Keith's Weblog: Comments on "No bounce for Kerry"

by ideoplastos

Mon, 02 Aug 2004 16:00:29 +0000

It's astounding, they actually managed to pick a candidate who's a worse public speaker than Bush.

What???

by Keith

Mon, 02 Aug 2004 18:18:31 +0000

Did you watch Kerry's speech at the convention?

I did a direct comparison: Kerry at the convention one day, and Bush in Missouri the next day. I was surprised to realize that Bush was actually a better speaker than Kerry. Kerry's speech sucked, and so did his delivery.

by ideoplastos

Mon, 02 Aug 2004 20:11:02 +0000

Let us see what happens during the debates, friend.

by Keith

Mon, 02 Aug 2004 20:35:46 +0000

Yes, I'm looking forward to them. But, that's different than making speeches.

by ideoplastos

Mon, 02 Aug 2004 20:45:36 +0000

I knew you'd say that, SmartyJones. Public speaking encompasses a whole lot more than just reciting a speech that's already been prepared, friend. Let's just wait until the leaves start to fall, shall we? Yes. Good.

by Keith

Mon, 02 Aug 2004 20:57:14 +0000

If you'd like, you can watch both speeches and compare for yourself. Kerry, Bush.

by ideoplastos

Mon, 02 Aug 2004 22:13:23 +0000

Friend, you're not hearing me. You're referencing one individual speech by each candidate, yet making a blanket statement about their overall merits as orators, concluding that Bush is superior to Kerry in delivering public speeches. Right? I'm saying two things:

1. You can't make that jump just from watching (or at least referencing in your 'argument') only one single speech delivered by each candidate (e.g., I might be off one night when we're out at the bar or something and you might seem cooler than me for some odd reason. Heck, someone that doesn't know either of us just might come along, shoot the shit with each of us, and conclude that you're cooler than me. Well, see, that person would be wrong, because, as we all know, I am cooler than you -- I was just having an off night -- had that person checked my record at the Dojo of Cool, they would realize that I have been, am, and will continue to be truly cooler overall, you see. (Well, maybe not continue to be -- that doesn't necessarily follow... but, anyway.)).

2. You claimed Bush is a better public speaker than Kerry. We're obviously working with two different definitions of the phrase here. My definition has "being a good public speaker" meaning much more than "being good at reading a prepared, rehearsed text in front of an audience." Being a good public speaker means you can consistently address the facts, deliver your opinions to others, whatever the size of the audience, and field questions in a concise, enthusiastic and eloquent manner -- this includes speeches, debates, casual conversation, etc., not just speeches.

by Keith

Mon, 02 Aug 2004 22:40:37 +0000

Haha, why are you getting so worked up about this? I was just giving a link to the speeches I was referring to.

I have to think that you wouldn't be making this big of a deal if I had said I thought Kerry was a better speaker.

by ideoplastos

Mon, 02 Aug 2004 23:57:44 +0000

I'm just tryin' to help you out, brother. You know, prepare you for the future and all.

by CS

Tue, 03 Aug 2004 16:21:19 +0000

No bounce. Why? Because Kerry moved his platform toward the middle for the convention trying to attract the moderates. This move didn't excite any of the base liberals, and, in turn, gave the moderate folks no reason to differentiate between him and Bush. The dog-and-pony show about Kerry's war record was also ineffective, and does little to show how Kerry would handle the current state of foreign affairs--it was a smoke screen to cover up Kerry's record in the Senate.

I expect the poll-driven Kerry to change his course again and flip back toward the left. I also expect this will give Bush more fuel for the debates as Kerry will no doubt trample on his own words.