JAX potential new host of 2020 GOP convention

[vicupstate]

https://www.axios.com/republican-national-convention-host-city-search-8bad370a-488d-470e-bafe-6a66897c98e9.html

The cities under consideration include Jacksonville, Phoenix, Dallas, Nashville, Atlanta and possibly New Orleans and Savannah.

Jacksonville is the only of those cities led by a Republican mayor. It's an appealing option to many RNC officials, but there's a concern about the availability of hotel rooms.

[thelakelander]

Pretty sure DeSantis said Orlando and Miami are options as well. Miami has a Republican mayor.

[blizz01]

Miami is behind the COVID curve.

[thelakelander]

Trump doesn't care about COVID.

[blizz01]

Miami might.

[thelakelander]

As of yesterday, this interview with DeSantis suggested they were interested:

He mentioned some of the cities that could be in the running: "Orlando because of the hotel capacity would be an obvious place." He said Jacksonville is interested and so is Miami-Dade County, "a place that is used to hosting large events." Once consideration for Miami could be the Miami Beach Convention Center, a site used to hosting gatherings such as Art Basel, would be able to accommodate convention crowds.

Full article: https://www.local10.com/news/local/2020/06/03/gov-ron-desantis-holds-news-conference-in-orlando/

[Papa33]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/elections-2020/republicans-look-at-multi-city-convention-for-trumps-renomination/ar-BB154Qgy

[Peter Griffin]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/elections-2020/republicans-look-at-multi-city-convention-for-trumps-renomination/ar-BB154Qgy

Only tangentially related to the article, but I'm really fed up with this line of "according to sources familiar with the matter"

How has that grown to become an acceptable citing of sources in the modern day? It lends so little credence to the legitimacy of news publications.

More directly related to the article:

A decentralized collection of televised rally-type events sounds like a not-too-bad idea. More attendance, less centralized impact on a single city, larger overall attendance and better likelihood of more local attendees in more locations.

[Tacachale]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/elections-2020/republicans-look-at-multi-city-convention-for-trumps-renomination/ar-BB154Qgy

Only tangentially related to the article, but I'm really fed up with this line of "according to sources familiar with the matter"

How has that grown to become an acceptable citing of sources in the modern day? It lends so little credence to the legitimacy of news publications.

It's standard practice to protect sources who might be compromised if their name was attached to it.

[Peter Griffin]

It's standard practice to protect sources who might be compromised if their name was attached to it.

That still doesn't make it a credible citation, and allows for the complete fabrication of news. It being a standard practice to protect certain sources has now evolved to being a standard practice for absolutely any source

[itsfantastic1]

It's standard practice to protect sources who might be compromised if their name was attached to it.

That still doesn't make it a credible citation, and allows for the complete fabrication of news. It being a standard practice to protect certain sources has now evolved to being a standard practice for absolutely any source

It's almost as if a reader's critical thinking should be exercised and the quality and integrity of the journalist and publiciation should be considered when evaluating the trustworthiness of anonymous sources.

https://www.ap.org/about/news-values-and-principles/telling-the-story/anonymous-sources

[Peter Griffin]

It's almost as if a reader's critical thinking should be exercised and the quality and integrity of the journalist and publiciation should be considered when evaluating the trustworthiness of anonymous sources.

https://www.ap.org/about/news-values-and-principles/telling-the-story/anonymous-sources

Right, which I typically do, but it'd be really nice to be able to trust the media and not to have to constantly be in skeptic mode, which is tiring.

That said, I typically write most "news" media off as either entertainment, native advertising, or propaganda. Just go full cynic, saves me from some grief.

I'm complaining out loud about a grievance I have with the current state of media, though. 

[jaxlongtimer]

My understanding is many sources want to get out info on behalf of their employers but don't want to make it "official" by being named.  It allows the organization to send out trial balloons on their positions without being committed to them or to "socially distance" themselves if they are greeted negatively.  This process can also message and test other parties they are engaged in without being obligated, such as between governments.  Think "ping pong" diplomacy.

I would suggest the White House (no matter the party in power) is a leader in this practice.  I understand sometimes even presidents have been "unnamed sources." 

[Ken_FSU]

Hard pass.

[vicupstate]

My understanding is many sources want to get out info on behalf of their employers but don't want to make it "official" by being named.  It allows the organization to send out trial balloons on their positions without being committed to them or to "socially distance" themselves if they are greeted negatively.  This process can also message and test other parties they are engaged in without being obligated, such as between governments.  Think "ping pong" diplomacy.

I would suggest the White House (no matter the party in power) is a leader in this practice.  I understand sometimes even presidents have been "unnamed sources." 

+ 1000.  It is nothing new either. When someone criticizes the use of 'unnamed sources' they usually can't defend themsselves on the merits. You would never uncover corruption either if every source had to be named.