Ha ha! Very funny article on Politico just now. This first paragraph says it all:
While excitement is building for a Democratic Party convention capped by Barack Obama’s historic acceptance speech before a sold-out, 75,000-seat football stadium, the GOP convention the following week is shaping up to be a considerably more staid affair, marked by the conspicuous absence of many of the usual convention attendees.
Republicans aren’t exactly planning to avoid the convention in droves. But compared to past conventions, lawmakers, lobbyists and candidates aren’t beating a path to St. Paul either.
Sad! I guess this means that it will have the "energy" of their nominee. Which is to say...you know.
Oh, and also, a lot of Republicans just can't be bothered to make it out there: after all, it's not close enough to their beloved DC:
In 2004, D.C.-based conventioneers could zip in and out of New York City by train. The 2000 convention in Philadelphia was an even shorter ride.
St. Paul, by contrast, requires a flight halfway across the country from Washington — and, of course, the maddening hassle of air travel.
That’s asking a lot of attendees, some of whom question whether, as a destination, the Twin Cities will be worth the aggravation.
Bummer, dude. It must suck having to take your private plane out THAT FAR into the wilderness.
Heck, even their leaders don't want them to go:
On the House side, according to a report in The Hill, during a July 31 conference call National Republican Campaign Committee Chairman Tom Cole of Oklahoma discouraged congressional hopefuls from attending, saying that doing so would potentially be a "waste of time."
Mmm yeah. Sounds like they're preparing the rebuttal of the century to Obama.
Or not.
After all, as one Senate GOP aide says,
"Nobody likes a funeral"
Pwned.