I heard him speak last week in Boston and he hit all the same notes you're mentioning tonight. Since I hadn't heard him speak before, I couldn't figure out why everybody said he was all rhetoric and no substance. So, it's interesting to hear you comparing your experience of older speeches. Thanks.

I will note that my favorite moment in last week's speech was when he spoke about how disappointing it is when Democrats co-opt the ugly campaign tricks of the Republicans. Someone in the audience yelled, "You mean Hillary." He stopped, put his hand up and said something to the effect of, "No. It's more pervasive than that. My campaign has even gone in that direction at times. I know what the temptation is like...." For all the moments of loud cheers, it was the brief silence of self-reflection in the audience that left me most inspired. It felt so genuine, so transcendent. It restore a little hope in humanity. I've waited a long time to see a leader emerge with that quality. I will be devastated if he doesn't win. I'll move on, but the sense that we will have passed up a rare opportunity to let someone lead us in a more constructive direction as a society will be profound. (Given that I came of voting age just one month after the first Reagan election, I won't be all that surprised if we don't elect this man. Still, sadly disappointed.)

Totally agree. He put it out of the park. Defended "hope" brilliantly, honored McCain while making the case that he's not right, and essentially launched the general election campaign. Did he mention his remaining Democratic foe at all?

By the time he was aligning his movement with historical movements in American history, I was choking back tears. Then I just let them go - I am so glad to know that I'm not the only one who thought this was his best speech yet.

Setting aside the content of the speech (which sounds great, but I haven't seen), I think it's definitely a good sign for Obama that you think each speech is his best.  He seems to have a natural talent for building themes in an organic way rather than clumsily announcing them like Hillary does -- if you track the rhetoric of his campaign, he's had a great sense of timing about when to make subtle changes in rhetoric, shifts in emphasis, and expanded arguments.  To me, it's a sign that he'll wear will with the national electorate over the course of a yearlong campaign.  Unlike Kerry or Gore, who for different reasons started out with high name recognition and more or less had nowhere to go but down, I think Obama really has the potential to wind up with 55% or more of the national popular vote.  That's critical and shouldn't be overlooked.

I think the rout and that speech put him over the top for the Edwards endorsement.

It seems like everytime he makes a speech it is his best yet. At this rate the State of the Union in 2016 will be one for the ages.

Seems like Edwards has maybe missed his endorsement window. I mean a guy named Barack Obama just one the seat of the Confederacy by 19-20 points. How much more help could he possibly need?

Besides, I'm still kind of worried about a ganging up on her backlash. But maybe Elizabeth Edwards could endorse.

Excellent speech.  He's getting better as he moves forward, that's a very good sign.

"We need a president who will not only listen to Wall Street, but to Main Street as well."

That's not an exact quote, but I thought that was a great line.

Just as a lark, I started to watch the speech Hillary gave in Texas.

First thing that struck me was the song playing as she came on stage.  Both Obama and Hillary were introduced with U2 playing in the background.  Obama to "City of Blinding Lights" and Hillary to "Where the Streets Have No Name."

GAWD, that song is SO 1987.  She is really out of touch.

"We need a president who will not only listen to Wall Street, but to Main Street as well."

I think Mike Huckabee has said something similar.

Barack Obama, performance artist.

bcbaird -- When it comes to U2, being "so 1987" is a GOOD thing.

"I think Mike Huckabee has said something similar."

Well, when Obama incorporates fried squirrels into his stump speech, give me a call.

This was very similar to his speech Saturday night.  It's certainly in his interest to mention McCain frequently, cuz it will push Hillary to the background with a new general election focus.

What asnavitt reports him saying inn Boston is the most impressive of all... the ability to say it is wrong and include himself in it ...

So different from Clinton who after her tears came back to "some of us are right and some of us are wrong."

Who said that it would make a big difference if he wins big... how right you are.

And Virginia... by 20%...my gosh, I'm 69, a white woman... I never imagined I'd live to see that day.

it was basically the stump speech i heard 10 days ago in wilmington ( i assume it was launched in the push toward super tuesday), but it was delivered beautifully and he's getting more and more comfortable with it.  i think it might have been even stronger on saturday night because the jefferson/jackson audience was so pumped...  i love that he's now using the term "bush/mccain" just to make sure no one forgets what the election is about...  

