What Reagan would have done: Communicated. . .in sentences

Look, I've made no secret of the fact that I plan to vote for John McCain. I've also made no secret of the fact that he wasn't my first choice. He wasn't my second choice either. But I understand the election process. I believe that John McCain, on his worst day, would be better as President than Barack Obama on his best day.
I don't believe that I agree with a single policy proposal that Obama has laid out. His taxation plan would harm the very people who create jobs. His energy plan would ignore the immediate need for domestic oil exploration. If he had been in charge of our foreign policy decisions after September 11, I believe that we would have already had several battles with terrorists on our own soil rather than on Iraqi soil. I simply disagree with everything he stands for.
But John McCain needs to learn to speak in sentences for something. In all three debates, I found myself telling him to conclude a thought as he muttered sentence fragments in response to Obama's smooth, flawed policy descriptions.
Following last night's debate, Britt Hume asked Charles Krauthammer what Ronald Reagan would have done. Krauthammer said that even Reagan couldn't have pulled out a compelling moment from last night's debate.
I beg to differ:
Reagan understood some very important things about persuasive speaking:
1. It's a performance - That doesn't mean you lie. It means you communicate. . .with your speech, with your facial expressions, with your posture. You are winning people over. You are wooing the audience.
2. Speak clearly - If you are going to make a point, make it. Don't hint at it. Don't use jargon. Make the point.
3. Give people something to support - Seems obvious, but as Peggy Noonan pointed out today:
"The McCain campaign has famously spent the past week trying to increase doubts as to Mr. Obama's nature, background, intentions. Their crowds have been irascible. Here is a warning for Republicans: When your crowds go from 'I love you' to 'I hate the other guy,' you are in trouble, you are on a losing strain. Winning campaigns are built on love. This is the time for 'McCain is the answer,' not 'The other guy is questionable.'"
People want to vote for something, not just against something.
Sadly, the man who I believe has better solutions hasn't sold those solutions as the man with bad options. McCain had the opportunities, but he ignored too many of them.



Comments