wareyin
Penultimate Amazing
This would be a good point if we accept the premise that party acts as a monolithic hive mind.
Which is also a rather simplistic way of looking at things. Which also seems to be a common thread.
As you've been arguing against individuality, and claiming the party is/should be aimed from the top-down "developing the next leader", I'm glad that you're beginning to recognize your monolithic hive mind idea of how the party operates is simplistic. Hopefully soon you'll begin to recognize it as not only simplistic, but wrong.
If we ignore that opportunity is part of the process and accept the premise that they were trying to break Clinton rather than Clinton just crapping the bed it just accepts the premise that being a keynote speaker is significant.
It can make you or break you, but for it to do that it has to matter.
The idea that can only break someone is nonsense to the point of endangering credibility. It's a pretty good sign I'm not in a good faith discussion.
We have no evidence that it made anyone, but we have evidence that it almost broke someone.
Does anyone remember President Mario Cuomo? How about President Ann Richards? Julian Castro? Elizabeth Warren? Barbara Jordan? All keynote speakers for the Democratic Conventions, so if your idea held water we wouldn't have only Clinton and Obama on the "keynote speaker to Presidential Candidate with party backing" pipeline.