To me, the stark contrast of the evening was to hear Obama speak in front of a roaring crowd of 17,000 in an arena, then immediately afterwards, hear John McCain speak in front of a couple of hundred people in some hotel exhibit room.  That once again demonstrated to me that the enthusiasm gap between the parties is MASSIVE.  If it ends up Obama v. McCain, I don't see that enthusaism gap waning.  That simple fact may well be enough to carry Obama to victory in November.

And Jon, you're absolutely right.  Obama really was on tonight.  I keep waiting for him to show some sign of being ground down by the crushing pace of the campaign, but he almost seems to be getting stronger as we move further along.  Simply astounding.

Nice to see something written about Bill Clinton that wasn't mean spirited Jonathon. Maybe the historical revisionism of his excellent record will begin to wane - but not yet, I know.  

Obama destroyed - the rationale for a McCain presidency went out the window.  LOVE the "Obamicans" line.  I know several Obamicans.  But then I'm a kool-aid drinker, out and proud.

Just look at the difference in numbers of voters between the parties - did 50% more Democrats show up to vote yesterday than Republicans, or am I readng the numbers incorrectly?  

and what about the contrast to Hilary's concession speech. Oh did I say concession? I meant completely ignore Virginia, DC and Maryland , Texas is all that matters speech. The one where she yelled her head off for the first 5 minutes (Hillary, you had a microphone in your hand) When it became evident she would be so classless as to not mention the results CNN and Fox should have just cut away from her instead of giving her the free media. That was Hillary's worst speech.

Dunno, Blackie.  I thought the speech was obnoxious, personally, but she did a good job completely recasting her campaign into one of economic populism.  And she sold it decently, anyway.

I'm 67, I grew up in Virginia where my parents were staunch Republicans. The first time I voted it was for Nixon because all my college friends were  "Young Republicans." I never thought I would see this glorious day. I've changed - but my home state has changed even more.

I really hate to say this, and you all will probably throw me under the bus for this. It's probably sexist in some way. But the yelling portions of Hillary's speeches remind me of the Martians from "Mars Attacks!" That chirping noise they made. It was the only sound they made.

"Mehhh! Mehhh! Mehhh! Mehhh!"

datacore.sciflicks.com/.../mars_attacks_bold_talk.wav

I'm a horrible person.

bone, you mean you agree with the part about making the minimum wage $250 an hour (I know chump change for Hillary). There is economic populism but there is also outright pandering. $9.50 an hour minimum wage? Yeah, then say goodbye to what is left of our manufacturing base. That is fine in NYC but insane in much of the rest of the US. There are better ways to address poverty, such as expanding the EITC downwards to include part time working mothers whose income is too low to benefit much from it.

But substance aside, she was emotionally all over the place, from yelling to being cheerful to looking like she were going to cry, I wouldn't have been surprised if she didn't wail "why don't you love me?!" And then to have it followed by Obama. What a disaster.

I agree with Brent. My older son and I were watching CNN and they stayed with Obama for quite some time, capturing the rising wave of stadium enthusiasm, then in what turned out to be a brutal breakaway cut, went straight to McCain. The contrast was naked. Not only is McCain a dull speaker...my friends seems to be the extent of his rhetorical flourish...the Old Man seems to be running against hope. That tortured line about platitudes is hardly going to rally the masses.

John McCain is a decent man and among the sorry lot of GOP Stepford candidates, he rises to the top of that rather low pile. However, pace the sour Wieseltier and his unstated preference for 100 year John, Obama has the potential to truly pound McCain in the fall election. And I sense that the GOP knows this.

I don't know, VC, her voice doesn't bother me. She's a lot less unpleasant to listen to than a lot of men politicians, especially here in the Old Dominion! I'd take Hillary over Dubya or Felix or Romney any day.

What bothers me is her very theatrical one-arm-out-to-the-side queen gesture. (I mean that literally: that's exactly how the Queen Beatrix addressed the crowd when I saw her speak in Amsterdam.) She performs that arm gesture with the stiff precision of a high school drama geek who's practiced in front of a mirror at home two hours a night for a month. It reinforces the Shatneresque quality of her vocal delivery ("And IIIIIII know that weeeeee") and makes her look like an overacting fake. Also puts me in mind of her husband, who tended to oversell when telling a lie. In that context, her overacting makes her look dishonest, too, though I know I shouldn't hold his particular bluffing "tell" against her.

Can we please, please, please stop having articles written about how articulate this guy is? So freaking what? So he is born with a silver spoon in his mouth.  So what? What are his substantive accomplishments in real life? He's a stinking lawyer, he damned well better be able to speak.  

