Who is the best communicator?

[JackDallas]

I think he speaks like a retard.

 

[PACE]

So he speaks like Sarah Palin's son, okay

How about this morning:

http://crooksandliars.com/ Christie's interview on the Newt win in SC.

better watch it Jack, lots of your colleagues, "like" Christie.

Regards
Pace

 

[imreallyperplexed]

Clinton and Obama as communicators

Cicero,

I thought about this a little more and here are a couple of observations on both the experience and communication styles of Clinton, Obama, and Romney respectively.

I think that both Clinton and Obama are very skilled speakers/communicators but they have somewhat different backgrounds and styles. I do think that Clinton's experience as a Governor was useful because he got a lot of practice balancing communicating with the electorate ("outsiders") and the legislature ("insiders"). I think that he was great at showing "empathy" and "feeling pain" but he was less skilled at "motivation." He also had the temperament of a wheeler and dealer and trial lawyer. Obama is - when he is on his game - a better "motivational/aspirational" speaker but is not as strong on showing "empathy." However, though both Clinton and Obama are lawyers, Obama seems to have the temperament of a judge or arbitrator (rather than an advocate). He is also more of a scholar. I think that this is reflected in his experience in "constitutional law." He is used to talking to judges and appeals courts (one kind of audience) rather than juries (a very different kind of audience). I think that one of the digs on Obama is that he is too judicious and insufficiently "decisive." I happen to think that that is a good thing (especially compared to GWB) but I know that it makes some folks uncomfortable. I think that this is reflected in his legislative career as well. In particular, I have never discounted the importance of his legislative experience in Illinois or his experience in the Senate. He was a Chicago legislator who learned to deal effectively with legislators from the red-part (south) of Illinois and did well state wide in his Senatorial campaign. (I think that the Kansas background of his white grandparents helped here as well.) As a Senator, Obama knew that he had to deal with both red and blue Senators depending on what was needed in Illinois. He also made - in my opinion - a good choice in Biden who - despite being a gaffe machine - does know the Congress. Nevertheless, he does have a different experience than Clinton.

Romney is a bit differnt. He grew up around politics (which neither Clinton nor Obama did). However, he was an MBA and a businessman. Furthermore, he was a "finance" rather than an "operations" guy. He knows how to do deals in executive suites (and in "quiet rooms.") I suspect that some of this experience was somewhat transferable to the situation that he faced in Massachusetts where he focused on dealing with Democratic insiders (the legislature) without really trying to convert the Democratic populace. I think that he is fooling himself if he thinks that the Massachusetts legislature will be anything like Washington. And he is not particularly inspirational or folksy. He also has difficulty convincing people that he has any empathy.

I would say that it's Barack Obama, but only because he's the president and that for all his faults, having a way with words isn't one one them. You did not include Bill Clinton as a Great Communicator and yet that was one of the main reasons that being impeached did not destroy him with the public. Enough citizens trusted him when he spoke that they were able to separate the fact of an impeachment from the president that spoke to them on television.

President Obama is great at the inspirational stuff -- like JFK and, in a different way, like Ronald Reagan -- but he is utter dreck as a Great Communicator when it comes to convincing the public that his nuts and bolts stuff regarding policy proposals make sense or are worthy. Clinton excelled at that sort of thing.

Of the remaining GOP presidential nomination contenders, I'd say in descending order of public speaking abilities that it's Newt Gingrich, Romney, and Ron Paul with Santorum having serious problems communicating his thoughts in a politically advantageous manner.

Of that group, so far only Gingrich has dabbled with being inspirational . . . and since he seems to shoot himself in the foot a couple of times each month by saying something that he probably shouldn't have, he ends up lurching forward three steps and then stumbling back two as a pattern.

Romney is mostly the strong [in relative terms] silent type. But we still don't know how he would conduct himself one on one against Barack Obama. He might very well be different then. He might not.

Ron Paul seems a bit too much like an ideologue with a memorized bullet points template and relies on that rather than trying to communicate with people.

That's my assessment of the field. Barack Obama can be taken on the campaign trail and especially in debates, but the opposition had better be damn good and utterly prepared.

 

[imreallyperplexed]

By Mitt Romney's (and Newt Gingrich's) measure of intelligence (monetary and professional success), my college friends and business colleagues do just fine.

So your college friends are idiots too, just like IRP's?

 

[imreallyperplexed]

Au contraire, I would suggest that your conclusions are an indictment of your evaluations of people.

So you're saying that your college friends are idiots and the high techs, with whom you do business, are morons?
That sure seems to be a negative indictment of our higher education system and our IT industry.

 

[imreallyperplexed]

What is the difference between note cards and a teleprompter?

You need more tech savvy to use a teleprompter.

At least, he didn't scribble crib notes on his hand like our friend Sarah.

No he didn't; he was using notes.

 

[JackDallas]

I imagine that Trigg, or Tree, or Trout, or whatever his name is, is much more coherent than is Obama.

 

[JackDallas]

I've seen the piece of shit speak without a teleprompter too; umm umm umm umm uh uh umm uh uh uh umm uh uh umm umm umm umm umm uh uh umm uh uh uh umm uh uh umm umm umm umm umm uh uh umm uh uh uh umm uh uh umm
umm umm umm umm uh uh umm uh uh uh umm uh uh umm umm umm umm umm uh uh umm uh uh uh umm uh uh umm umm umm umm umm uh uh umm uh uh uh umm uh uh umm umm umm umm umm uh uh umm uh uh uh umm uh uh umm
umm umm umm umm uh uh umm uh uh uh umm uh uh umm umm umm umm umm uh uh umm uh uh uh umm uh uh umm umm umm umm umm uh uh umm uh uh uh umm uh uh umm umm umm umm umm uh uh umm uh uh uh umm uh uh umm
umm umm umm umm uh uh umm uh uh uh umm uh uh umm umm umm umm umm uh uh umm uh uh uh umm uh uh umm umm umm umm umm uh uh umm uh uh uh umm uh uh umm umm umm umm umm uh uh umm uh uh uh umm uh uh umm
umm umm umm umm uh uh umm uh uh uh umm uh uh umm umm umm umm umm uh uh umm uh uh uh umm uh uh umm umm umm umm umm uh uh umm uh uh uh umm uh uh umm umm umm umm umm uh uh umm uh uh uh umm uh uh umm
umm umm umm umm uh uh umm uh uh uh umm uh uh umm

 

[JackDallas]

No you didn't; you didn't seriously ask that question did you?