Holy Shit! Edwards is on fire in this speech!

[Quixote1818]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vB4CVHTzzvw

[acmavm]

1. I do believe that a lot of people are going to get a big surprise after the

Iowa primary. Especially the Barrie and Hils supporters.

[Blue_In_AK]

3. Personally, I would like to see Edwards and Biden

come out on top in that race. It would make things a lot more interesting.

[peacebird]

2. Thanks for the link - it was a great speech!

[mod mom]

4. "History will judge us on this moment" rec'd.

[OffWithTheirHeads]

5. On fire? Not so much. And I like the guy

He's my first choice in the Cal primary unless Dennis is still in.

[GreenArrow]

9. I don't think so either. It's performance art.

Watch it with the sound turned off and the scripted nature of it becomes all the more apparent.

Unlike you, however, I confess to not trusting the guy.

[OffWithTheirHeads]

14. Oh hell, I don't trust any of them but

Noam Chomsky isn't running so we gotta pick someone and even Hillery is better than any puke.

[gmudem]

16. Why would I turn the sound off during a speech? n/t

[GreenArrow]

19. the good thing about taped speeches like this

is that you can watch them over and over again. With sound or without. There is something to be learned from watching them both ways.

[JDPriestly]

21. I'm watching it with the sound turned off. I don't see any "scripted nature."

Edwards is a trial attorney known for his final arguments. Watch the videos of Edwards responding very specifically to questions that he was not previously given at the Heartland Community Values Forum in Iowa posted today on DU. You will see that he is simply a very experienced speaker with a quick and flexible mind that responds to the crowd at the moment. He is just very intelligent, and very well prepared to run for president. Take another look. As he speaks, he is watching the crowd and responding to the crowd's feedback. That is what a really good preacher or public speaker does. He is not "scripted" at all.

[GreenArrow]

25. well, we'll have to disagree on Edwards

I believe he uses his speaking and interpersonal skills to manipulate people. I agree with you that he's quick witted and clever, just not that he's sincere.

But thanks anyway for taking the time to experiment with watching the video without sound. Even if we disagree about Edwards, I suspect we'll agree on the subject of this video. Watch (as much as you can stand) without sound first, and then turn up the volume. Great communicator!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pa3J-L29iT8&feature=related

[Bongo Prophet]

28. Hey, you're right! Without words and ideas to distract, he is just moving his lips and gesturing!

And that clip of Bush without the words, he looks like much LESS of an idiot!

I'm not sure that was the right lesson, but an interesting experiment.
Viva la science.

[GreenArrow]

30. the moving lips and gestures

provide clues to his level of sincerity.

As for Bush, I he comes across as alternately confused, smug, angry, smarmy, manipulative, and defensive with or without sound.

[Bongo Prophet]

32. Okay. So which candidates do you think are the most sincere with the sound off?

It also begs the question of what we might learn by just LISTENING to the speeches...with the lights turned out.

I think just closing your eyes might be good enough, but I am not a scientist.


Finally, I guess bush comes off that way in ALL cases.

[GreenArrow]

35. you can learn a lot from just listening with no visual as well

The debates for example, come across much differently on radio than they do on TV. The Kennedy/Nixon debate is one that comes to mind, with most of those listening on the radio thinking Nixon had won, and most of those on TV thinking Kennedy had. One thing that comes across in either medium is that candidates seldom answer the questions asked to them.

As for which candidates are most sincere? I'd have to say Kucinich, Gravel, and then maybe Dodd. How many politicians would have answered the UFO question that Kucinich got honestly? But I'm a cynical bastard and don't really see a great deal of sincerity in most politicians.

[hedgehog]

37. Of course, a lot of people might have been like my Mom.

She went out and bought a TV just so she could see Kennedy. I guess the Nixon people didn't want to watch.

[Bongo Prophet]

45. Yup. And think of the challenge of having to read speech, before modern transportation

They were especially hampered by the fact that it was before the invention of the smiley :wtf:

We all know how easy it is to be misinterpreted on discussion boards ;)
Your points are well taken sir.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

59. Quite possibly the dumbest post I've read today

"Uses his speaking and interpersonal skills to manipulate people"

If by "manipulating" people, you mean that Edwards is trying to convince people to vote for him, then...um...yeah, I guess you're right.

