Where’s the Vision? – The Second Presidential Debate

First thoughts – they both came to play. President Obama and Governor Romney were contentious, confrontive, strong, and articulate. If you favored one guy, he won.

But the audience lost.

 

 

Messaging

So many conflicting stories. Even the fact checkers are conflicted. I guess the best offense is a good defense. So we won’t talk specific issues here, but behavior, because as usual, Behavior Reigns.

Rising above the issues and arguments – there were so many opportunities to cast a vision. To lift the audience up. Neither candidate took the opportunity. In our communications coaching we always urge our clients to think BENEFITS – what’s in it for the listener. Both Obama and Romney kept it all about THEM. In different ways…

 

Obama

He recovered from the first debate. More energy, combative and interruptive where appropriate. (And maybe where not appropriate for a President.)

On the positives, several times he had rhetorical flourishes that were typical in his 2008 campaign. He moved around well, had good eye contact with Moderator Candy Crowley. And he reviewed the VP Debate split screen when sitting and listening as he did not pull a “Biden” by smirking and eye rolling when Romney was speaking (though there were a couple of ‘slow blinks.’)

On the negative side, his cadence often gets in the way of believability. Too often we feel it is a ‘speech’ rather than the authentic thoughts and feelings of a man – our President. And when you add to that the tilt of his serious face – those who dislike him would say arrogance – we don’t feel the likability that the polls show.

 

Romney

He continued his behavioral performance from the first debate – confident and assured in manner and voice.

On the positives, he often used the ‘rule of three,’ and had a great command of facts and figures. He often said “We don’t have to settle for this” and “We don’t have to live like this.” Romney again held himself like a CEO, and the Town Hall format gave him a chance to ‘stride’ without being stiff and jerky, as he often is. Many said he wouldn’t relate in the Town Hall setting, but he did just fine with that, as did Obama.

On the negative side, Romney asked direct questions of Obama rather than making statements AT Obama. When we rehearse executives in Q&A, we advise ending on a positive statement of your Point Of View, rather than an open ended question at an adversary. This happened several times, and Romney looked defensive as Obama parried him – and particularly rattled with the Benghazi question at the end, where Romney lost a big opportunity to make an important point. (I expect we’ll hear more on this in the days to come.)

 

So what…

No clear winner here, and the beat goes on. This will be a tight race to the wire, with only a sliver of folks undecided. There will be two factors that will sway those undecided:

  1. Who they believe – so much mud slinging and accusations of lying on both sides make trust and believability a tough issue. And behavior and likability will go a long way in determining that.
  2. A mis-step – if either Obama or Romney is caught in a real untruth or situation that rises above the cacophony of charges and countercharges, that could trump behavior.

 

So next weeks debate could be telling – we’ll see.

Behavior Reigns – Lessons from the Debate Front

“We don’t ‘know’ our presidents. We imagine them. We watch them intermittently and from afar, inferring from only a relatively few gestures and reactions what kind of people they are and whether they should be in charge. Much depends on our intuition and their ability at a handful of opportune … Continue reading

Starbucks & the lowest common denominator

Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz has been making rounds in the media lately, discussing how his success with reinvigorating Starbucks could relate to turning around the US economy. On Piers Morgan Wednesday night, he made a particularly interesting point about drilling down to the lowest common denominator when communicating a message … Continue reading

Top Ten Best (and Worst) Communicators of 2009

The Top Ten Best Communicators of 2009 1. Sully Sullenberger Capt. Chesley “Sully” Sullenberger is not just the hero who brilliantly landed his airplane on the Hudson River, he is a bona fide great communicator. He is humble yet has a message. He inspires yet speaks sparingly. I remember eagerly … Continue reading

Obama, Teleprompters and Authenticity

President Obama is no longer the premier communicator – which is remarkable as he was elected largely because of his speaking ability. I even named him as #1 in my Top Ten Communicators of 2006. It’s not about the words – he does have very good speech writers – it’s … Continue reading

The Teleprompter Strikes Again – A Tale of Two Leaders

Kelly Decker here – guest blogging today. I’m a relatively new fan of Shel Holtz’s blog, arriving there from somewhere the Twittersphere. Shel is a PR guru and writes extensively on communications and technology. Over the past week, he’s been blogging on the Dominos debacle that you’ve probably seen, or, … Continue reading

Interview on Speaking, Obama and Twitter

Good friend and communicator Chris Spagnuolo has a great blog called Edgehopper (that’s his frog above) – and he was nice enough to interview me. In case you missed it: Ten Questions with Bert Decker (1) In your book “You’ve Got to Be Believed to Be Heard” you refer to … Continue reading

Obama and the Teleprompter

First, Barack Obama is the probable nominee because he is a great communicator. In oratory and rhetoric. I even named him the Top Communicator of 2006, and look where speaking got him! But why doesn’t he learn to use the teleprompter well? A mystery. In an earlier post I was … Continue reading

Getting Into The Zone

 ”Communications is about self-control and staying on message. But it’s also about letting go…” Although I slightly altered the opening quote of David Ignatius of The Washington Post – since he used ‘Politics’ instead of ‘Communications’ -  his great article is really about communications, not politics. There is some great … Continue reading