Strengthening Constitutional Self-Government

No Left Turns

Romney Boring at Hillsdale

Mitt had problems with content, continuity, and delivery. He’s the opposite of the current president: Good at ad libbing but deadwood with a prepared text.
The remedy: Practice and a punchy, pithy writer. Tall and handsome, to tell the truth, isn’t enough.

Discussions - 12 Comments

Hold it!

Let me get this right. You actually think the President delivers a decent speech?

Think of how many times this President has delivered a speech. We're talking YEARS of practice. And you think he delivers prepared text well?

This guy butchers speeches. He could take the words of Churchill himself, and they would be dead upon delivery.

There's only been a few times when I think he's actually done well. One was at the United Nations. Another was his Convention speech at New York City in '04. There's maybe a couple others. And that's it.

Had he taken a few weeks during one of his many vacations to work on delivery, instead of spending his time worthlessly clearing brush, his numbers wouldn't be so pathetic today. This guy scorns communicating. Positively scorns it. In that respect, he's just like his old man, who scorned, what he derisively termed, "the vision thing."

And our Party is paying for it, and come November, '08, the price might be unbearable.

Peter, were you praising Bush's delivery? Dan makes the point on this sad problem: This guy butchers speeches. He could take the words of Churchill himself, and they would be dead upon delivery. And I say sad, because I have read that early in his presidency, Mr. Bush DID work on delivery. He really does a better job than he did at first. Unfortunately, he does not do nearly well enough, and to stir the American people on important topics like the war, he does not speak nearly often enough.


But then I wonder how the president can't be discouraged with communicating. If he says what needs to be said, it is lost in the negating drone of commentary in the days that follow. By objective measures, the country is doing fine. While we have problems (Don't bother enumerating them; I do NOT forget.) we always have problems as that is the nature of the world. Despite the general state of the U.S. being just fine, ticking along prosperously, the general perception is that everything is just awful, dire, doomed. Is that true? Even with the immigration issue, the obverse of the problem is that our economy has absorbed 12 million people, and we have low unemployment. That's just an example, and I wonder, do I believe the objective measures or general perception?

Back to Romney, anyone who can bore that audience with a discussion of the nature of evil in human nature is missing something serious.


Punchy, pithy writers are well and good, but a punchy, pithy person and then some, are what Republicans need in their candidate for the coming election. As to practice, presumably making perfect, said election is so far off that all those running ought to get PLENTY of practice at public speaking before the main event.

Yea, the whole "deer-in-headlights" thing with Bush's speechifying always gets me. Nonetheless, if you've ever seen him in person before a crowd, ad-libbing, he's actually pretty effective. But the guy's a complete stiff when they turn on the floodlights and open up the mics. Truman was exactly the same, though.

I agree with all of the above. Bush's speechifying has gotten worse. Bush is pretty good in informal settings, but once the mic is on... And Kate's comments on Romney are on the money. But who else we got, as they say?

What's the knock on Mike Huckabee, my governor when I taught at John Brown University? That said, why does the superficial so readily negate even considering guys like Jeb Bush (by the "not another Bush" crowd) or Rick Santorum (by the "incumbent senator who failed to win his own state" camp)?

Lucas, I'm willing to be persuaded on "Huck." Please talk him up!
Peter --Jeb and Rick are nonstarters...

I can see why one would think Bush is good in speeches - compared to speaking off the cuff, at least he appears more intelligent. So grading on the curve, he's excellent with speeches.

I'm amazed at how negative some people are about Romney. Maybe his Hillsdale performance was off, I haven't seen it. I have seen him speak on several of occasions on CSPAN, including a great address at the Bush Library in Texas, and I find his speaking style to be excellent.

I don't know who this Ryan Williams is and I don't read Claremont's blog regularly (there's just so many hours each day), but I would think that he might have some minimal political knowledge, which it appears he doesn't. National polls mean absolutely NOTHING right now. Romney is up double digits in Iowa and New Hampshire and is making great strides in other early primary states. Those polls have some significance, which I would think someone who writes for a political blog might have some concept of.

I've seen the President up close in action. How far? About ten feet. I've heard him delivering his stump speeches.

Folks, it ain't pretty.

Sure, sure, the President can't deliver a speech. But what a beaut of an immigration bill he's gonna give us!

Oh, Carl. Would you bring us to tears?

Well, at least the *^%*((&^ issue is on the radar screen. True, the elites are trying to twist it to their own benefit, but mostly I suspect they want the status quo (you can pretend to do something about immigration, but in reality do nothing). Kate, the people do have some power in this country...let's keep the pressure up.

Leave a Comment

* denotes a required field
 

No TrackBacks
TrackBack URL: http://nlt.ashbrook.org/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/10473