And when you use your "speaking and interpersonal skills" to tell you boss that you should get a raise, you're manipulating someone.

And when a charity sends you a solicitation for funds, you're being manipluated.

And when you ask your kids to please clean up their room, you're manipulating them.

A good deal of our speaking and interpersonal skills are used for the purpose of convincing and persuading people. There's nothing wrong with that, unless you're either lying or trying to convince people to do something that is demonstrably not in their best interest.

If you're not going to vote for a candidate who is trying to persuade people, then I assume that you're not voting.

[GreenArrow]

63. you might want to get a clearer grip

on the various meanings of the word "manipulate" before you categorize my post as "dumb". None of the examples you provided indicate or require manipulation.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

64. You might want a clearer grip on reality

I spent fifteen years teaching persuasive writing to college students. What Edwards, and any other candidate, is doing in a campaign is trying to convince voters that they (and not the other person) are best for the job. They are attempting to convince and persuade.

Giulini, with his incessant references to 9/11, is attempting to manipulate. There's a vast difference between Giuliani's approach what Edwards (and the rest of the Democratic field) are doing.

If you can't grasp that difference. Then my original opinion of your post is validated.

[Plucketeer]

61. GreenArrow opines:

"he uses his speaking and interpersonal skills to manipulate people"

Well, I've got news for you. You do it every time you talk with someone. In fact, by the very nature of saying JE manipulates folks, you're trying to manipulate attitudes to fall in line with yours.
Picture us all going around speaking without emotion and tonal inflection. We'd all sound like speech syhnthesizers!
Give me a guy who can inspire me - not some factoid-droning automaton. :boring:

[FatDave]

26. Ummm, sorry, but aren't speeches scripted by nature?

I mean, isn't a speech written in advance? Did JFK come up with "ask not what your country can do for you" at the moment he said it? Or am I missing some connotation of "scripted" that's obvious to everybody else?

[GreenArrow]

33. sure they are,

though occasionally you'll find someone who is really adept at speaking extemporaneously. But given that most speeches are scripted, I view them as performances, as given by actors. When I watch John Edwards, I see him iin some sense giving a speech to himself. To put it another way, he always seems to be utterly aware of the performance he is giving, and when he gets in a good line, you can see him patting himself on the back.

When I view his speech, I don't see the "passion" that others are claiming, but rather, an appearance, an approximation of passion as given by an actor who has memorized his script well, but hasn't understood the physical art of acting; he doesn't feel what he is saying. I don't see the anger claimed for him, for he seldom loses his damnable smile, especially when he gets in what he feels is a particularly good rhetorical lick, or when he is saying something self-referential that reflects well on him. Rather like Little Jack Horner, he "sticks in his thumb and pulls out a plum and says what a good boy am I." In my view, he tailors his speeches in a very manipulative way. The appeal to emotion, not reason, is his goal. And to be honest, he's not exceptional in doing that, but he is more skilled at it than many of his colleagues.

My problem with Edwards' speechifying (not just in the linked speech, but in others of his that I have watched) is not that it is scripted - in the sense of being written out before hand - but that he comes across as manipulative, insincere and self satisfied.

[FatDave]

34. You must be watching a different john Edwards than me

We're talking about the candidate for president, right? :)

But you wanna talk about a master orator, Mr. Obama puts them all to shame. Or at least he can when he tries. I haven't seen him do anything approaching his '04 convention keynote lately. Maybe he's saving the good stuff for the general.

[GreenArrow]

38. The one and the same!

As for Obama, I didn't get to see it but listened to it via radio. My wife and I had been criticizing the night's Convention speeches, and his was the only one that found favor with both of us. Like you, I haven't really heard him say anything since that has come across with any real power or depth.

I haven't really got a sense with Obama yet, the way I do with Edwards, Hillary, Biden...I don't entirely trust him, but the fact that he at least spoke out publicly in a strong way against our Iraq adventure is a big plus for him, and of the big three, he's the only one I'd be willing to support.

I seem to be in the minority in being displeased with the candidates set out for us this year. I'm not thrilled with any of them, and several of them I really dislike.

