If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Post)   Just how much of that speech did Clinton make up on the spot? Prepared remarks: 3,136 words. Remarks as delivered: 5,895 words   (washingtonpost.com) divider line 34
    More: Cool, Delaware Democratic Party, Democratic National Convention, Bill Clinton, President Obama, New Democrats, Washington Post, United States, Bank of America Stadium  
•       •       •

1468 clicks; posted to Politics » on 06 Sep 2012 at 4:21 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-09-06 10:46:40 AM
7 votes:

DamnYankees: Aarontology: DamnYankees: I don't even understand how that's possible. Maybe he wrote it all beforehand and just gave the media a fake version.

He probably had his speech written out, but when he delivered it he added a lot on the spot.

Ya, but that's like 25 minutes of ad libbing. And it flowed and made sense. That's ridiculous.


Clinton is probably the best and most charismatic speaker we've had as president since JFK. The man's just plain good at it.
2012-09-06 10:50:54 AM
6 votes:

DamnYankees: Aarontology: DamnYankees: I don't even understand how that's possible. Maybe he wrote it all beforehand and just gave the media a fake version.

He probably had his speech written out, but when he delivered it he added a lot on the spot.

Ya, but that's like 25 minutes of ad libbing. And it flowed and made sense. That's ridiculous.


We should only be electing people who can ad lib for 25+minutes and continue to make sense. It proves they think for themselves and aren't reciting from a play book.
2012-09-06 05:07:43 PM
5 votes:
This is why I hate presidential "debates" in the modern form. They aren't debates- they're scripted talking points to previously vetted questions.

I don't want to see that- I want to see the candidates asked tough, factual questions and then be forced to ad-lib their responses for 10+ minutes. If you can't do that, you're simply not smart enough to be president.

Clinton is a master at this, because he understands the material, he believes it and he can communicate it. Obama is damn good at it as well- witness the utter flaming destruction of the House Republicans when they were stupid enough to tangle with him. The teleprompter jokes continue because they simply can't deal with the fact he can own them face to face at will. Reagan was weaker at the understanding part, but the latter two were there in spades.

The sad part is I can't think of a recent Republican who can do that. The ones with charisma (Palin) are too stupid for words, the ones who believe it are boring as sin (Romney, Ryan) and the ones who can do it all switched parties a while ago.
2012-09-06 04:27:40 PM
3 votes:
Here's the text of the speech with what he ad-libbed in blue and what he got rid of in pink. Really interesting read.
2012-09-06 01:15:16 PM
3 votes:
And he still stumped the fact-checkers.
2012-09-06 04:53:31 PM
2 votes:
And this is why the dude crushes ass.
2012-09-06 04:36:09 PM
2 votes:
Fall in Light: Here's the text of the speech with what he ad-libbed in blue and what he got rid of in pink. Really interesting read.

That should be of interest to anyone in this thread. Thanks.
2012-09-06 04:35:55 PM
2 votes:
The man even results in a surplus of words.
2012-09-06 03:44:25 PM
2 votes:
I'll just leave this here.

farm5.static.flickr.com
2012-09-06 03:37:25 PM
2 votes:

thomps: what would be the point of ad-libbing there? did he just suddenly remember a bunch of sh*t that he had forgotten to include in the text or was there a bunch of stuff that he couldn't get pre-approved by the convention handlers?


My guess would be he had a set speech full of points he wanted to make, to strengthen the claim for Obama getting re-elected. Then the passion of what he was talking about took over, and he deviated from that set speech, going back and forth to cover everything he could possibly think to say.

Obama's a passionate, engaging public speaker, and so is Clinton. He could have stood up there another hour and kept right on going, and not only would no one try to play him off, the audience would be equally as enraptured at minute 100 as they were at minute 1. THAT is the mark of a great public speaker. If you can stand in front of 20,000 people and talk policy and numbers for nearly an hour, when it's past 11 p.m. and people want to go home, but they don't waver in their their rapt attention to every syllable that comes out of your mouth, you've got 'em. He could have started reading from Ulysses by James Joyce at that point, and people wouldn't have blinked.

I was 10 when Clinton was elected to his first term, so I wasn't old enough to vote for him, but I was starting to get into politics at that time, thanks to my dad, and I watched the convention that year and the convention in 1996 as well. At 10 and 14, ages when most kids could honestly give less than a rat's wet asshole about politics, I sat in front of the TV and listened to every word that came out of his mouth, even if I didn't have the firmest grasp on the policy issues he was talking about. That 1996 speech, which was a little over twice as long as the one he gave last night, was the only time I could remember prior to turning 16, that I was allowed to stay up that late on a school night.

I said in the gigantic mega thread last night that I had a raging girl boner for him, and it's totally true.
2012-09-06 02:57:21 PM
2 votes:

thomps: what would be the point of ad-libbing there? did he just suddenly remember a bunch of sh*t that he had forgotten to include in the text or was there a bunch of stuff that he couldn't get pre-approved by the convention handlers?


