Yes, it was exciting for us political types to play Al Roker and figure out the potential impact of Gustav on the campaign. Yes, riffing on the limits of abstinence-only sex education was diverting. And, Lord knows, it was eye-opening to watch Republican delegates applaud as Joe Lieberman excoriated Republican corruption and corporate cheats while praising Bill Clinton. Those weren't balloons descending from the Xcel Center's roof; those were pigs flying.
But it may be worth remembering that the most important business of this convention will come Thursday night, when John McCain delivers his acceptance speech. It's the one time when voters, 20 million or 30 million or 40 million of them, will listen to a potential president—one of two—make an extended case for his election, interrupted only by the rapturous cheers of his supporters.
So what makes for a successful acceptance speech? The lazy answer is to say, "One that's given by the candidate who wins." But this is simplistic—and not always right. John Kennedy's 1960 acceptance speech, while famous for a slogan—"we stand today at the edge of a new frontier"—helped convince Richard Nixon that he could out-debate JFK. Gerald Ford's 1976 acceptance speech, in which he became the first incumbent president to challenge his opponent to debates, was highly effective, even though Ford's comeback fell short.
The better measure, I think, is whether an acceptance speech persuades the audience at home to see the candidate the way he and his campaign want to be seen. A few examples suggest how and why some candidates' succeed in this effort—and where John McCain might be going Thursday night.
In 1980, Ronald Reagan came to the nomination facing an electorate that had serious doubts about his qualifications and his seriousness. He'd been governor of the largest state in the union for eight years, but the public still saw him as an actor and as an ideologue a little too eager to undo the social safety net and to confront the Soviet Union. (As a Gerald Ford 1976 primary ad put it: "Gov. Reagan couldn't start a war; President Reagan could.")
So Reagan's speech blended reassurance with lots of specifics. There was no personal history, no homey anecdotes of growing up in small-town America. Instead, he offered a mix of economic specifics and reassurance. At times, it often sounded like an economics lecture at the Heritage Foundation:
I've long advocated a 30 percent reduction in income tax rates over a period of three years. … Within the context of economic conditions and appropriate budget priorities during each fiscal year of my presidency, I would strive to go further. This would include improvement in business depreciation taxes. … We will also work to reduce the cost of government as a percentage of our gross national product.
On the reassurance front, there were gestures toward the afflicted ("We have to move ahead, but we're not going to leave anyone behind") and more than a hint of the famous debate closer he would use against Carter that fall: "No American should vote until he or she has asked, 'Is the United States stronger and more respected now than it was three and a half years ago? Is the world a safer place in which we live?' "
And, like the former Democrat he was, he twice invoked words from Franklin D. Roosevelt—Roosevelt's "rendezvous with destiny" phrase from 1936 and his promises to lessen the size of the federal government. (It was as unlikely a move in 1980 as was Joe Lieberman's praise of Bill Clinton Tuesday night.)
For George H.W. Bush in 1988, the challenge was very different. His dilemma was that he was seen, as most vice presidents are, as a vestigial appendage of the president; worse, he was seen as a political version of Thurston Howell III, a candidate for Upper Class Twit of the Year. While the speech is best known for the "Read my lips. No new taxes" line that helped elect him (and then unelect him four years later), the key to the speech is how writer Peggy Noonan dealt with both of those liabilities. After praising Reagan, Bush said:
But now you must see me for what I am: the Republican candidate for president of the United States. And now I turn to the American people to share my hopes and intentions and why and where I wish to lead.
And later, in a risky act of bravado, Bush said:
I know that what it all comes down to, this election—what it all comes down to, after all the shouting and the cheers, is the man at the desk. And who should sit at that desk. My friends, I am that man.
TODAY IN SLATE
Don’t Worry, Obama Isn’t Sending U.S. Troops to Fight ISIS
But the next president might.
IOS 8 Comes Out Today. Do Not Put It on Your iPhone 4S.
Why Greenland’s “Dark Snow” Should Worry You
How Much Should You Loathe NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell?
Here are the facts.
Three Talented Actresses in Three Terrible New Shows
The Human Need to Find Connections in Everything
It’s the source of creativity and delusions. It can harm us more than it helps us.
- German Fraud Investigator Says Anonymous Client Will Pay $30 Million for Info on MH17 Shootdown
- A Brief Reminder That Not Everything in the World is Terrible
- How Many Countries Were Created Through Secession Votes?
- Gun-Control Group Investigates 81 People Looking for Guns Online, Finds Eight Have Criminal Records
More Than Scottish Pride
Scotland’s referendum isn’t about nationalism. It’s about a system that failed, and a new generation looking to take a chance on itself.