM

I've just dashed off a note to my one prominent Republican friend (from the losing city of Cleveland, so it also counts of taunting) offering him the use of my house for an immodest rental fee. I'll be at the lake that week if you need me.

Posted by fasolamatt | September 27, 2006 2:39 PM

I think the whole idea is just plain bad. I mean, do you want the Twin Cities to look like Chicago in 1968 where protesters gotten out of hand in which massive rioting had occured?! Forget it. They should withold the GOP convention somewhere else like Austin or Colorado Springs, not Saint Paul or Minneapolis by far.

Posted by BR | September 27, 2006 9:02 PM

Well, there probably won't be any rioting because nowadays there's no freedom of assembly around conventions. They designated "free speech zones." Which brings up an interesting question.... where will St. Paul's "free speech zone' be? Minneapolis?

Posted by Bob Collins | September 27, 2006 9:17 PM

Heh, free speech zones..

Anyone ever seen Arrested Development?
http://the-op.com/images/400lindsay-cagedance.jpg

Posted by matt | September 27, 2006 11:27 PM

Services

• Hourly Newscast
• HD Radio
• iPhone App / Mobile
• E-mail newsletters
• RSS feeds
• Podcasts
• Submit your photos
• Videos
• Weather
• Most e-mailed stories