Is donald trump an eloquent speaker – quora grade 9 electricity unit test

Look, having nuclear—my uncle was a great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at MIT; good genes, very good genes, OK, very smart, the Wharton School of Finance, very good, very smart—you know, if you’re a conservative Republican, if I were a liberal, if, like, OK, if I ran as a liberal Democrat, they would say I’m one of the smartest people anywhere in the world—it’s true!—but when you’re a conservative Republican they try—oh, do they do a number—that’s why I always start off: Went to Wharton, was a good student, went there, went there, did this, built a fortune—you know I have to give my like credentials all the time, because we’re a little disadvantaged—but you look at the nuclear deal, the thing that really bothers me—it would have been so easy, and it’s not as important as these lives are (nuclear is powerful; my uncle explained that to me many, many years ago, the power and that was 35 years ago; he would explain the power of what’s going to happen and he was right—who would have thought?), but when you look at what’s going on with the four prisoners—now it used to be three, now it’s four—but when it was three and even now, I would have said it’s all in the messenger; fellas, and it is fellas because, you know, they don’t, they haven’t figured that the women are smarter right now than the men, so, you know, it’s gonna take them about another 150 years—but the Persians are great negotiators, the Iranians are great negotiators, so, and they, they just killed, they just killed us.—Donald J. Trump

This, in fact, is our new American moment. There has never been a better time to start living the American dream. So to every citizen watching at home tonight, no matter where you have been or where you have come from, this is your time. If you work hard, if you believe in yourself, if you believe in America, then you can dream anything, be anything. And together, we can achieve absolutely anything.

Tonight I want to talk about what kind of future we are going to have, and what kind of a nation we are going to be. All of us, together, as one team, one people, and one American family, can do anything. We all share the same home, the same heart, the same destiny, and the same great American flag.

Trump is fairly competent in interviews, and when talking one on one, or even answering questions in front of a crowd, unless he starts story-telling. Whenever Trump starts story telling, he rambles and has these illogical trains of thought leading to some bizarre conclusion most people would never reach.

In other words, Trump is highly inconsistent. By no stretch of the imagination is he eloquent in speeches, but he is competent in interview situations, and answering questions—are the answers themselves truthful? Often, no. However, he doesn’t sound like a copy pasta.

With teleprompter he is as good as anyone, but that is not a measure of eloquence. Without a teleprompter, his speech has two noticeable flaws. He appears to be rambling. It is good that he hits the same points in every speech: dishonest media; border security; peace through strength; jobs returning to America, the military and the veterans, etc, — but there must be a way to give each speech a particular focus, and often that focus is either not there or is diluted. If you like him, you enjoy every moment, but if you don’t, you think he was just ranting and it took too long.

The second flaw is the limited palette of adjectives. He overuses words like “beautiful” (beautiful tax cut, beautiful wall…) or “tremendous” or “biggest in history”. That, again, to one inclined to criticize him, — seems like bragging. Sometimes, the lack of polish creeps in when the phrasing was supposed to be memorable and the moment pivotal:

However, his rhetorical skills don’t matter, because he is talking like a regular guy: he is a developer from Queens, comfortable with himself, speaking with American middle-class simplicity. The very awkwardness of his delivery makes him lovable because it makes him stand apart from the pharaonic class of politicians that this country has had enough of.

Through a couple centuries of research, we have discovered what good nutrition looks like. True, we have made some mistakes, but by and large we know that lots of vegetables and fruits, a decent amount of protein, vitamins, minerals, and trace elements are necessary to make up good, long-term nutrition for human beings.

Meanwhile, other researchers have discovered that salt, sugar, fat, and various flavours can induce people to eat things which otherwise are not particularly good for them. These elements were originally difficult to come by in the wild, and necessary or at least pleasurable whenever we found them. Salt, for instance, can be rare or difficult to find in some parts of the world. Sugar, a high energy component of our diet, can be very useful in situations where we might need quick, compact energy. And fat, very dense and storable source of heat energy, would also be very valuable.

However, a diet of salt, sugar, fat, (and artificial flavours which in the wild would signify good food), can be very very bad for us. It carries all the markers which would signify valuable parts of the diet, but you cannot have a diet made up only of markers and not the things those markers were meant to signal.

I see President Trump’s speaking style as being made up of salt, sugar, fat, and artificial flavors. He does not even talk about nutrition. Instead his language, like preformed chips or chicken nuggets, is chaotic on purpose-it is merely a delivery method for the marker-flavours that will involve his audience.

Eloquence, in the sense that it is normally considered, isn’t really much of a draw to crowds and political success as we would’ve hoped. Similarly, well formed arguments and discussions based on factual, proven underpinnings are not the basis of Oscar winning movies and crowded theaters.

The first option is describing a persuasive or charismatic speaker. I have heard people who met him describe him that way, which implies to me that he has a better personal presence than his television persona. He doesn’t persuade me to do anything but dislike him, unfortunately.

Another way of looking at it is efficient and effective use of language, which I have to say he does not employ. He has been seen to go into free association mid speech and get lost, that’s not something that happens to people who are skilled speakers. His primary appeal seems to be his blunt approach. He gives off a sense that he doesn’t care what people think, these are just his opinions. I thought he was blunt until he received the nomination, then I realized that his stances change with public approval, and his only lack of concern is with what liberals think of him. Even that is an oversimplification, because he wants to anger liberals. That is precisely what he and his base share.

I don’t actually think he’s lacking in the education or ability to speak better. I believe he doesn’t need to in order to rally his base, and therefor puts in little effort to crafting a public image. He is capable of hiring good speech writers, and possibly delivering the speech well. We’ll never know, because that isn’t how he delivers speeches.