"We hate to say it, but in style Clinton beats the President."
Clinton is not a good speaker. Winston Churchill is a good speaker. Clinton is an evangelist or carnie barker.
Well, the Dims are an ideological freak show.
Perhaps not historically, but in these times he passes for one.
Clinton is a great speaker. He can talk about anything. What makes him completely forgettable is that, unlike Churchill, he has no thoughts. He's just trying to stay at the podium long enough to shoot the beavers in the front row.
Slick Willie and his Traveling Snake Oil Show.
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.
No, Clinton is good. When he speaks, he owns the room. Bush will never be that good since you can tell he doesn't really enjoy public speaking and manipulating people through that method like Clinton does. In addition, Bush could probably use a bit more time in high school English class, and that hurts him.
"Clinton is an evangelist or carnie barker."
Please don't insult evangelists. Some of them, like Billy Graham, are good guys. Clinton, on the other hand, is the crook selling cheap knock-offs out of the back of his car. He's the pervert who lures little kids into his van with promises of candy. He's the creep who peeps into windows at night and organizes the blood drive the next day. Just the sort to energize and enthrall Democrats.