[flyarm]

44. i have watched John Edwards give 5 speeches in person..i don't know what the hell you are watching

he is as sincere as anyone i have ever seen..and i am a trained actor..many years ago..i think i can spot an actor!!

John Edwards is no actor!

nor is he fake..

maybe you just don't know what truth or sincerity look like!

i know it is in short supply these days!!

fly

[Voice for Peace]

54. have to disagree

I study people closely and don't have the impression of Edwards that you do. In general I put a lot more weight on what I see in the person's face and eyes than in what they say. Bush's character came through loud and clear during his first inauguration speech, and not when he was speaking... but during the pauses. Edwards consistently has impressed me as being genuine; I don't see any deception whatsoever, or signs of self-congratulation.

[GreenArrow]

56. we seem to emphasize the same features

I posted the Bush video above because I felt there would be general agreement on the obvious negative physical clues provides. His smirk is the obvious one, but he is a walking tic. There is often incongruence between what he says verbally and what his body says (probably unconciously). I see the same thing with Edwards, particularly when he smiles. I find his smile frequently inappropriate.

Here's a interesting Edwards video. Try watching it with no sound first and seeing if you can guess what the subject matter is. Then turn the sound on and see if you think his facial expressions are in keeping/appropriate to the subject of the video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4fOJm5EXfY

[Voice for Peace]

58. I don't see what you see

I look mainly at a person's eyes.
Maybe he reminds you of somebody who you knew once who was insincere?
He really strikes me as genuine, and self-examining.

What I saw in Bush's eyes I might describe as adolescent greed for power.

Tics, body language, & facial expressions aren't always accurate; but it's a rare individual who can lie with their eyes... I just don't think Edwards fits that bill.

[hedgehog]

36. You mean he might have rehearsed it a few times?

Isn't that called homework?

[GreenArrow]

40. of course he rehearsed it.

I just don't think his performance rings true. I don't think his rhetoric comes from the heart. I think his desire to be President is what comes from his heart, and he will say whatever he thinks people want to hear if he believes it will get him what he wants.

[hedgehog]

41. I don't know. If Edwards were campaigning on what a great country this

is and how ducky everything is, I might agree. Bring up the fact that there are poor people and we need tofix that problem isn't what I would call a feel-good campaign.

[ChiciB1]

6. Checked It Out Yesterday & Folks IT'S TIME This Man Gets Some

real credit. He's working his heart out because he knows that he's being forced to climb a very big mountain. If anyone has been listening to what D.C. journalists have been yapping, you would know that the D.C. Elites are doing all they can to keep him from being elected!

The likes of Rahm Emanuel and Chucky Schumer are major players here and DON'T want the apple-cart to get pushed over! I don't which of the two turns me off more, but I have harsh feelings for BOTH of them!

I say more POWER to John Edwards, and I must say that as time passes I see more and more people finding his message to be one that America sorely needs!! For too long we've been pushed around by far too many D.C. hacks who ignore "we the people" and forget that America was built and thrived because of our hearts and souls!

[waiting for hope]

7. You go girl!

and Amen! Edwards will be the "People's President"!

[ChiciB1]

8. Hangin' Tight & Spreadin' The WORD!! n/t

[vanboggie]

10. Yes! What you said...

I totally agree. This is the candidate with substance, fight and ideals, and this is the one the media and DC elites have been pushing down because he scares them.

[JDPriestly]

22. I'm working very hard for John Edwards.

He not only has my vote; he has my time and my commitment.

[Jimmy811]

11. Edwards

Edwards talks about ending the war and keeps voting to fund it. Does that make sense? Kucinich talks the talk and walks the walk.

[Hieronymus]

15. What in hell are you talking about? Edwards is in no position to vote

to fund the war. He's a FORMER senator.:eyes:

[MaineDem]

17. Hello...

He's not in the Senate, jimmy.

:eyes:

[ChiciB1]

20. Voting To FUND IT??? Now There's A Trick! He Has Admitted PAST

screw-ups and all the War Hoopla was a MAJOR one, but voting NOW IS NOT AN OPTION!! For now, he's a FREE-BIRD, but I'm gonna help him to HELP AMERICA!!!!