It's called jazz, man. Get hep.

manlyweddingblog.com
2012-09-06 10:49:41 AM
2 votes:

DamnYankees: Ya, but that's like 25 minutes of ad libbing. And it flowed and made sense. That's ridiculous.


Awhile ago, he forgot his notes on a speech about the CGI. He gave it anyway. He's just that good.
2012-09-06 10:43:59 AM
2 votes:

Aarontology: DamnYankees: I don't even understand how that's possible. Maybe he wrote it all beforehand and just gave the media a fake version.

He probably had his speech written out, but when he delivered it he added a lot on the spot.


Ya, but that's like 25 minutes of ad libbing. And it flowed and made sense. That's ridiculous.
2012-09-06 05:09:15 PM
1 votes:
I think Clinton is GREAT at taking complex ideas and putting them into clear, comprehensible form, with the common touch and massive charm. He can do POLICY in a way which seems like charming conversation.

Obama does well at speaking with grand, sweeping majesty. He speaks like a statesman and a visionary leader, pulling people in to great causes.

They gave Clinton the point by point rebuttal speech, based on the record. If Obama now focuses on fostering enthusiasm and introducing a general initiative or two... they both will have played to their strengths.
2012-09-06 05:06:55 PM
1 votes:
One thing about Clinton's speech is he laid out all the flaws of the GOP already and presented several accomplishments of Obama. So tonight Obama doesn't have to get into any of that, and can talk purely on an up note and about what he wants to do. Clinton's speech removed any need for any negative comments or tone in Obama's speech, which when you think of it is just brilliant strategy.
2012-09-06 04:55:02 PM
1 votes:

lennavan: I think what it clearly demonstrated is he absolutely believes and feels strongly about every word he says.


Im not so sure about this. Like him or hate him, the one thing everyone should agree on about Clinton is that he is an AMAZING liar. I think he'd be able to give a speech at the GOP convention and be just as good.
2012-09-06 04:53:12 PM
1 votes:

DamnYankees: Aarontology: DamnYankees: I don't even understand how that's possible. Maybe he wrote it all beforehand and just gave the media a fake version.

He probably had his speech written out, but when he delivered it he added a lot on the spot.

Ya, but that's like 25 minutes of ad libbing. And it flowed and made sense. That's ridiculous.


I think what it clearly demonstrated is he absolutely believes and feels strongly about every word he says. What's more, I think it has always been very clear Bill Clinton loves this country. Maybe people disagree with his policies or him farkin around with an intern but you sure as fark can't question his love for this country. That's a hell of a lot more than I can say about the GOP.
2012-09-06 04:50:43 PM
1 votes:

mahuika: I'd argue that Reagan needs to join Clinton, Obama, and JFK in the "damn good speakers" arena, even though I'm not a fan of his policies or legacy.


Ditto. I'm no fan of him either, and hate how false much of his legacy is, but his 1980 acceptance speech was on CSPAN the other night and it was brutally good. He absolutely eviscerated poor little Jimmy Carter on all fronts. Whether his speeches were rooted in reality didn't matter, he was a very effective speaker and so it didn't surprise me that he won EVERY SINGLE STATE in 1984, except for Minnesota.
2012-09-06 04:47:17 PM
1 votes:

DamnYankees: Serious Black: Clinton makes a stronger emotional connection, and Obama is much more analytic.

I would say its the exact opposite. Clinton is much better at making policy arguments in his speeches, while Obama's more soaring rhetoric is far more emotional.


Funny how we can come to different conclusions. Regardless, I think we both agree that they are great public speakers whose weaknesses are as strong or stronger than many other speakers' strengths.
2012-09-06 04:47:16 PM
1 votes:

Fall in Light: Here's the text of the speech with what he ad-libbed in blue and what he got rid of in pink. Really interesting read.


Nice. THAT should have been a green light, not the ten or so hit pieces.
2012-09-06 04:43:30 PM
1 votes:

Serious Black: Clinton makes a stronger emotional connection, and Obama is much more analytic.


I would say its the exact opposite. Clinton is much better at making policy arguments in his speeches, while Obama's more soaring rhetoric is far more emotional.
2012-09-06 04:42:56 PM
1 votes:
It was like Dad visited your dorm room and told you what the real world was like.
2012-09-06 04:42:55 PM
1 votes:

DamnYankees: Voiceofreason01: Clinton is probably the best and most charismatic speaker we've had as president since JFK. The man's just plain good at it.

Obama is better. Their styles are very different, but I look forward to Obama's speeches more than Clinton's. As Matt Yglesias tweeted last night, Clinton is good, but keep in mind that Barack Obama is so good at formal political speeches that he won nomination on otherwise thin resume.


Keep in mind that Clinton won the presidency against a relatively popular Republican who just finished a quick and successful war in Iraq.

