Republicans chose Cleveland to host their 2016 national convention, and the city, writes the Plain Dealer’s Stephen Koff, is “swooning over its victory.”
I’m not kidding. “A great day for our city. Has anything bigger ever happened here?”he tweeted Aaron Goldhammer, co-host of the ESPN Cleveland morning sports show. Ed FitzGerald, elected Cuyahoga County Executive and 2014 Democratic candidate for Governor of Ohio, he was content in the GOP’s acknowledgment “that Cleveland is now in the midst of a historic renaissance.” Local folk hero Charles Ramseywho last year rescued three Cleveland women who had been held hostage for 10 years, – he told a television journalist news of the upcoming Republican convention left him “giddy… happy as a clam.”
“Our city’s time to shine,” raved the Plain Dealer front page on Wednesday, during announced the editorial office that “the Republican Party has affirmed the importance of the city.”
Even though I’ve spent more than half my life in Boston, I am a born and bred Clevelanderso none of this delirium surprises me. Growing up in Cleveland in the 1960s and ’70s meant living in the Rodney Dangerfield of towns – a town with a flammable river and mayor’s hairthe butt of endless jokes at the Laugh-In, home of a football club so desperate for fans that it offered ten cent beer as a promotion and ended in a drunken riot in the ninth inning. Is it any wonder that Cleveland has developed a persistent inferiority intricate? There are only so many times a city can hear itself derided as “the mistake on the lake” before it takes the condemnation to heart.
But don’t be quick to mock, Boston. Cleveland’s euphoria following the announcement of the presidential nominating convention may seem excessive, and it may be tempting to ridicule a city so hungry for “acknowledgement” of its importance that it treats the gathering of politicians and media representatives as an incomparable prize. But Cleveland’s reaction is no different than Boston’s when it was chosen to host the 2004 Democratic National Convention. “This is the renewal of Boston,” exclaimed Jack Connors, head of one of the city’s best advertising agencies. A Boston legislator hailed the choice as historic: “Let’s face it, the city is crossing a line here.”
The truth, of course, was that Boston didn’t need the restart any more than Cleveland needed the confirmation. Cities crave major party conventions because they see themselves basking in the reflected prestige of a presidential candidate and the political pubs pouring in from across the country. Given a gloomy opinion Americans, when it comes to domestic politics and politicians, this prestige is mostly theoretical, but the illusion remains.
Lord knows why. It has everyone the city’s national reputation was measurably improved by being the site of the quadrennial nominating convention? Parties spend huge sums of money staging these events, and the media sends armies of journalists to cover them. And yet voters tune in most of the proceedings that took place in any event almost no effect depending on how the elections turn out.
Beyond the supposed glory of hosting a GOP conclave in two years, Clevelanders are being told to expect $200 million economic injection of all the riches that the delegates will spread.
But Cleveland has a chance to learn what other host cities have learned about the fun that conventions consistently predict: It’s also mostly theoretical. Boston officials have repeatedly claimed that hosting the 2004 convention would provide a windfall of $150 million to the local economy. Then this he made a tenth of that. Most delegates spent less than $500 during their stay in the city; most never dared to go beyond the place of assembly and their hotels. “As a short-term economic event, the DNC clearly failed” – Boston Business Journal he concluded gloomily.
Boston was no exception. As reported by the National Journal. two years ago based on research by Holy Cross economists who “analyzed all national political conventions held between 1972 and 2004, comparing 14 convention cities with 36 similar regions.” The result: None of the 18 conventions held during those years “had any impact on personal income or local employment in the host city.”
I don’t begrudge Cleveland any of the civic pride that winning the 2016 convention inspires. But I also know that Cleveland doesn’t need a horde of congressmen… or even, dare I say it, LeBron James – feel good about yourself. “Laugh-In” is historic history, just like Cleveland not anymore buckle on the Rust Belt. Republicans chose a city whose reputation is much better than it once was. If only the same could be said about Republicans. Or Democrats.