[JDPriestly]

23. Edwards does not vote to find the war. He can't. He is not in the Senate or the House.

Edwards is the candidate who told Congress to keep sending back the bill that set a timetable for troop withdrawal. Edwards has stated exactly what his timetable is for troop withdrawal.

In addition, if you watch the videos at the Heartland Values Conference posted on DU, you will hear him promise to end the illegal surveillance, close Guantanamo and ban torture. Just watch the videos. Kucinich has a lot of good ideas. Edwards has great ideas and can win in 2008.

[surfermaw]

29. J.D. Priestly... right on

Better listen to J.D., or you may have another republican for 8 years. John Edwards is the only one of the three that can win the White House in 2008, He is my choice, however I will suupport any one that gets the nomination. I like Dennis, but he can't make it Edwards can, I like Biden, but he was stoped short in a run several years ago... We do need Biden knowledge in some fashion...

[Hieronymus]

42. Agreed, Edwards is the man that can win. Biden seems to be running

for Sec. of State.

[JDPriestly]

46. Somehow, Biden has the skill and experience but not the drive to get elected president

That is my sense. Edwards has organized his campaign very well, especially considering that he is running on public financing and private smaller donations. Edwards knows how to get far on less money than the other candidates. Interesting. Biden has tremendous knowledge and, in my opinion would make a good VP or Sec. of State. But then, there is Richardson who is also great. Dodd would make a great Attorney General. I can't however imagine why Dodd or Biden would leave the Senate to join a cabinet.

[Bongo Prophet]

27. All those votes he made since 2004 don't count...think about it.

Loop user back for remedial lesson in history.


Oh yeah and your link is broken too, Mr.M.


BUT welcome to DU! :hi:

[frogcycle]

50. whoooops!

Fragged the wrong candidate - or grabbed the wrong talking point - there, Jimmy. Better go back and study your instructions. Oh, and welcome to DU (not)

[EVDebs]

12. Mr Edwards TEAR DOWN THAT WALL ! nt

[ChiciB1]

24. Tear It WIDE Open & Give Me A Hammer To Help! n/t

[Hieronymus]

13. Awesome speech .. be sure to watch all 3 parts.

[MaineDem]

18. I think it was one of the best speeches of the day

Biden was good too.

I was disappointed in Obama. It's a shame Hillary didn't speak so we could compare them.

[Hieronymus]

31. It will rank as one of the great speeches, along with JFK, RFK, FDR.

[Cha]

39. A Kick up for John

Edwards' "greatest speech".

[caligirl]

43. America needs to hear this man! He is incredible, he nails the issues that matter to us most.

No other candidate talks like this and its a shame. Edwards should get the nom and the WH.

[TAGGLINES]

47. YOU ROCK JOHN....

:yourock:

THE ONLY ONE WITH THE BALLS TO CALL IT LIKE IT IS...

FIGHT THE POWERS THAT BE !!!

[huskerlaw]

60. Welcome to DU!

:hi:


:)

[deacon]

48. kick and highly recommend!

[MilesColtrane]

49. I think he'll be equally adept at speaking to general election voters as he is to...

...Democrats, if he gets the nomination.

It's certainly got to be easier to rouse your party's rank and file than independent or uncommitted voters. But, Edwards shows here that he's got the rhetorical chops. He held that audience without even breaking a sweat.

Edwards is clearly the candidate with the best combination of progressive ideas and political skills.
He can win it all.

[Apollo11]

51. If you liked Edwards' speech, you are gonna love Obama's!

You can watch Barack Obama's speech on the Political Videos Forum

Part 1
www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x73476

Part 2
www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x73477

Get ready to recommend these videos!! B-)

[MaineDem]

52. Actually I was disappointed in Obama's speech

I'm sorry we didn't get to hear Hillary's. It would have been good to compare them all.

[Ninga]

53. K & R

[harun]

55. Good speech, go EDWARDS !

[Plucketeer]

62. My sentiments EXACTLY!

GO Johnny GO!!!

[Kajsa]

57. K & R.

Edwards is who we need in the WH.

He came from poverty and understands the great
economic divide in this country.


:applause: