Last Monday morning, she flew into Los Angeles for the same mission at the Democratic convention. "There was absolutely nothing," she said. "No signage. It was just business as usual."
Charles Dickens never wrote The Tale of Two Conventions, but if he had needed material, there would have been plenty of it in Los Angeles, where there were many who spent their summer conventioning in both cities. The polls will compare how well the conventions did in boosting each party's prospects on Election Day.
But how the convention played to the audience of business people, news media, protesters and hangers-on strictly depends on who's doing the talking.
"The Republicans always run smoother," said Ron Reagan, the former president's son, who attended both conventions this year. "There's a Mussolini-like quality where all the trains run on time. The Democrats are fun, more fractious." Reagan was talking about the politics, but he could have been talking about the cities.
Generally, friendly Philadelphia's hometowny convention seemed to operate more smoothly (and yes, the buses ran on time), but sunny weather, beach excursions, and especially stargazing added up to lots of fun in Los Angeles.
"It meant more for Philadelphia. People were more excited," said former Mayor Edward G. Rendell, whose sales ability helped land the GOP convention before he became general chairman of the Democratic National Committee. "L.A. is a little more blase. That being said, L.A. has really got its act together."
So how did the two cities compare? Here's a quick rundown:
Philadelphia: Better transit. Buses started running the Saturday before convention week in Philadelphia, but not till Monday in Los Angeles, and they ran more often in Philadelphia. The Broad Street subway also helped. (Most Angelenos can't even find their subway, let alone direct visitors to a station.)
