The contents of the Democratic Convention speeches have been examined ad nauseam but only 10% of speech is what is said, 90% is how it is said. Elections are ultimately be decided by small, uninformed portions of the voting public based on very limited impressions of the candidates. This makes the question of "how" candidates deliver their speeches paramount. So, how did the speakers at the Democratic Convention do?

But first, my qualifications for conducting this evaluation:

In a previous life I was a stand-up comedian. I started at 16 and retired at 20, I was onstage over 100 times (and even got paid for a few of them.) I did it, initially, to meet girls – it didn’t work.

My undergraduate degree is a Bachelors in Speech from that oratorical powerhouse Emerson College. (Really, Emerson was founded in 1880 by one of the most noted orators of his time Charles Wesley Emerson – a cousin of the more famous Ralph Waldo – as a school of oratory and rhetoric.) I took classes in Public Speaking, Voice and Articulation, and Oral Interpretation. Full disclosure: I earned a B-, C, and a B respectively.

The grading scale is this:

F – Absolutely inept speaker who has no business speaking before a group
D – Not absolutely painful to watch
C – Competent professional speaker
B – Pretty good speaker who can move an audience
A – Excellent speaker, owns the audience

This is a tough curve and the small screen, which is not kind to speechifying, makes it harder. The grades I gave were based on their TV performances – but assume that live they are better. I generally give President Bush a C, he is a competent professional speaker, but I’ve seen him speak in person and he is quite effective – at least a B-. Someone who gets an A on TV is really something (watch a video of Martin Luther King, Jr. sometime.)

(On a very good day, I give myself a B.)

Things I look for:

Was the speaker having fun or were they just plodding along? This is really the difference between a B and C. An unenthusiastic speaker can be competent – but can never really move an audience.

Does the speaker know how to express emotion without yelling? This is tricky, most people when they are excited raise their voice. This can be effective, but (note to Elijah Cummings) shouting a speech is grating and the larynx offers a great many more options. Contrast the speeches of Al Gore and Bill Clinton at the 2000 Convention. Gore, trying to show excitement yelled. Clinton, unsurprisingly, is a master of inflection, pitch, and timing.

Here, in no particular order, are my grades – based on speeches, parts of speeches, and clips shown on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart.

Bill Clinton –A – Knows his stuff. He is almost the only politician with absolute mastery of his voice, his timing is terrific, and when he is up there it is obvious that there is nowhere else he would rather be.

Al Sharpton – A – He is a first-rate speaker. A master of oratory, with good vocal quality and timing, he yells a bit – but it works. And he loves it up there. He is also an utter scoundrel. A good insight into Third World politics is that there are plenty of countries in the world where a Sharpton-like figure can orate his way to power.

Barack Obama – A – The guy has a good voice and knows how to use it. It would be terrific if, from his almost certain slot as a U.S. Senator he could help dampen the growing leftist radicalism in the African-American community (see above.)

Nancy Pelosi – C – She read the lines well, without any enthusiasm - although her face may not be capable of expressing emotion anymore. Her tongue kept popping out as she spoke.

Madeline Albright – C – Another solid reading, without much emotional communication.

Hillary Clinton – B- - She will never emote like her husband. But she is an able speaker and if the crowd likes her she can work with it.

Dick Gephardt and Joe Lieberman – D – I like their politics but they are plodding emotionless speakers. Lieberman delivered the big, “Hope is on the way” as his finish with all the enthusiasm of a directory assistance operator.

John Edwards – B – Frequently compared to Clinton: he is good, but not that good. He is smooth and pleasant to listen to. He clearly enjoys himself in front of the crowd. But he did not demonstrate the full range of his vocal gifts. He yelled a little, but did not do more subtle things with his voice and gestures. That being said, a solid B – he is impressive and in person even more so. But maybe, he is just a bit too much sunshine, a rough edge somewhere might serve him well.

John Kerry – C+ - Better than I expected. We kept hearing how dull he was, forgetting how he blew Congress away with his testimony at the tender age of 27. He has a good deep voice (that reminds me of the announcer on The Superfriends cartoon.) When he is tired that voice works against him, because he sounds like a windbag. But when he is on it works well – masking some of his weaknesses. Sometimes, when excited, his voice actually goes down which is a nice way to emphasize his points, and even when he yells it does not come out shrill. He speaks from his throat. Speakers get a better sound quality when it emanates from the diaphragm lower down. It also reduces the strain on the larynx. Unfortunately, this is not easy to do – that I can describe it, but not really do it is why I got a C in Voice & Articulation.

Also, the long, pointing finger was a bit too professorial.

Still a solid performance – but he really did not look like he was enjoying himself at all.

For those of us who love this stuff and could watch more of it – the Republican Convention starts on August 30. Hope is on the way!*


* I wondered about that line. Maybe the Edwards' babysitter was named Hope and she was running late (which was why the children were out so late at the Convention) and the refrain was just letting Elizabeth know.