English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Please give a letter grade (like A, B, C, D, or F) and why you think so

2007-01-11 15:19:11 · 29 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

29 answers

b, too short. didn't address more issues.

2007-01-11 15:22:53 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 5 7

D

Ok - in addition to teaching full-time at a university, I also teach Public Speaking at a Community College on a part-time basis so I have some experience in critiquing speeches since I usually hear about 300 per semester.

We didn't get to hear his opening comments because the microphone wasn't working, so I won't even try to critique that or for that matter, the rest of his introduction.

One of the things a good speaker does is they raise their voice, lower their voice - in effect they don't speak in a monotone which destroys their credibility and gives the listener the impression they are a dull and boring person. For the most part, Bush spoke in a monotone the entire time. In conjunction with this is that good speakers don't use words such as "gonna, gotta" etc. They say going to, got to and so forth. I won't even mention the big mispronounced word, but everyone knows what it is.

Another thing a good speaker does is utilize effective nonverbal communication such as gestures in a speech. Bush just stood there. He never gestured, never did a bloody thing. Eye contact is another important area of nonverbal - I can't recall that he even blinked. He stood there reading from the teleprompter the entire time. He looked like he was either stoned or had tape holding his eyes open.

Now, what about the facts - were they supported or just merely implied? Where did he get all those facts from? He was obviously getting them from somewhere, but God only knows since he never told us.

Now we come to his conclusion - a good speaker will briefly go over the main points they've touched on and repeat the Thesis of their speech before providing a good, strong, effective concluding statement which provides finality. Bush didn't.

Overall, Bush attempted to give a persuasive speech and did a poor job of it. He never followed accepted persuasive speech guidelines which are basically, get the audience's Attention, show us their is a Need and explain what it is and how it affects each and every one of us, he failed to provide Satisfaction for those needs - in effect, calming us down a little; to a certain extent he did follow the Visualization step of a persuasive speech in which a speaker asks the listener to visualize what the negative consequences are and the positive benefits are of their position and he certainly didn't ask for a call to Action other than to ask Americans to give up more of our young people in an endless war.

It was all "we're gonna do this, we're gonna do that" and that is NOT how you persuade people.

If Bush was in one of my classes, I'd anticipate having him again next semester.

2007-01-11 16:32:41 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

Hell no . did not he have you ever all suckered Into guns of mass destruction ? He did me . And he had that similar little smirk smile on the right of his Speech like he did again then . Its like McCain stated with seven hundred billion shall we rebuild the entire infrastructure of america and then some . What can we want loans for if we've money from operating . And if we do bail them out so as that it will provide loans who may have the money to pay the loans . Face it the anybody is broke We cant have the funds for extra loans

2016-11-23 13:19:27 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Well, since he literally couldn't even write one sentence- and we all have experienced his off the cuff comments that are forever being reviewed by every comedian out there, I will grade him as if he were a diver--- a dumpster, diver--
F- for presentation-- he always has that clueless idiotic look on his face.
F-for composition- although we ALL know he didn't write a single word of it, it is the same **** just said on a different day-- mumbo jumbo about all bullshit-- with no, and I mean no sense to it at all.

So he gets 2 F's and I'm sure he got a lot more of them from all the Americans watching him, figuratively and literally!

2007-01-11 17:42:09 · answer #4 · answered by mac 6 · 1 3

First I want all to know that I am a registered republican. Now , drum roll please....F. Because we heard from this person back in 2003 that the mission was accomplished. Because there were no weapons of mass destruction. Because we have spent over 300 billion dollars and over 3000 lives on this fiasco. Because he won't listen to the learned advisers he himself set up. Because he won't listen to the Pentagon. Because he won't listen to the people.

2007-01-11 15:48:31 · answer #5 · answered by Diana P 2 · 4 1

Although, I support our President for our Country's sake, he's speech was very disappointingly short. Therefore I would give his speech a D+. Whoever prepared that speech, needs to get another job, it lacked a lot of issues that the American community should expect from a Presidential Address to the Nation. I truly expected a lot more then he reported.

2007-01-11 15:31:20 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 5 3

I think he is going to move the troops into Baghdad and sit tight until just before the election then bring most the troops home and claim victory and the violence will rise up again but will be covered up in the news by the up coming election.

2007-01-11 15:35:05 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

F. It was one of the very few Presidential speeches that had zero or a negative effect on public opinion.

It was also delivered in a bizarre, monotone affect - symptomatic of someone being on the wrong prescription of heavy psych medications. Note to Bush physician - work on those psych med adjustments.....

2007-01-11 15:31:43 · answer #8 · answered by Timothy M 5 · 4 3

D. he repeated things he has said before, there was no new "exit strategy", and he looked like a bumbling idiot when he talked.

B+ to the speech writer because it takes talent to write a well structured speech like that. the info was poor, but i am willing to bet that he didn't get good info to begin with.

2007-01-11 16:12:59 · answer #9 · answered by happyinblue 3 · 1 4

I give it an I - incomplete. He still does not have a winning strategy. It is just more of the same that did not work before. The delivery was better, no whining or smirking, but he did not actually say anything.

2007-01-11 15:26:48 · answer #10 · answered by Paul K 6 · 4 4

Incomplete.

Bush is no longer worth listening to. His words are irrelevant.

He needs to show results in Iraq and elsewhere. His spin machine is broken for good.

2007-01-11 17:14:21 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 1 3

fedest.com, questions and answers