Is it fair to expect Hillary to give speeches as good as Bill did?

[Forkboy]

I was never a big fan of either one,but when Bubba spoke people listened.He was one of the best speakers politics has ever seen.I've seen a couple comments today about Hillary not being as good as Bill,and while true,I wonder if it's fair to expect her,or anyone,to be as good a speaker as Bill was.

I know some Obama fans will say he's as good as Bill was,but honestly,it's not even close.I've never seen anyone with the ability to grasp any issue at the drop of a dime like Bill did.

[NJCher]

1. I don't think it's fair

Clinton is a rare politician--the kind that comes along about once every hundred years or so. That's why I don't think it's fair to expect other politicians to measure up to his abilities.

I'm a college teacher and my area is public speaking. We teachers of public speaking often talk about how Clinton is one of the few presidents to speak extemporaneously. Clinton used to drive his speechwriters crazy because he would disregard their notes and speak off the cuff. Notice he never caused any world upsets or upheavals with this ability, either.

Extemporaneous speaking is the ideal but few can do it. That's why notecards are accepted in public speaking.



Cher

[ElizabethDC]

2. NO ONE is as good as Bill . . .

I've seen them all speak in person, and no one comes close to Bill. Bill is the only politician who can really hold my attention for long periods of time - you just can't help but hang on his every word.

Having said that, Obama is obviously a very good speaker, and Hillary is much better than people give her credit for, but no one can be as good as Bill.

[Colobo]

3. And given Bill is not running, then we should focus on Obama and Hillary

[Forkboy]

5. That doesn't answer the question.

:)

and on edit...the OP is about Hillary...so wouldn't that count as focusing on her?

BTW...there's more candidates than just her and Obama too.

[Colobo]

6. In a way, it does

We should not put the pressure of emulating figures of the past to our candidates. We need to let them be who they are, and judge them base on what they say and do.

Bill Clinton is not running for president, so right now he's kind of irrelevant in terms of our candidates.

[Forkboy]

10. "We should not put the pressure of emulating figures of the past to our candidates."

That's all I was asking in the first place.

Anyone who can singlehandedly raise millions of dollars for a candidate is hardly irrlevent,though that wasn't the point of the OP. :shrug:

[Colobo]

12. He is irrelevant to me as a voter

Because he's not one of the candidates. Voters should only care about those who are running and their platforms.

[Forkboy]

14. I think that ignores the reality of politics

But if it's working for you who am I to complain. :)

[Colobo]

17. There are aspects voters should ignore

If I, for example, focus on the Hillary-Bill Clinton marital and political connection, I will wind up making false assumptions about Hillary as a candidate (For example, she is Bill Clinton part II) that will influence my vote negatively.

[Forkboy]

21. That's fair enough

Thanks for the answers.

[ElizabethDC]

7. Agreed

but obviously he's going to be brought up because he really sets the bar when it comes to great speaking skills (and also, of course, because he's Hillary's husband, etc.)

[LiberalFighter]

4. Hillary is an excellent speaker

She does not have that Southern flair that Bill has. But still a damn good speaker. I think better than Kerry and better than Edwards.

But speaking skills are not all that makes a good candidate for the office of President.

[WatchWhatISay]

8. I have to disagree

I think she not only doesnt have the gift, I think her delivery style is acutally a bit irritating at times.

Of course, the content of what she has to say should be the only real measure of her, but in this day and age, style matters way too much.

[ElizabethDC]

9. Her speaking style is hit-or-miss

I've seen her give some really good speeches (she gave an amazing one at Ann Richards' memorial), and other times she'll just put you straight to sleep. She just needs to work on her consistency.

[Captain Hilts]

13. Right. Sometimes Hillary's great, other times she's lousy. nt

[ShortnFiery]

11. Gawd! Is it fair to deal with more Clinton Mystique talk talk talk? n/t

[Forkboy]

15. Yes.

[ShortnFiery]

19. I kind of knew the answer - but thanks for clarifying.

IMO, you're a good soul Forkboy. :hi:

[Forkboy]

20. Why thank you

But don't tell God or I'll end up in heaven where all the crappy music is. :)

[snowbear]

16. Big Dawg is SMOOOOTH ... Hillary (((grates))) on my nerves.

But why just compare her delivery to Big Dawg?

