Audio from Dodd Event [4/22/07 Keene NH]

Reversed Reaction (0.00 / 0)

I had the reversed reaction that you did. I thought Dodd did awful with the speech and he did much better speaking extemporaneously afterward.

I agreed with everything he said in the speech, but I had real difficulty with his delivery of the speech.  He read it; he read it too fast, and he did not read it very well. He was almost like he was mailing it in (which may have been the case because he had tickets to the Red Sox game that night). 

I thought he was his best speaking extemporaneously about his family and trying to answer those questions that he got from the audience.  The first four questions he got:

1) The first lady mentioned that she wanted college and universal healthcare for everyone, but how was he going to pay for what she wanted?
2) Someone, who was obviously a veteran (because he looked like one and he mentioned that the last two presidents were "draft dodgers"), asked whether Dodd was going to be a "warrior" president?
3) A conspiracy theorist asked if Dodd truly believed that the fuel from the airplanes on 9/11 collapsed the twin towers?
4) And some lady made a rambling statement about her beliefs in general and then eventually asked him "Was the embassy that the US was building in Baghdad green?"

Those are tough questions to answer and still make the overall points you want to make. He did the best he could.

Finally at the end someone asked a decent question about his thoughts on education and whether it would be one of his top priorities and he was able to give his best answer.

---

by: gradysdad @ Tue Apr 24, 2007 at 07:15:51 AM CDT

Interesting, made me think twice (0.00 / 0)

I admit: maybe his answers were limited by the questions. How do you answer a question about hemp, when what you want to say is I've got bigger fish to fry here, and the 9/11 truth stuff is enough to depress anyone. The warrior question was also asked of Oliphant at the Mason lecture: it's a set question from a guy that's everywhere.

As I said, in talking to the reporters afterwards, he gave great answers, so the long rambles in the Q & A were confusing to me.

You've motivated me to take another look at those -- Maybe I'll put some Q & A up.

I'd disagree on the speech, though: yes, he did look down a lot and READ, but I thought he sounded forceful and focussed while still going into a level of policy detail. At least that was my initial impression. I found it, like I said, relaxing, and I found the speed refreshing. In general I think candidates this time round wander too much, speak too slow, and invade my personal space a little too much.

---

by: Mike Caulfield @ Tue Apr 24, 2007 at 17:06:14 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Relaxing (0.00 / 0)

I understand when you say relaxing. I felt that too. Not sure why.

However, I had a hard time understanding what he was saying because he was speaking so fast so at a certain point I tuned out.

---

by: gradysdad @ Tue Apr 24, 2007 at 18:57:11 PM CDT

[ Parent ]