Which of the 2 conventions is going to get the more politically damaging protests?

That's the real question, I think, behind the NYT headline, "Will Dominant Images of Conventions Be of Unity or Protest?" Look how the text — written by the delightfully named Trip Gabriel — probes into the comparison between what Trump's going to get and what the Democrats are attracting:

Republicans arriving in Cleveland next month to nominate Donald J. Trump will be greeted by as many as 6,000 protesters on the first day, a noisy coalition of dozens of groups, including Black Lives Matter and the Workers World Party. The demonstrators intend to ignore restrictions keeping them far from the delegates, raising fears the violence that accompanied some of Mr. Trump’s rallies will be magnified on a mass scale....

This doesn't seem to be much of a threat to Trump. Either the protests will be inconsequential and not matter or, if they get unruly or violent, they will help Trump. These are left-wing groups, so they're not expressing any GOP sentiments, and if they are disorderly, they'll be making the argument for more order, which is essentially a pro-GOP argument.

A week later, as Democrats pour into Philadelphia, so will an army of Bernie Sanders supporters planning Occupy Wall Street-style protests against what they call the “fraudulent” nomination of Hillary Clinton. One group, Occupy DNC Convention, is circulating information about protecting oneself from tear gas by wearing a vinegar-soaked bandanna and swim goggles.

These protesters, being Sanders supporters, are Democrats. We'll be seeing Democrats fervently asserting that the Democratic Party nominee should be opposed. That's going to hurt Hillary, because her own party's people reject her, and, if it's chaotic or violent, it will — for some viewers — suggest the need for more conservative government. The terms "Daddy Party" and "Mommy Party" have long been used to refer to the Republican and Democratic parties, and that comparison is more vivid than ever this year, and not just because the Democrats are nominating a woman. The Republicans are nominating an unusually steely patriarch. If chaos or violence cause us to long for order, it may help Republicans even more than it usually does.

When you get about half way into the longish NYT article, you'll find it gets around to the point I'm making:

In Cleveland, Mr. Trump — who will be confronted by left-wing demonstrators, not fellow Republicans — could potentially benefit from scenes of mayhem that allow him to call for law and order and project strength... Street chaos, if it occurs, could overshadow disunion in the convention hall as an increasing array of party leaders nervously break ranks with Mr. Trump.

Democratic leaders are worried about emerging from their convention with an unmollified “Bernie or Bust” contingent whose protests could provide jarring split-screen images as the party seeks to rally around Mrs. Clinton.

I'm sure that the media will work to help Hillary Clinton frame the narrative to her advantage and that they will resist any facilitation of the pro-Trump narrative even if the facts on the ground amply support it.

But Trump has some great potential material here, and he can even use the discord within his party to his advantage. That discord is drama, and Trump can make some post-Lewandowski pivoting moves that break the tension at just the right moment inside the convention hall. With peace breaking out inside, and the forces of barbarism raging outside, the home-viewing audience will feel satisfaction in the theater of Trump's convention launch.