The DNC speeches today...If I had to rank them...

[SaveElmer]

Despite the fact I am supporting Hillary Clinton in 2008...I have to say the best speech today IMO:

Chris Dodd

After that:

Hillary
Edwards
Obama
Clark
Kucinich

[snowbear]

1. I agree.. General Clark knocked it outta the ballpark !!!

Oh wait.. you said Dodd...

[murielm99]

2. You're supporting Clinton?

You are very brave to say that here. There is so much hatred for her at DU.

FWIW, I'm not supporting anyone yet, but I am leaning Obama.

Both Clinton and Obama came from my state!

[DemKR]

3. Hillary

She really struck a cord with me on her speech. Impressive.

[Missy M]

4. I'm supporting Hillary Clinton and I'm not afraid to say it here...

or anywhere.

[illinoisprogressive]

5. I found alot of them were just standard stuff. I thought Obama's was different.

[SaveElmer]

6. Obama's was not bad...but more of a conversational speech...

DNC setting folks are looking for red meat...designed to get party activists motivated and fired up...

Which is why I thought Kucinich's was bizarrely inappropriate for the occasion...alot of confusion in the audience about why he is running...judging by the relative lack of reaction...

[Clarkie1]

7. They were standard political fodder and rah-rah speeches except for Clark's.

He was the only one who really spoke about what is most important, which is those who are dying.

[jenmito]

9. And he was ignored by the media...

as usual. I didn't hear his name ONCE mentioned on MSNBC or CNN today or tonight.

[FrenchieCat]

13. They did mention Arkansas!

But kidding aside,

They are selling us Edwards for sure, and low and behold, it's working no matter how obvious. Never underestimate a good looking pandering man with the media on his side.

They will be deconstructing both Obama and Hillary slowly but surely.

They will not mention the General because as good as he is, they just don't want him...and at this point they will go out of their way to ignore him. period.

[jenmito]

14. I hope he doesn't realize this...

and decides not to run. :(

[DianeG5385]

29. I think he's in. He's a warrior

Our country is at stake and I believe he's the only guy who actually wants to fight for his country.

[DaveinMD]

17. No is selling anyone

Edwards did a good job today, as did Obama. Clark didn't do as well as we all know he can. Clark can gain traction, but he'll have to run an unorthodox campaign. He needs to take some chances. I hope its not too late because his voice is a very necessary one in our party. I have a strong feeling that if he doesn't get the nomination, he'll be on the ticket because the rest of the field understands how important his strengths are.

[DianeG5385]

28. This is because he's OUR candidate not THEIRS!

Never have I seen a candidate with so much grass roots support be completely ignored by the MSM as Clark. It's as if they are DELIBERATELY hoping he'll go away so someone on their agenda wins.

Sorry, MSM, we rule you report...now GO DO YOUR JOB!!!!!

[snowbear]

10. I like Hillary... I honestly, truly do. But as a public speaker..

Wow.. .. I don't want to say it's "nail's on the chalkboard bad" -- but in my opinion, it's not one of her finest qualities.

I know I'll get bashed for thinking that -- but public speaking is seriously not her forte..

me -->

[DaveinMD]

18. it takes her

some time to get going, but is usually decent on the stump.

[snowbear]

30. "Decent" isn't good enough for me....

I want STELLAR. I want "Knock your socks off good"!

I want someone like General Wes Clark!!!!!

If he opts not to run, I'd prefer Governor Richardson, Senator Obama, former Senator John Edwards, or perhaps even Al Gore (if he jumps in late).. I would vote for Dennis Kucinich or Al Sharpton over Hillary Clinton.

She's far too polarizing --- She is a poor public speaker (IMHO) --- and not only did she vote to give Mr. Bush the authorization to go to war in Iraq, she kept her pie-hole SHUT about it until her campaign started about a week ago.

No thank you.

She is dead last on my list of '08 choices ~~

[DaveinMD]

8. I thought Dodd's wasn't very good

it was a very Washington oriented speech. Too much time spent on the victories of 2006 and not enough on his vision.

I thought Edwards was excellent. Obama was very good.

I thought Clark's speech was out of place. It was a good speech, but not the red meat type speech for this audience.

I had to leave before Kucinich and Hillary spoke.

[Clarkie1]

11. Well, perhaps Clark's not into red meat?

I'm not either, and I say kudos to Clark for speaking truth to power today...even if it wasn't what they wanted hear, it was what they needed to hear.