I'd prefer someone like Giuliani who can't really speak but has 1) vanquished the mob 2) cleaned up Gotham city 3) got rid of the window washers 4) graffiti 5) removed corruption in the unions, convention centers, garbage and construction industry 6) kept NY calm after 9/11.  What the hell has Osama done? Voted "present" at the majority of his Senate votes for his 1.1 years in office (the last year doesn't count given that he's been stumping since he got elected) ?

McCain had better start scheduling his primary-night speeches before Obama's.  Topped off by his evident campaign against hope as alluded to by thejauntyboulevardier, he sounded petulant, cranky, tired and old.  It's as if he were offering himself up as Exhibit A of exactly the kind of cynic Obama was inveighing against.  

jwl, classy as always. how clever of you to say Osama for Obama, why it never occured to me before. and that silver spoon in his mouth line, we all know it means to be born rich (which he wasn't) is brilliant in its misdirection.

Guiliani is done, wandering around halfdressed through times square which is  your habit is not likely to bring him back.

I think you mean he is silver tongued.  As Ricky Schroeder or George Bush could tell you, being born with a silver spoon in your mouth means that you are born into a wealthy family.

Sigh...

First off, the "present" was in the Illinois Stathouse, where it is a legislative tactic.  Not in the US Senate.  Nor was it the majority of the time.  I know your part is a wreck, but one should try getting smears at least partially correct before slinging them.  I know that means "reading things" or "using your brain to think" rather than just listening to Rush, but you should give it a whirl.   It is fun, sometimes.

And I love- love!- how "cleaning up graffiti" is something you listed as Guliani's qualifications for the Presidency.   That's what we need in a time of war!   Yes- a thin-skinned, vindictive and petty little man whose personal failings led him to have the emergency center in the World Trade Towers so it was closer to his misteress' house is the kind of leadership we desire.  

Obama was President of Harvard Law Review, a highly successful community organizer and a talented legislator.   Say of that what you will, but don't keep repeating the same canard that he hasn't done anything in his life.

And it is a scientific fact that every time one says "Osama" one gets dumber and dumber.  

Thanks for the shout out, Cookie.  (Yes, old habits die hard.)  Last night, seeing Obama and McCain back to back, I also had that feeling for the first time that Obama might really pound McCain in November.  Wishful thinking?  Maybe.  But you heard it here first.

boneill

And I love....love....how we need a new health care system and higher minimum wages in a time of war.  Don't worry.  If Osama's elected, there won't be a war.  We'll be outta there in a week.  Iraq will fester for 5 years without incident until one day we realize that all the terrorist training camps like Hezbollah have relocated there.  Not to mention that it has become an uber-Lebanon, a proxy for Syria and Iraq.  Except one with massive quantities of oil.  This is the defining battle of our generation and you would all vote for a man who would sacrifice future security for temporary reprieve from war.

Woo Hoo.  Hold the press.  President of Harvard Law Review and a community organizer.  That makes him uniquely qualified to lead this country.  Politics is the one quasi-science where past data is completely eliminated; you can clean up the town, do the impossible and govern NYC and you're a petty little man that did nothing.  You're not worthy to hold his jock strap.

According to a recent New Yorker piece, Obama is a not-too-shabby poker player. When it comes to policy, he can have his ace and play it, too.

Obama from the bully pulpit will reach, convince, and motivate the greatest number of stakeholders (i.e., somebody's constituents) since Ronald Reagan. Imagine you're a congressman opposing, say, Obama's health care plan. Have fun explaining why to a townhall meeting full of your district's disgruntled voters the day after Obama's filled their ears with his plan. Who wins that debate? Care to double down? Obama sees your health care and raises you Social Security.

Members of Congress can substitute any number of issues for "health care" and they'll still need to send out for more folding chairs when all the folks show up to call them on the carpet, whatever they did, the poor bastards.

I thought the speech in Virginia a couple of days earlier was tighter. This one sounded a bit like offering all things to all people. Maybe the recent Brooks NYT column about the difficulties a Dem president will have reconciling promises w/ budget realities had its effect.

  God, we sound like Deadheads arguing which "Sugar Magnolia" was best...

jwl2672:

Wow, still pining for Rudy?  Perhaps we should give him his due for picking up the trash, but what has he done lately (i.e. since he was mayor 7 years ago) that is remotely presidential, beyond being GWB's echo?  Fox New's annointed candidate could not even run a campaign to compete with the snoozer Huckablaster Fred Thompson, even with an entire news network in his pocket calling him "America's mayor" at every turn.  I am not sure his complete misread of the American electorate, and his failure to run an even modestly competitive campaign, is evidence of Presidential leadership ability.

