Discarded: Was the 2008 Democratic National Convention successful?

Yeah, lets go with the speech issue and ditch this one...

We would have to see lots of sample evidence on this issue because I really don't see much of a debate. The only shot might be whether or not Obama's speech will have a positive, negative or no impact on his candidacy.

I think that Democratic party being united shouldn't be able to negate all other related issues. Whether or not the DNC was effective may be better wording(?)

People could think it was a dud and wont affect the polls at all, people can think that Obama blew it, and people could think it was a smash hit, but that doesn't necessarily have something to do with whether or not the party will be united in November

Good point.

Hmm...

Maybe this is something to ask after the Republican convention wraps up, and ask which one was (better?)

There will be a lot of partisan stuff of course but I think also there will be media commentary -- sort of like re: the coverage of the Olympics, which is an issue -- and more neutral people weighing in.  And the compare-and-contrast is heightened because of timing this year (back-to-back conventions).

Basically, I'm trying to focus some of the endless convention chatter; had already been thinking of how to do so when I saw Carl's "successful" comment.

My concern is what "successful" means... is it about whether people think it successfully united the party? If it is, then this would end up as a dupe of the previously proposed "Will the Democratic party be united in November?" right?

This might not be the best way to phrase it.  I just saw Carl Bernstein, on CNN, say it was the most successful convention he's seen.  There is lots of talk about the convention, and I think some debate.

(Obviously this wouldn't go up until after the convention wraps up tonight.)