The Image and the Albatross
Barrett Kalellis
Monday, August 2, 2004
Pollsters and researchers who study voting patterns have indicated that the country is pretty evenly divided between John Kerry supporters and President Bush loyalists. Winning the election, they say, will depend on the number of so-called independent voters who can be persuaded to vote for one candidate or the other.
There are 21 states considered battleground or toss-up states that are not consistently Republican or Democratic in their voting patterns. The most critical ones are those that control double-digit electoral votes, like Florida, Ohio, Michigan, Arizona, Minnesota, Washington, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia and Wisconsin. These are the states that will determine the outcome.
Story Continues Below
Analysts also point out that independent voters are non-ideological, and less concerned about political and policy issues than they are with the candidate’s image. Non-partisan voters primarily want to establish a “comfort level” with a candidate before giving him their votes. Their attitude is strangely similar to that of the mainstream news media, whose approval seems to be dependent only on whether a candidate is “hot” or not.
In my judgment, President Bush has a serious liability in winning the votes of these non-aligned voters: his poor speaking ability. It has become a veritable albatross around his neck.
A company marketing a popular educational vocabulary program used to advertise on radio with the slogan, “People judge you by the way you speak.” If there is any truth to this claim, it is one that Bush should have taken to heart years ago before entering public life.
A recent speech to the National Urban League in Detroit demonstrates all the poor mannerisms on display. These poor rhetorical habits appear whether the president is delivering a formal, prepared speech which he reads, or simply during impromptu comments that he uses in a press conferences. Although the substance of the speech was solid, the unsatisfactory delivery makes him appear less than presidential, less a statesman, and more like a semi-literate person suddenly thrust into the spotlight.
For example, Bush has an aversion to putting final “g’s” on present participles. Thus he says, “We’re askin’ if every child can read.” Or, “We’re makin” progress.” “When I was runnin’ for president,” “We’re sayin’ to kids,” “You heard me talk about ownin’ your own home, “and “What I’m tellin’ ya....” I didn’t hear one final “g” throughout the entire speech.
Then there’s the unfortunate contractions: “Get them outta here,” “We’re gonna be involved,” “We gotta make sure,” “I’ve seen ‘em under pressure,” and “...on the face ‘a’ the earth.” The speechwriter cannot have written these into the speech. It’s Bush’s delivery that is at fault.
While the president’s “handlers” and spokespersons probably dismiss these rhetorical faux pas as part of his plainspoken and direct image, they are mistaken. Coupled with his tendency to whine, they give instead the perception of being “not ready for prime time.”
Harry Truman spoke plainly and directly, but this referred to the content of his message, not his speaking manner. George Bush speaks lazily, with poor diction. While he is an intelligent man, his manner of speaking makes him sound unintelligent. He has never taken the time in his life to learn how to speak properly, especially in situations where formal speaking is called for.
This inability to modulate his delivery will surely hurt him with undecided voters, those to whom image is paramount. And in a tight race, it could cost him the election.
Listen to any successful politician. A large part of their ability to persuade voters and to maintain their power base has been command of the language. Think of Franklin D. Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy, Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton and the leadership image that was projected when they spoke — in many cases because they spoke well. By and large, it’s almost part of the job description.
By contrast, Lyndon Johnson, Jimmy Carter and George H.W. Bush were often portrayed negatively and constantly battled image problems because of their inability to communicate effectively as speakers.
Regardless of John Kerry’s mortician-like demeanor and his uncharismatic persona, he is a masterful speaker and a good debater, along with his patented ability to hold both sides of an issue.
At debate time this fall, no matter how well prepared the President on the issues, no matter how knowledgeable about his agenda, he is going to be in trouble as soon as he opens his mouth.
Barrett Kalellis is a Michigan-based columnist and writer whose articles appear regularly in various local and national print and online publications. He can be reached at kalellis@newsmax.com.