“After reviewing feedback from all these individuals, I am confident that Charlotte is an ideal location,” DNC chair Tim Kaine said in a statement on Tuesday. “I want to congratulate the people of Charlotte, their mayor, Anthony Foxx, Senator Kay Hagan, Governor Bev Perdue, and every other leader who helped to put together this winning bid. I am looking forward to working with all of them to ensure that the next Democratic National Convention is one that will demonstrate the best of our party and our nation’s political process.”

Minneapolis Mayor RT Rybak offered congratulations to Charlotte.

“Congratulations to Charlotte on being selected to host this great event. Any assistance they need, we’re here to help,” he said. “We’re obviously disappointed, but having been a finalist for this selection proves once again that Minneapolis has what it takes to host any major event.

He added, “Trust me, we’re going to continue to compete for them. Every time Minneapolis vies for this caliber of high-profile event, we strengthen the infrastructure needed to be competitive in attractive conventions and new business to town that in turn create good jobs that grow our economy.”

In an email sent out to supporters, Michelle Obama wrote:

Charlotte is a city marked by its southern charm, warm hospitality, and an “up by the bootstraps” mentality that has propelled the city forward as one of the fastest-growing in the South. Vibrant, diverse, and full of opportunity, the Queen City is home to innovative, hardworking folks with big hearts and open minds. And of course, great barbecue.

Barack and I spent a lot of time in North Carolina during the campaign — from the Atlantic Coast to the Research Triangle to the Smoky Mountains and everywhere in between. Barack enjoyed Asheville so much when he spent several days preparing for the second Presidential debate that our family vacationed there in 2009.

The Republican National Convention will be held in Tampa, Fla.

Sens. Al Franken and Amy Klobuchar, as well as DFL gubernatorial candidate Mark Dayton, are pressing the Democratic National Convention Committee to host the DNC in Minneapolis in 2012. The state’s most populous city is on the short list along with Charlotte, N.C., St. Louis and Cleveland. Also shortlisted in 2008, Minneapolis lost out to Denver, but partnered with St. Paul in hosting the same year’s Republican National Convention. Protest groups are opposing any efforts to bring the DNC to Minneapolis.

Anti-war groups filed for a permit to march on opening day of the DNC should it come to town, but were denied by the City of Minneapolis. The RNC in 2008 resulted in more than 300 arrests; of those, 15 people were charged with wrongdoing and only five were convicted.

Here’s the letter from Franken, Klobuchar and Dayton:

To the Members of the Democratic National Convention Committee,

We are writing to you on behalf of the State of Minnesota urging the Committee to select Minneapolis as the host city for the 2012 Democratic National Convention.
Each finalist city presents valid reasons politically, socially and economically as to why it should be chosen to host the Convention. As you know, Minneapolis is resourceful, reliable and ready to serve Democratic National Convention goers. With vibrant cultural attractions, efficient transportation and world-class dining and hotel accommodations, we would be thrilled to host delegates, nominees and attendees alike. But, you know this and we know this decision has as much to do with politics as it does with logistics.
To that end, please keep in mind that history shows the national political convention site doesn’t necessarily influence the outcome of the election. In fact, only half the time has the state in which the DNC was hosted, went for the Democratic Party in the general election.

The objective now is to select a city that will establish the proper political setting for the 2012 election. With this in mind, we firmly believe Minneapolis is the best choice for the Democratic Party. Located in the country’s heartland, Minnesota is often on the list of swing states and winning the heartland has proven to be a key region in many presidential elections. Key constituencies for the Democratic Party, including labor, have a strong presence in this region and are eager to serve as hosts of this convention.

Like many others, we have seen a significant shift in our political atmosphere following the mid-term elections. Our state legislature turned from Democratic to Republican control for the first time in 38 years. We lost a 35 year veteran of the U.S. House and our congressional delegation is now split evenly between Democrats and Republicans. The one positive coming out of the election is that we appear to have elected a Democratic governor – a significant victory and one that no other finalist host city can boast. Minnesota proved that despite a tough election year across the country, Democrats can still win here – in a place Democrats will need to win to be successful in re-electing President Obama.

