What to Watch for in Candidate Speeches

As we head into the final sprint of the presidential election, we will hear, read, hear about and read about hundreds of speeches – some by the candidates themselves, others by surrogates.

As we hear or read these “We’re great – the other guys are bums” speeches, we need to look for certain elements – clues, if you will – which indicate whether or not one team or another has the desire, ideas, ability and fortitude to turn our country around - to fix its many ills. Further, we need to be particularly focused on any cues they provide regarding their basic philosophy of government and governing. So what are these elements – clues – cues?
1. Is the focus of their speeches what they will do or is it what is wrong with the other guy?

2. Are they telling us anything we would rather not hear or are they pandering to us at every opportunity?

3. Are they taking or deflecting any personal or party responsibility for our problems?

4. Do they offer solutions – specifics – or excuses?

5. Are most of their answers to our problems found outside or inside of our national government?

6. Do they offer real, workable solutions for our national debt? For our moribund economy? For near depression-level unemployment? For millions of people without healthcare? For the rescue of Social Security and Medicare? For a failing public school system? And for the many other problems that beset our country? Or are they trading in vagaries and demagoguery?

7. Are they willing to acknowledge that our nation is indeed engaged in a great culture: a war of liberty vs. license, decency vs. vulgarity, master of one’s fate vs. victim, hard working success vs. lazy class envy, government by the people vs. government over the people, and, most importantly, God-centered vs. Godlessness? Or are they downplaying or ignoring it altogether?

8. Do they espouse policies and programs that result in lives independent of or dependent on the government?

9. Are they willing to admit their mistakes - specifically? Or do they deflect, dissemble or deny?

10. Are they willing to acknowledge that the other party has some things right, has some good ideas, deserves some credit? Or do they reflexively believe their party is right on every issue and in all respects and the other party is evil incarnate?

Friends, I suggest that the team whose views and behavior fall most often on the front side of the “or” in these ten questions is the team we need in the White House. What do you think?