I hope the old style convention supporters learn things from this year’s approach. As a consequence of the face to face audience, the traditional approach is less effective in communicating with voters who will always be watching at a distance. I understand communicating with the public is not the only function of the “convention”, but in terms of influencing voters this year’s approach was very well done.
I would argue that the intended focus of the convention was to establish differences in character. The inclusion of this kid and his message made this difference so clear. There was no need to draw the comparison to Trump’s mocking someone with a disability during one of his events to make the point.
What about issues? I think a solid case could have been made promoting different positions on income inequality, health care, the environment, regard for the role and responsibilities of the U.S. within the global community, etc., but these distinctions seem obvious and vary in how individuals feel impacted. The difference in character is so obvious it probably makes the most general case for which individual is the best leader.