Remember, not only is Minnesota the state in which President Obama decided to accept his nomination but it’s also the state Republicans chose for their National Convention in 2008. Our state is in play and has political importance. It’s time again for Democrats to lay claim to Minnesota and help regain control in 2012.

We respectfully urge you to select Minneapolis as the site for the 2012 Democratic National Convention.

Sincerely,

Senator Amy Klobuchar
Senator Al Franken
Mark Dayton

The home of Minneapolis anti-war activists Mick Kelly and Jess Sundin were among those searched, they told the AP.

“The FBI is harassing anti-war organizers and leaders, folks who opposed U.S. intervention in the Middle East and Latin America,” Kelly said before agents confiscated his cell phone.

Sundin called the suggestion they were connected with terrorism “pretty hilarious and ridiculous.”

Sundin was “a principal leader of the mass antiwar march of 10,000 on the opening day of the Republican National Convention two years ago,” and Kelly has said he would march on the Democratic National Convention if it were held in Minneapolis this year, according to the Minneapolis Star-Tribune.

As I wrote earlier this week, fusion centers have a habit of targeting domestic activist groups as terrorist organizations. During the 2008 protests against the RNC in St. Paul, a Minnesota fusion center played a role in coordinating law enforcement’s response to activists, for instance. The FBI is being tight-lipped about why it conducted the raids and what it was looking for, but it doesn’t take a huge stretch of the imagination to guess that information gathered in 2008 could have some connection to today’s action.

It’s clear why Charlotte and St. Louis are in the list — North Carolina and Missouri were the two states with the closest margins of victory in the 2008 presidential election. John McCain won Missouri by .14 percent — 3,903 votes. Obama won North Carolina by .32 percent — 14,177 votes.

Ohio was also close, though not to the same degree as Missouri and North Carolina. Obama took the Buckeye State by 4.59 percent — 262,224 votes. Still, Cleveland’s pick as a finalist shows the DNC wants to do everything it can to keep Ohio in the Democratic column. Most unofficial studies indicate Ohio will have two fewer electoral votes in 2012 than it did in 2008 — down to 18.

The inclusion of Minneapolis on this list is an oddity if one only looks at the 2008 results. Minnesota gave Obama a very comfortable 10.2 percent victory margin — far larger than the wins Al Gore and John Kerry scored in the state in the previous two contests. But the state is perpetually on the GOP’s radar. Also worth noting: Minneapolis co-hosted the Republicans’ 2008 convention with neighboring St. Paul, and Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty is very likely to be a contender for the Republicans’ 2012 presidential nod.

In addition to sitting on the Democratic Party’s Platform Committee, de Rothschild was an ardent supporter of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s run for the presidency. She acted as a surrogate, raised large amounts of money and, on the eve of Sen. Barack Obama’s nomination, was still fuming about the outcome of the primary race.

Angry could not begin to describe her feelings.

In a darkened hotel room, she raged against Obama and the more liberal factions of her own party; blamed party leaders like Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) for much of what happened, and predicted doom for Obama on Nov. 4. Near the end of our talk, she even expressed doubt about whom she would support in the general election.

We have now found out her decision.

Earlier today, the McCain campaign announced de Rothschild had endorsed McCain, saying in a statement that, “In an election as important at this, we must choose the candidate who has a proven record of bipartisanship and reforming government, and that’s John McCain. We can’t afford a president who lacks experience and judgment and has never crossed party lines to work for meaningful reform. Amid tough economic times and foreign-policy concerns, we need someone who is ready to lead. Although I am a Democrat, I recognize that it’s more important to put country ahead of party and that’s why I support John McCain.”

But what of the issue of reproductive choice? It’s something I asked de Rothschild during our conversation. It never made it into my piece, but seems salient now. When I asked about Roe vs. Wade, the political heavyweight used it as an opportunity to further attack her own party.

