Sorry, have to disagree. Clinton is a great speaker. The difference between Churchill and Clinton is content - namely, Churchill had it, Clinton doesn't. Clinton is blessed with remarkable rhetorical gifts, and has a genuine talent for shrinking a room. Because of that, he can make inane or otherwise stupid ideas sound innocuous by burying them in elaborate, eloquent speeches, mired in messages about the goodness of man, the need to coordinate international efforts and such.
That's because he has that evangelist or carnie barker touch and that doesn't make him a good speaker.
As Marlon Brando once said "In the valley of the blind; a one-eyed man is King.