Obama has better flourishes in his speech, he's more inspirational. But Clinton's the better story-teller, a better policy wonk, and speaks with a stronger conviction. They both ad-lib well, but Clinton, as evident last night, can make it seem much more rehearsed and scripted. With Obama, you can see his mind's still formulating thoughts as he says them so he has more pauses in his sentences, but with Clinton, it's like chess to him - he already planned several moves out.

CSB time: My cousin and I got to meet with Clinton once for a chat, and god bless her but she tends to ask pretty dumb questions and this occasion was no exception, but Clinton played it cooly and wow'd us with insights that we hadn't thought about. The chat went on for a good ten minutes - he absolutely wanted to make sure we get everything what he was saying.
2012-09-06 04:41:44 PM
1 votes:

Rwa2play: DamnYankees: Voiceofreason01: Clinton is probably the best and most charismatic speaker we've had as president since JFK. The man's just plain good at it.

Obama is better. Their styles are very different, but I look forward to Obama's speeches more than Clinton's. As Matt Yglesias tweeted last night, Clinton is good, but keep in mind that Barack Obama is so good at formal political speeches that he won nomination on otherwise thin resume.

Apples and oranges. They're both incredibly great speakers but do it in separate ways.


Obama and Clinton have complementary strengths. Clinton makes a stronger emotional connection, and Obama is much more analytic.
2012-09-06 04:40:13 PM
1 votes:
Man, I would hate to be whoever was in charge of the telepromter. Trying to figure out when to start it and stop to keep up with all the on-the-fly deviations. Whoever that mystery AV nerd was, I applaud him/her.
2012-09-06 04:31:33 PM
1 votes:

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: And he still stumped the fact-checkers.


I heard someone last night mention that he has a photographic memory.
2012-09-06 04:27:55 PM
1 votes:
Nice stats and all but how many chair props did he use? Zero you say? That automatically makes Clint Eastwood's speech better.
2012-09-06 04:25:04 PM
1 votes:
Clinton mentions of G.W. Bush = 3

Romney, Ryan mentions of G.W. Bush = 0
2012-09-06 03:42:44 PM
1 votes:

mrshowrules: DamnYankees: I don't even understand how that's possible. Maybe he wrote it all beforehand and just gave the media a fake version.

How is it possible for people like Isaac Asimov to write scientific reference books from memory?


Wait, Asimov did what now?
2012-09-06 03:09:57 PM
1 votes:

thomps: what would be the point of ad-libbing there? did he just suddenly remember a bunch of sh*t that he had forgotten to include in the text or was there a bunch of stuff that he couldn't get pre-approved by the convention handlers?


Probably he wrote a speech to fit his allotted time, but decided at the last minute to make sure he talked about everything he wanted to mention, knowing nobody would stop him. Or, all the extra stuff was stuff he decided to add based on the speeches given right before his.

Or it was all planned to be a story in itself, since everyone knows Clinton can wing it like that.
2012-09-06 01:29:34 PM
1 votes:
I saw a news story about this this morning. They played a clip of his speech, filmed from behind with the TelePrompTer in view. Clinton was speaking at length while the text on the screen didn't move.
2012-09-06 01:11:21 PM
1 votes:
Using basic arithmetic skills, I am able to calculate computationally and derivate that Mr. Clinton "ad libbed," 53 percent of his speech. "Ad lib" is latin for "add lie," which means then that 53 percent of Mr. Clinton's speech was a lie. Since the legal definition of "fiction" is more than 50.5 percent lie, Mr. Clinton's speech must be classified as "fiction" and, in the future, only made available in that section of bookstores (online or brick/mortar). Furthermore, pursuant to various and sundry laws, since a candidate cannot be nominated on the merits of a fictional speech, Mr. Obama did not receive the Democratic nomination by midnight and therefore Mitt Romney is now the only legal candidate for president. Good job, Mr. Clinton, you ruined it.
2012-09-06 10:52:18 AM
1 votes:

DamnYankees: Voiceofreason01: Clinton is probably the best and most charismatic speaker we've had as president since JFK. The man's just plain good at it.

Obama is better. Their styles are very different, but I look forward to Obama's speeches more than Clinton's. As Matt Yglesias tweeted last night, Clinton is good, but keep in mind that Barack Obama is so good at formal political speeches that he won nomination on otherwise thin resume.


Yes I love Obamas speeches! I'm a serious fanboy and I'll be making popcorn tonight for this one. (im really serious).

Also I wonder why the Republicans didn't bring out either of their X Presidents.. We can see what a positive impact having an X-President at a national convention has.
2012-09-06 10:41:51 AM
1 votes:

DamnYankees: I don't even understand how that's possible. Maybe he wrote it all beforehand and just gave the media a fake version.


He probably had his speech written out, but when he delivered it he added a lot on the spot.
 
Displayed 34 of 34 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report