Rejoice! It will come! The Republican National Committee (RNC) announced Las Vegas as one of its finalists for the 2016 Republican National Convention.
Despair! It won't come. Already, two national media pundits have declared the RNC won't pick Vegas for 2016. And Jon Ralston's dreams of having a national Republican Party convention in his back yard have officially been dashed.
Does it really matter either way? In terms of political postioning, probably not. Republican Conventions don't have a great track record when it comes to flipping states from Blue to Red.
So why are so many media pundits treating the RNC's convention host selection process like it's a holy grail for 2016? Perhaps because it's easier to do this than to look more closely into the party's serious structural trouble?
Sure, plenty of ink has been spilled over "Republican rebranding". And party "leaders" seem to be suggesting that their 2016 convention selection will be the highlight of all this "rebranding". And of course, this is why many "party insiders" have suggested that Las Vegas is the perfect place to showcase the "rebranded Republican Party".
Well, this would be the perfect location to showcase the Republican Party that's rebranded its way into... Scaring away longtime Republican leaders like Sue Wagner, claiming the likes of (no, not that) Michael McDonald as its "leaders", trying to have it both ways on immigration reform, not even trying all that hard to hide its love of "segregation laws", and always trying its hardest to please its true leaders. Oh, yes. Las Vegas is the perfect location to highlight all the amazing rebranding the Nevada Republican Party has led the national Republican Party into.
And this is why it really doesn't matter where the RNC ultimately chooses to place its 2016 convention. As long as that "Republican rebranding" keeps going nowhere fast, hardly anyone will actually believe the RNC has anything new to offer.