The Best?

In a political campaign, we are subjected to a lot of speeches and debates from candidates- perhaps slightly more than during a non-election year. It would seem reasonable to assume that candidates for elective office would be among the more accomplished speakers and communicators. Even if you thought that was not automatically true, particularly with your lower offices such as the state legislature, you would probably think it was true for presidential candidates, who have either won a whole string of elections or succeeded in some other arena where speaking is key.

It's not true, lamentably. This aggravates me tremendously. I have been in Toastmasters for several years now, and while I don't claim to be the champion speaker of the world, I will say I have improved a good amount, and I see that in speakers around me as well. People start out terrified to speak, and they not only lose that fear, they become competent and even excellent given time and dedication. Even in their first tentative steps, however, new members of Toastmasters are way ahead of our president and his rival in some respects.

Debating is no easy thing, there's no doubt about it. You must persuade an audience while fending off a competitor, and this is obviously more involved than a mere speech that goes unchallenged by an interlocutor. What should be easy in either case, though, are things as elementary as staying on time. When you watch a debate, they're supposed to give their answers and rebuttals within an allotted time. Almost without exception, they shamelessly exceed that, and I don't think it does them any favors to do so. A novice Toastmaster could do better, and looks better as a result.

A Toastmaster would have more regard for their fellows and for the system than to repeatedly derail the proceedings with interruptions and other clear violations of the rules. They would, in my experience, have more sense than to do that. It just never pays to push the boundaries, I don't think. Even when you can get away with it in the moment, you look bad for having done so. You look weak if you fail to wrest control from the designated speaker, and you look like a bullying child if you do manage it,

It's a real downer to think that our alleged best and bright, smart and able though they may be, are such poor speakers as to commit these offenses I have described. I don't claim that the superior speakers I know of would be better leaders, but given the opportunity I'm certain that they could persuade a fair amount of people that they would be. I'm just dismayed to think of what it means for us that it doesn't matter whether the candidates are any better of communicators than they are.