The fact that Democrats are no longer considering red-state cities like Phoenix, Arizona and Birmingham, Alabama is not a surprise. The remaining cities — Columbus, Ohio; New York and Philadelphia – are a bit surprising.

Columbus, Ohio is a potentially problematic choice. It’s not as small a city as you may think, and it has its charms. But hosting a convention is a massive financial, logistical, and security challenge. The city has no mass transit beyond buses. (Perfectly appropriate for the party of money-losing high-speed rail projects, no?) There are some corporate headquarters there, but one has to wonder if it has enough Democrats with deep pockets willing to donate the money to run all of the events. Keep in mind, Republicans just swept the 2014 midterms in Ohio, and the Ohio Democratic Party is in rough shape.

Admit it, you couldn’t pick this skyline out of a lineup.

Philadelphia hosted the Republicans in 2000, and handled most of the logistics well. It’s probably the “safest” choice, although not a particularly bold or glamorous one.

New York City is obviously used to handling large events and conventions. (Minor complication: The convention would be held in Brooklyn, and the biggest and fanciest hotels are in Manhattan. Do you picture all of those big party donors, fixers, hangers-on, and other crowds taking the subway?)

If you think Hillary Clinton will be the nominee, there’s a historical symmetry there. The last time Democrats held their convention in New York City was 1992… when they nominated Bill Clinton. One can’t help but wonder if Mayor Bill de Blasio, crusader against horse-drawn carriages and charter schools, could create some embarrassing headlines in the run-up to the convention.