“I’ll tell you about the choice,” de Rothschild said to me. “The Democratic Party uses Roe vs. Wade as a leash around women’s necks. They say, ‘Oh if we lose, the Supreme Court will overturn Roe v. Wade, you’ll lose your right to choice.’

“I am a graduate of Columbia University law school,” she continued. “I have had a conversation with Ruth Bader Ginsburg about this. Roe vs. Wade was not the best case for women’s reproductive rights. There are better fact-cases. And people like me, all pro-choice people, would get that case before the Supreme Court should Roe v. Wade be struck down.

“There is no question the Constitution protects our right to choose. If Roe v. Wade was going to go, George Bush would have gotten rid of it. John McCain’s not going to go after Roe v. Wade, and I’m not going to be held hostage. I’m not going to be ghettoized by Roe v. Wade. That’s what the Democrats do and I’m sick of that.”

There’s no doubt that a great number of Democrats will distance themselves from de Rothschild because of her decision. Indeed, she may never be welcome into the party’s inner circle again.

But there’s no doubt, given the polls, that there are many women who feel this way and are ready to bolt their party to support McCain. So now it’s crucial for the Democrats to promote Clinton even more–having her appear on TV and public events; making the best case that a vote for Obama is a vote for everything she stands for.

The burden on Clinton is immense. She has to win back the people who supported her. She is more than an Obama supporter — she must be a super-surrogate, the likes of which we have never seen.

“As Sen. Kennedy said two weeks ago in Denver, he intends to be on the floor of the United States Senate next January, when we begin to write the next great chapter of American progress,” said Kennedy spokesman Anthony Coley. “Sen. Kennedy’s doctors are pleased with his progress so far and have recommended that he continue to work from home through the fall.”

Because Democratic leaders have low expectations about what legislative accomplishments are possible for the rest of the year, Kennedy’s absence won’t likely be significant as it pertains to individual votes.

And if it were to become an issue, who knows how Kennedy would react?

The 76-year-old has already astounded observers with two surprise public appearances earlier this year: the first in Washington in July to cast the deciding vote on a tight Medicare bill; the second last month in Denver to deliver a fiery, if short, speech before the Democrat faithful gathered for the party’s convention.

The message is clear: Kennedy may be ill, but he’ll be there if the party needs him.

Last night, President Bush enthusiastically passed the torch to the man who he wants to carry on his legacy for the next four years – his disastrous economic policies, his foreign policy that hasn’t made us safer and his misguided war in Iraq that’s costing us $10 billion a month. …

What’s most telling from their convention so far is what they’ve left out. Last night we heard no mention of the economy, no mention of how John McCain would jump-start the economy, no mention of how he would fix the housing crisis or create energy independence.

McCain’s campaign manager said yesterday this campaign would not be about the issues, and last night’s speeches showed he was right: the Republicans intend to offer no real change, just more of the same. American families who are struggling deserve better.

It’s a direct rebuke on the economy, Iraq and “more of the same.” Pundits and nervous Democrats have been endlessly speculating on whether Obama is hitting McCain hard enough, but this recent line of attacks seems to be working. After the Democratic National Convention last week, McCain’s unfavorable ratings hit a high for the year of 38 percent in a new USA Today poll. In fact, despite a summer facing harsher, more personal attacks, Obama’s unfavorable rating was at 32 percent. He also had a higher favorable rating, at 61 percent, to McCain’s 54 percent.

In a stirring essay that ran in The Washington Post on Monday and also on his blog, Wolfson narrates his feelings as a “Clintonite in Denver“:

….Then came Thursday night at Invesco Field. During the campaign, we scoffed at events like this, mostly because we were not capable of producing them. A cross-section of voters waited for hours to enter the stadium and take their seats. As one friend put it, it looked more like an American convention than the convention of any particular political party. Clinton delegates greeted one another with tears and hugs and were greeted in turn by Obama delegates. Several Obama supporters took my hand to thank me for what the Clintons had said that week, urging that they stay involved in the campaign. Every so often, I would simply look around me, amazed at the significance not just of the day but of the entire campaign.