[DaveinMD]

15. I've heard Clark

give stronger speeches before. I was hoping I'd here more of his vision today. My standards for him are high. I thought his convention speech was better.

[FrenchieCat]

12. My take...

Obama's was stellar and thoughtful. Great timing and delivery.

Clark's was good (but too much military), but not good enough, considering his obstacles with press ignores. Good delivery.

Edwards' was typical trial attorney wooing a jury but will get large media boost just cause that who they want in the end. Decent delivery but I thought he was trying too hard...and the "stand up with courage" line was ironic but got him "stand"ing ovations; and the media is making sure to emphasize that "Edwards got the most standing ovations" as their "new" method of judging speeches.

Hillary was confident but severe. Average delivery. She's starting to remind me of an American Thatcher.

I missed most of Dodd, but he seemed mad as hell. Will watch it again.

Kucinich spoke of his wife too much as though she's been working by his side for a lifetime. She's a beauty though...that's for sure!

[DaveinMD]

16. I thought Edwards speech

was very good. I really like the theme that we must do better and we can do better. I think Obama and Edwards got an equal number of standing ovations.

I didn't see Hillary's speech, but her campaign was extremely well organized and the members were definitely receptive to the campaigners.

[FrenchieCat]

19. well maybe you're a "Jury" type of listener.....

meaning the speaker you hear never has to actually "do"....all is based on what he says.

Edwards talks about courage and standing up......but the important part is standing up when no one else is; that's courage.

On the other hand standing up on popular issues when talking to particular audiences (voting for Iraq when it was popular, then saying sorry when it was not, like threatening Iran while talking to AIPAC, or giving out stories of Poor People to Democratic Activists, or campaigning on the Minimum wages to Unions, and building a large house when talking to your wife) is easy.

[DaveinMD]

21. the house thing is just silly

the trial lawyer thing is a positive and actually doing things. Its standing up for the powerless against huge corporations that have harmed them. He's the only Democratic candidate in 20 years to talk about poor people instead of middle class people. He deserves credit for that. I know you don't like him and that's fine.

[Clarkie1]

24. I watched both Obama's and Edward's speeches

and I thought Obama was far superior in both content and delivery.

Edwards reminded me of a slick trial lawyer cynically appealing to a jury he knows he can play like a fiddle....even down to that cocky half-grin on his face! Way too predictable!

[justiceischeap]

20. The one thing I thought about all the speeches today

Full of rhetoric but wasn't hearing a lot of solutions. I really think, no matter the candidate, if the general American public doesn't start hearing solutions, I could see them voting along their party lines.

I know we've got two years but show a hint of solution for something... anything. I think we all understand and get just how bad it is in the US, we want to know how you're going to fix it!

[DaveinMD]

22. not enough time

to get into real specifics. And there will be plenty of time for policy proposals.

[SaveElmer]

23. Well you have to look at t he audience and the purpose of the addresses...

This was a DNC meeting...candidates are largely preaching to the choir on policy. This was designed to fire up supporters...which is why the speeches have a more red meat rah rah quality to them...

[chimpymustgo]

25. Edwards' speech gave me chills. It made me feel and think about our Democratic ideals.

I'm still watching the speeches. So far, Edwards - hands down.

[VADem11]

26. Dodd

did a surprisingly good job. I have to give him credit for that. After him, it was probably Edwards and Obama. Obama had a very different speech but I liked it. His speech later during the day at GMU was very different than the one he gave at the dnc. I have to admit that I didn't like Edwards' opening but the rest of the speech was great.

[Awsi Dooger]

27. I was most impressed with Obama

So refreshing to see a Democrat speak slowly, with emphasis on every word, as if it's been thoughtfully selected as opposed to merely the idea chosen, and then the first sloppy simpleton version written down and spoken. He also has rare timing and grips the audience from the outset. It was startling how the audience was mumbling, looking elsewhere and impatient during Dodd's scattergun presentation, then immediately silent and almost mesmerized as Obama spoke.

Edwards wasn't as different or improved from 2004 as I'd expected. He loves the somewhere in America tonight examples, but I think he over does it. Needs to say more with fewer words.

Hillary is using a crush the Republicans theme. If anyone else said the same thing word for word it would be embraced on this forum, but since it's Hillary we'll find other reasons to dislike her.

[k_jerome]

31. Clinton, Dodd, Obama, Edwards, Kucinich, Clark. nt.