DescentBB

....well, I was up at the circus for a couple days. Third one I've attended(1968,2008). A few little insights, avoiding the partisan talking points, and on a more human basis:

1. The whole show was by far the best organized, in terms of flow of message and systematic addressing of core issues, that I've ever seen from either party. The entertainment was first rate.
2. Getting around Philly still sucks. I took trains in and out save for Monday, when I took some younger delegates on a road trip
3. Watching 3 young men from Virginia eat a REAL cheesesteak(not Genos or Pats, but uptown in Roxborough) was fun
4. I am so glad I stayed home with the family last night, I would have never managed that balloon and beachball fest without breaking an ankle.
5. The contrast of both high-end celebrity support, military support and opposing party support was stark.
6. The Dems have, in their fold, some of the best orators on the planet. Period. Hillary is not one, and the party planned for that, too.
7. Good to be home, and off to the pool with the grandkids.
8. Two days of being buttonholed for money isn't fun. For the record, I committed nothing to Hillary, as I felt she had enough on hand to get the job done. I am now the proud supporter of 50 Congressional campaigns and 8 Senate campaigns.
9. The diversity in that building and the stark contrast with what was on TV last week was very palpable.
10. The appeal to build coalitions and use our system as it was intended was something I've harped on for over a decade, mainly
on Progressive blogs, and in public forums. If that is to be her hallmark, I'm with her.

I know this is a ridiculous complaint, but I think the show was too well organized. I want to remain skeptical about these things and I felt like the grinch with a growing heart. I almost felt uncomfortable that a lot of the speeches were so emotionally resonant to me. Both Obama speeches in particular made me feel extremely proud to be an American. I'd like to think this is what it felt like in the 60's when people listened to Kennedy speak.

And then both Clinton speeches made something click with me. When Hillary was talking about public service, and how much she enjoys the service, but not so much the public, that struck a chord with me. The dichotomy between enjoying and being good at the work, but being uncomfortable and bad at the public spectacle.

And that's what makes me feel uncomfortable with it all. It's like I'd been primed to receive this message, and it was delivered so perfectly that I got it exactly it was intended. It didn't come off as manufactured, even though I know it was.

Everyone's speech was inspiring, except Hillary's. She came off wooden and flat, almost like she was reading from a safe script and didn't fully believe in what she saying. I know that women in general have the same problem as black men, sounding too angry if they speak passionately and forcefully, but Hillary has rarely spoken with any passion or emotion. She's always got that same half smiling expression plastered on her face, like it's glued there for the crowd. The only time I've heard any emotion from her was during one of the numerous Benghazi hearings that Congress was putting her through. She actually broke down and showed some emotion, like she's a living human being. Elizabeth Warren had a more passionate and forceful speech than Hillary did and she even sounded like she believed her convictions. Hillary, definitely not.

Yeah, it's difficult to listen to her make a speech. It's grating and uneven. She's definitely not in her element. There's like a negative feedback loop where she's bad at it, she knows she's bad at it, and it makes her worse at it. It gets excruciating when I feel a bit of empathy for the predicament, because not only do I have to endure the speech itself, it just brings up the uncomfortable feelings I get when I rarely speak publicly.

It's too bad making speeches is such a big part of being President.

speaking to the previous post's points, Clinton was not IMMEDIATELY following killer orators, like her husband, Obama or Biden, nor Cory Booker. That fellow Barber from North Carolina rocked the place, though. Felt like a revival tent meeting with deep, sincerely held morality. I've heard southern pals speak so very highly of him. I see why.

forgot one point.....the attire, and this sort of is traditional for either party. I spent all of 25 minutes, tops, on the floor, with the PA delegation(used to be one of them, and was catching up before dinner Weds). It was like being in the midst of a Price Is Right tryout gone horribly patriotic in theme. Given the rigid control over MOST signage by the floor whips and sign captains(a hundred of each), folks try to turn themselves into walking billboards regarding issues, state pride, national pride and some stuff I never really could figure out.

Vander wrote:Yeah, it's difficult to listen to her make a speech. It's grating and uneven. She's definitely not in her element. There's like a negative feedback loop where she's bad at it, she knows she's bad at it, and it makes her worse at it. It gets excruciating when I feel a bit of empathy for the predicament, because not only do I have to endure the speech itself, it just brings up the uncomfortable feelings I get when I rarely speak publicly.

It's too bad making speeches is such a big part of being President.

That's the problem. You can't tell if she actually believes what she's speaking about. No passion, no emotion. That creates a trust issue when someone speaks like a robot reading from a script.

from all reports, and ZERO personal experience(noted for Woody) she is far more emotionally focused and involved in small group settings, and far too many stories of her personal involvement with 9/11 victims and other constituents over long periods seems to speak to that. I'll get back to you in later September with what I actually see in person, as I've been invited to some soiree her with her supposed to be in attendance.

tunnelcat wrote:That's the problem. You can't tell if she actually believes what she's speaking about. No passion, no emotion. That creates a trust issue when someone speaks like a robot reading from a script.

I think I agree on the point, but not the bigger picture. I agree that the "style" makes trust hard, but I'm not sure it's a good thing that a good speaker makes trust easy. This kind of goes to the point of my first post. Most of the speeches hit all the right spots with me, which makes skepticism harder.

Yes, she "hit" all the points, even the ones Bernie was after, but is she really committed to following through with those points, especially the ones that she compromised on with Bernie, like not passing the TPP? Only her election as president and time will tell. Personally, I don't trust her. Since she's not getting my vote, she's going to have to earn my trust if she wins.

if you really listened to her, she stated that she's trying to build a coalition to work in the interest of all of us. Let's face it, all she does on the TPP is sit and watch whether the Senate approves it or not. The test for her will be how she negotiates FUTURE agreements. The thought of us NOT having some agreement for ongoing free access to Asian markets is chilling from an economic standpoint. At some stage, China will shore up its domestic markets and aggressively go after the ENTIRE Asian market. If we don't have trade agreements in place, we're screwed. I repeat, at the risk of sounding boring, that we have to accept living in a GLOBAL ECONOMY

Observations:

1. The Democrats had a good convention.
2. I hope Hillary has a good relation with god, because it’s going to take a god’s power to enact all of those promises.

I mean seriously, can’t Democrats see there is just a little (way) too much on that plate.

Slick, as Shakespeare wrote, "You Doth Explain Too Much"

except, he never wrote those words. Protest, but not explain.

Spidey wrote:Observations:

1. The Democrats had a good convention.
2. I hope Hillary has a good relation with god, because it’s going to take a god’s power to enact all of those promises.

I mean seriously, can’t Democrats see there is just a little (way) too much on that plate.

she made it VERY clear that she will support those things, but it up to a coalition and a Congress to get them to fruition. You heard, as with Obama, goals instead of promises. All she promised was to work like mad on behalf of the nation. I'll take her at that word.

callmeslick wrote:except, he never wrote those words. Protest, but not explain.

No ★■◆● slick. You ever hear of a play on a phrase? You need to get your literal nose out of the books. Smell the roses so to speak.

I'll gladly explain stuff. Always have, always will. I'll even explain English lit, if you need.

as for smelling roses, I came out of this week seeing roses coming up everywhere. Toss in Texas' and North Carolina's draconian voting blockages getting tossed out for this election cycle by the courts in three days, I'm positively buoyed.