We have a LOT of candidates running who are eloquent, smooth, and easy to listen to!!!

I'm sorry, but wow --

[Forkboy]

18. "But why just compare her delivery to Big Dawg?"

Well,he is her husband and former president,so it seems an obvious comparison.The point of my OP was whether or not it's fair to her to make that comparison.

I believe it isn't.

And you don't have to apologize ;)

[snowbear]

23. he he..

"And you don't have to apologize"

Thanks. I wasn't planning on it..

[Forkboy]

26. LOL

I like those emoticons.That first one is actually dancing in time to the music I have on. :)

[Snellius]

22. I wish she would speak more from the heart

And less from the script. One on one she is very personable and engaging but, for some reason, she gets very uptight before an audience, especially an audience who seem to expect a rousing oration. It's unfortunate that she can not escape a comparison with her husband, whose own oratorical talents I think are very overrated. Bill's State of the Union speeches were often tedious with detail and long-winded with self-praise.

[Captain Hilts]

24. She's better off the cuff. But her worst speaking style is better than the president's. nt

[Snellius]

28. Good point

Too many people falsely read inarticulateness as a sign of sincerity and are suspicious of intelligence as a sign of duplicity.

[terisan]

27. I could not appreciate Bill Clinton's speeches-those I heard were not great.

State of the Union-nothing great. His first big Democratic Convention sppech was a long-winded disaster. I just accept other people's comments about his great speeches. I have certainly never heard one.

Possibly we don't all expect the same things of oratory.

[snowbear]

33. So ah...

Do you prefer Mr. Bush's incoherent rambling to President Clinton or something?

Clinton wrote a good deal of his own speeches --- Bush can barely even read them; much less write them.

"I just accept other people's comments about his great speeches. I have certainly never heard one."

You have "certaintly never heard one"

[terisan]

34. My comment was just about Bill Clinton not George Bush

I am just honestly puzzled when people refer to Clinton as a great orator. I am told that he has a great intellect and is able to speak extemoraneously and well on a number of topics. I accept that.

I have never heard him speak in person. I have listened to broadcasts of a few speeches he has made and have not thought them great---that is why I say that possibly people have differing expectations.

I think people may respond differently to orators.

For example, I live in the south and many people I know like certain styles of preaching. I do not like most preaching I have heard but I respect the fact that it speaks to some other people.

[IndianaGreen]

25. Big Dog was a unique political leader, the likes of which we won't see for awhile

Big Dog is not running for President and he isn't going to be making any Presidential decisions were his wife to be elected to the Presidency.

It is not fair to expect Hillary, or anyone else, to connect with her audience like Big Dog did with his. Only FDR could give the fireside chats, only Nixon could have a meltdown on national television, and only Reagan could sound good while saying goofy things.

[Captain Hilts]

29. I'm not that big on his style either, but his first State of the Union was GREAT! nt

[Auntie Bush]

31. Well said!

[ddeclue]

30. Both Edwards and Obama are better speakers than Hillary.

[JI7]

32. no, but it's not that important

the thing about Bill is that he is pretty consistent in his speaking. others have good days plus bad. Bill seems to always do very well in speeches.

but i don't think it's that important. Bill never got a majority of the votes. yet there is no question he outshined Bush and Perot in 1992 and Dole in 1996 in a HUGE way.

he still had people who didn't like him.

with Hillary i don't expect her to be as good as BIll. i know she isn't. she has never impressed me in speeches that much. but she has done pretty well in debates. and she is better than Bill in making her opponents look bad and herself better there.

[SaveElmer]

35. Bill is the best...Hillary is quite good though...

To expect anyone to give a speech as good as Bill is unreasonable...no one in the current field on either side even approaches it...

However, Hillary is well above average in that department...

[Forkboy]

36. "To expect anyone to give a speech as good as Bill is unreasonable"

That's how I see it,and it's why I posed the question.