QUICK THOUGHTS ON GOVERNOR JINDAL’S PERFORMANCE LAST NIGHT

Roman Around ^ | 25 February 2009 | Andrew Roman

[andrew roman]

As disappointing as Governor Bobby Jindal was last evening in his response to President Obama’s non-State of the Union address, I harbor as much disappointment in myself for expecting too much.

From the moment Jindal began speaking, I couldn’t help but wonder if he was sitting on a thumbtack or if someone was applying a nutcracker to his pinky toe – particularly at the beginning of his talk. The lighting and the background were, at best, unflattering, and his delivery was as smooth as large curd cottage cheese. It pains me to say this because I am a huge fan of Governor Jindal. (This past summer, for example, while working at a well-known broadcasting outlet, I was impressed to hear how Jindal handled the hurricanes that battered his area of the Gulf Coast – strong, decisive, unwavering. Unfortunately, that Bobby was MIA last evening). Since his talk, the adjective truck has been heavy with words like “cardboard,” “awful,” “akward” and “wooden” to describe the Governor’s performance. Throw in “lackluster,” “boring,” “unimpressive” and “flat” and we’ve almost got enough for a baseball team.

In a perfect world, “substance over style” would have rendered Barack Obama a poll worker instead of an election winner – but that’s not how it works in the real world, sadly. Indeed, much of what Jindal said last evening was spot on. He is, indeed, a good conservative who normally comes across much better than a slab of gefilte fish on a paper plate. Unfortunately, if opportunities such as this – with the world watching – are squandered, especially following an Obama-teleprompter spectacular as we saw last night, Jindal will quickly see his star begin to lose some of its luster.

First off, it was ...

[CaliGangsta]

I’d use all those adjectives about Osama Obama’s speech.

Jindal nailed it with a great speech and great delivery.

[txnativegop]

Are you more concerned with style? Isn’t it the substance of what he said that counts?

Conservatives are doomed if each and every one of us demands to see only that which we consider the perfect conservative. I am guilty of this as well.

[Williams]

I hesitated forever to have a tagline and now I am a tagline egomaniac, I say to all these reactions to Jindal, read my tagline.

350 million people cannot afford to make their decisions on a speech delivery. We would have been infinitely better off with a Bod Dole presidency over Clinton, no matter how old Dole was.

[Doug TX]

The problem is that the repubs are trying to turn every favorite into the next Reagan.

[KansasGirl]

We should have had Joe the Plumber give the Republican response and called it an American voter response.

[BGHater]

The GOP measure is Reagan. That has been the standard and it will be hard for any Repub to measure up to that ability.

Jindal delivery was mediocre. The text and message was very good. However, he will have to adapt his delivery. Ron Paul has a similar problem, he might be right on economics and liberty put he has a sad delivery and comes across as a nutty professor.

[AnotherUnixGeek]

From the moment Jindal began speaking, I couldn’t help but wonder if he was sitting on a thumbtack or if someone was applying a nutcracker to his pinky toe – particularly at the beginning of his talk.

Didn't see the speech but that's a shame - Jindal is obviously good on substance, but a successful presidential candidate must also be good on style and communication skills.

There's plenty of time for Jindal to recover, however - Bill Clinton had a similarly panned national introduction with a long, incredibly dull speech at the Democratic Convention in '88.

[A CA Guy]

Delivery a bad math teacher in high school.

Off night for him IMO.

[PGR88]

I suspect that once again, a decent conservative politician goes against his better judgement on the advice of weenie media “handlers.”

[Melinda]

He’s not ready for Hollywood? LOL, he must be a total failure as measured by those high Dem standards.

[arealconservativeforachange]

Everybody needs to take off the favorite candidate goggles.

If Jindal and someone else gave the exact same speech but the other person delivered it like Reagan...who would you vote for?

It’s that simple.

Jindal has plenty of time to work on his speaking abilities but if there’s no improvement he’ll go nowhere.

[AnotherUnixGeek]

Are you more concerned with style? Isn’t it the substance of what he said that counts?

The reality is that candidates with no charisma or communication skills will lose, regardless of substance. Jindal needs to work on that part of his game. The people doing the production and lighting for his telecast also need to improve, apparently.

[Albion Wilde]

I must have been watching a different broadcast. I was paying attention to the content, which was right on point, and his sincerity, which was apparent.

[dawn53]

If Jindal and someone else gave the exact same speech but the other person delivered it like Reagan...who would you vote for?

Very true and this is the reality of politics in America. Unfortunately, Jindal, if he was running, wouldn't be seeking just conservative votes. If he was, then no problem, we could accept substance over style, but in this era of 24/7 biased news coverage, style does matter. Should it matter? Of course not, but does it matter, absolutely.

[jonrick46]

Governor Jindal’s speech was on firm conservative ground. However, he should have had experts coaching him on the delivery. He had a style that made his good message sound like syrup—something like a used car salesman trying to pass off a lemon. Most people focus on the delivery and pay little attention to the message.

When is the GOP going to wise up and refine the method of delivery? If Governor Jindal did not have the right stuff, they should have found someone who did.

The GOP is letting opportunity and carelessness slip through their fingers. And our grandchildren will pay dearly for their bumbling.

[roses of sharon]

Jindal does not understand, and did not convey the seriousness and the dangerous time we are in with Hussein.

I saw no zeal for liberty.

[cynwoody]

Didn't see the speech

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QFK8aTpYAmg

It really wasn't that bad. The substance was right on. And the delivery — well, those opposition speeches are never much good anyway. Just a friendly up-close talk. No attempt to match the grandiosity of the main event, which would be neither possible nor plausible.

[wilco200]

“Jindal nailed it with a great speech and great delivery.”

You sound like a moonbat when deny reality like that.

Sure, the guy may be a conservative at heart, but his speech last night sucked an egg. Lame tired rhetoric about “principles” and “yes we can.” And why does ever Republican have to start a speech about how great and historic Obama is? Give me an effing break!

The only hope conservatives have is finding a leader with the personality and grasp of conservatism to “get real”

Talk specific. talk numbers, Talk dollars from YOUR paycheck. Talk about loss of YOUR freedoms. Name names. Stop being a pussies!

How much is Obama’s plan going to cost us per paycheck, per month?

Talk specifically about how nationalized healthcare will put YOUR health at risk

Talk about how Obama is slowing eating away at your God given rights, your liberty, free speech, private property, etc.

[Dixie Yooper]

Whoever set up his lapel microphone should be fired. It was popping like crazy and very distracting. His delivery, although a bit corny, kept my and my wife's attention and got the point across. It's too bad he didn't take the opportunity to correct the President's claim that the automobile was invented in the USA. He could have apologized to the German people on our behalf.