I listened to Clinton's victory speech last night, and my immediate reaction was, "Damn, that woman needs a better speechwriter." But this morning I read the transcript, linked below, & I didn't see anything wrong with the words. It was the delivery.
Clinton excuses herself as not being a "natural politician" like her husband & President Obama. But that claim is as false as it is a dig at Bill & Obama. She is a natural politician in the worst sense: she curries favor with those who can fill her campaign coffers, she manipulates facts to the extent that they constitute lies, she is the paradigm of the "Me generation."
The ways she is not a natural politician is in her carelessness -- her assumptions that the rules other must follow don't apply to her (private e-mails), her secrecy (her 1993 healthcare initiative), her rolling revisions when the facts don't back her up, her failure to think thru & follow thru on the outcomes when she does get the result she wants (Libya). And her carelessness is reflected in her speech deliveries -- even when she says the right words her speechwriter puts in front of her, she comes across as manipulative & selfish. There is nothing endearing or laudable about her.
The idea that Bill Clinton & Barack Obama are "naturally" better speakers is also a crock. They study their craft. You can hear it in Obama's speeches; he borrows the style of black preachers. He didn't just come to his style because of the color of his skin, for Pete's sake; he practiced.
The same with Bill: there is an anecdote in a book by David Maraniss (I think it is) where he relates how Bill Clinton practiced for hours copying Ronald Reagan's style. He got videotapes of Reagan's speeches & studied Reagan's mannerisms, right down to his gestures. According to Maraniss, Clinton came running from his practice room one day & said, "I got it, I finally got it!" What did he get? -- a particular hand gesture Reagan made.
But these talented speakers are talented because they want to connect to voters. They may not really "feel your pain," but they at least remember how the pain feels, & they want your vote enough to call up those memories of their own hard times. Hillary Clinton suppresses whatever pain she has felt (and like all of us, she has feelings); that's what makes her such a wooden speaker. Actually "feeling your pain" would mean letting down her guard, letting her seem less royal & special & better than you & me.
Describing the 2016 election as the "most important in recent history" is something of a crock. From the standpoint of court appointments & a few other matters, it is very important. But the fact is that in November, we will have a choice between two of the worst nominees in modern history. This will be the "Me generation" come to its ignoble end. I shudder to think of what kind of presidency is in the offing.