i liked Hillary's speech.

[jakem]

It covered the necessary bases for sure.
It even gathered momentum, which is unusual for her (i find).
Plus, no accent, which was a huge relief.

My question, because i spent most of her speech thinking about it, is why do i not like her speeches more?

The first thing that comes to mind is that she gives them fast and a little flat (or they are at least predictable in tone).
Some pauses for emphasis would be welcome I think... Any other thoughts?


This is not an invitation for 'shrill' comments, nor is it a critique of HRCs primary choices.

[CreekDog]

1. she's gotten to be a terrific speaker

but that was not until recently.

[Patsy Stone]

2. I liked it too, and she was spot on in content.

But I thought she, Warner and Pelosi were all a little flat. Warner stepped over his applause lines and Pelosi seemed robotic last night. I didn't realize it until they showed clips of Ann Richards. There was a woman who could give a speech! RIP, Ann. :loveya:

[bdamomma]

3. Let her be the new majority leader of the Senate

Harry Reid move over please.

[rocktivity]

4. No--the DLC must die

If we are to have any real hope for any real change.

If she sounded flat, maybe it's because she's finally come to terms with what happened and is ready to make the best of what she has left.

:headbang:
rocknation