[pullquote]Obama is one of the great orators of our time, but his meandering speech for Hillary missed the mark[/pullquote]
Not sure about how anyone else felt, but his speech was pretty damn good. Amanda Marcotte thinks otherwise.
By most political speech standards, Obama was a 9 out of 10. But Obama is a better speaker than most. Unlike most politicians, he’s an actual writer — the author of a best-selling memoir! — and he understands certain basics about speechifying most politicians don’t: Keep it short. Keep it on topic. Don’t be digressive.
A 9 out of 10 is a meandering speech that was a letdown? OK, well, if your saying that you measure a 9 out of 10 as a letdown speech then your numbers are a bit skewed. Because if 10 is perfect then 9 is almost perfect. Its like say 99% is just too low of a number.
But that was a crowd that was fully ready to be united and scream its head off at the chance of electing the first female president, and, for some reason, Obama just fell a bit short of the task. As he noted in the speech, being the leader of the free world is hard work — which is why we should want Clinton in the job — so perhaps he didn’t have time to tell a better story.
Still, a shame. Most of us wanted to hear the real story of how these two former foes became friends. Obama could have told that story in style, and made history while he did it. His failure to do so is on him.
Ahh, the problem you have is that you didn’t get that story you wanted to hear about how the Obama’s made friends with the Clinton’s so long ago. Got it. So Obama failed to deliver because you didn’t hear what you wanted to hear.