I am not sure Obama is the best public speaker I have ever heard, but he is very, very good (Bill Clinton can still give anyone a run for their money, but, ummm, yeah).  It is sadly novel to see a presidential candidate be so popular while actually asking people to DO something for the collective good, apart from shopping during war time, and at the same be critiqued for precisely this quality.  Would we like to see the slacker generation keep on slacking?  I also really like how destabalizing Obama is to the mass media, since he blurs so many distinctions and shows how truly tired and beaten the current political and media establishment have become.  

Williamyard:

Well how about the Congressmen opposing Bush's tax refund checks? How does he explain that to his constituents? Apparently pretty damned easily.  Heck, as a New Yorker, I dislike a lot of things my democratic senator, congresswoman, etc. do but what can I do about it? I didn't vote for them.

adsprung,

I heard them do it at Winterland in, I think, '72, and it was mighty tectonic, IIRC.

But the best version was from "American Beauty," which I first heard on Gwen's turntable at the house she shared with a couple other GWU sophomores in the D.C. 'burbs the year before. She had just told me it was over between us, so she played "American Beauty" out of compassion, much as Alan Arkin says, "There, there" to the bombardier in "Catch 22" as he covers him with a billowing parachute after discovering the latter's eviscerated intestines fleeing their abdominal prison.

jwl,

My point was that, whatever one thinks of Obama's policies, do not discount his ability to sway voters.

It's neither an exact science nor an infallible skill, but great oratory can overcome a lot. I heard Reagan say plenty of things I disagreed with but I admired how he said them and wasn' t surprised in the least when his policies either became law or pulled the country in their direction.  More than once he even changed my mind, too--never an easy accomplishment.

Jwl- you are right.  I have never run a major city.  I feel incredibly burned right now. You totally called me out on it.  And, for the record, I wouldn't particularily want to carry Rudy's jock- I think it would be all fungal and covered in sweat and anger.   Not my cup of tea.

Now, more substance- again, if you think Obama is going to have all the troops out after a week you are either allowing yourself to be decieved by Rush or don't care to know anything.   And you asked if he had done anything substantive, and I answered.   But one would daresay that doing a decent job of running a big city does not always translate into running a much bigger country.  Rudy is a glib and shallow man, who hadn't bothered to learn the difference between Sunnis and Shi'ites.  His "expertise on terrorism" comes from having been the mayor on 9/11 and doing a good job that day.   Sure, one of the reasons so many rescue workers died is because he underfunded the communication equipment and put the fucking headquarters into the one place that had already been attacked, against the advice of everyone, so it could be within walking distance of Ms Nathan's home, but what is a little blood of firefighters to a man who cleaned up graffiti and Times Square?  Hm?  He understands terrorism.  Of course.

Moving on.  Iraq is NOT a proxy for Syria.  The one thing Syria dreads the most is an unstable Iraq.  OK?  THe rise of al-Qaeda is not good for them, and as much as they want Hezbollah to keep Lebanon a dangerous place for anti-Syrian politicians, they don't want it to get too strong.   Here is some quick history.

The Asad clan is part of a Shi'ite branch called the Alawites.  They are a minority of a minorty, even in Syria.   They are generally distrusted, even by Shi'ites, and loathed by Sunnis.  It was only through the evil genius of old man Asad that they clawed out of their hole (I urge you to visit Latakia if you want to see from where the Alawites sprung.  Dingy town, spruced up a little.  Pretty harbor though.  Have you been?).   As such, they are terrififed of al-Qaeda and any militancy.  Their relationship with these groups is one of convenience, but they are more scared of them then we are, and rightfully so.   Look up what the old man did the the Borhterhood in Hama.  That is their relationship.

I know spouting out things like "Syria" and "proxy" sounds good, but honestly- just saying things doesn't make it true.

The only improvement I would offer on Obama's words is this:  He should not have ended his excellent rant about McCain's Iraq position with the words "reason enough not to give him four years in the White House"; he should have said, and should always say, ""reason enough not to give him four more years in the White House."  Just another way of bringing home the message that a vote for McCain is a vote for continuing the failed Bush agenda.  

Those of you who have followed my primary night entries know that I've consistently urged Barack