Wolfson describes the embraces and excitement of a party uniting behind Obama:

No one in recent history had attempted this kind of a political conversation with 75,000 people. Barack Obama pulled it off. For 18 months, I listened to Obama on television, sometimes intently, often just barely — background noise to a running series of conference calls and meetings and emails. In person, my attention undivided, I saw something of what so many others had seen for so long. Progress in America is never cheap, and even today history exacts a price for Obama’s victory — the dreams of electing the first female president, the dreams of so many who rushed toward Hillary Clinton on rope lines across America and refused to give up her hand and their hopes. Today these dreams are giving way to another kind of progress….

On Wolfson’s blog, a woman named Donna, who said she was an Obama delegate from North Carolina, wrote that the essay was moving, and told Wolfson, “I have tremendous respect for both Clintons and believe that you ran a campaign you should be proud of.” Another commenter called the essay “beautiful,” and one Clinton supporter said it elicited a first-time response to a newspaper article:

This is the first time I have ever responded to a newspaper article, but wanted you to know that I admire and applaud you for your article in “The Washington Post” today. I voted for Clinton in the Florida primary but am now supporting Obama 100 percent.

Back in Denver, Wolfson and I also discussed the job he did take after Clinton bowed out — a regular commentator for Fox News. I mentioned that the GOP sends out press releases promoting comments from Democrats that might undermine Obama, often from Fox broadcasts. For example, for two days leading up to the convention, the Republican National Comittee press releases highlighted comments from another Clintonite-turned-Fox commentator, Lanny Davis.

Wolfson agreed that a fair way to test his commentary is to see if it provides fodder for Republicans. So far, I count several RNC emails about Davis, but none about Wolfson.

Up until Thursday night it had been a crowded week for the Democratic National Convention. There were too many delegates and reporters jammed into the Pepsi Center. The conversations of the faithful were crowded with anxieties about slipping poll numbers, soft messaging, elusive unity, and the omnipresent Clintons. Memories of disastrous Augusts (John Kerry in 2004, Al Gore in 2000 and Michael Dukakis in 1988) pinched the party’s imagination.

Last night those hemmed-in feelings dispersed into the breezes of mammoth Invesco Field where an adoring throng of 70,000-plus 84,000 cheered Barack Obama as he accepted his party nomination with a speech– none too lofty and none too soft–that reinfused his historic campaign with sense of history and horizon that had seemed lacking in recent weeks.

Early on Obama declared “enough,” and that word resonated throughout his 48-minute speech. So did the phrase “Now is the time.” Those simple sentiments bookended, a comprehensive indictment of Republican presumptive nominee as honorable but clueless (“Its not that John McCain doesn’t care. It’s that he doesn’t get it.”) and challenges to his own party (“Democrats, Democrats, we must also admit that fulfilling America’s promise will require more than just money”).

Tough talk on Afghanistan (“we must take out Osama bin Laden and his lieutenants if we have them in our sights.”) was combined with tender feelings toward his grandmother (“She poured everything she had into me.”).

After delivering a laundry list of specific policy proposals, Obama returned to the post-partisan message that enabled him to prevail over the more traditional partisanship of Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primaries.

“These — these are the policies I will pursue,” he declared. “And in the weeks ahead, I look forward to debating them with John McCain.”

“But what I will not do,” he went on, “is suggest that the senator takes his positions for political purposes, because one of the things that we have to change in our politics is the idea that people cannot disagree without challenging each other’s character and each other’s patriotism.”

“I’ve got news for you, John McCain,” he finished. “We all put our country first.”

Obama thus both sharpened the choice facing voters 68 days from now without closing off his ability appeal to Republicans and independents. He again demonstrated the political agility that brought him to this historic occasion and almost certainly restored his supporters’ confidence that was a little shaky just 24 hours ago.