The President has one opportunity each year to address all of Congress and the American people at the same time. But it is an almost impossible situation. This vast audience is made up of every ideology and opinion imaginable. And each person is hearing what he or she wants to hear. Changing minds is very unlikely.
Even so, on the whole Obama’s grade should be at least a B-plus, maybe even an A-minus. It was a good speech. But could it have been better? Or is there a better approach?
I have written in the past that these speeches end up containing far too much information. Half way through many of us are already wondering how all this will be financed, or thinking that there is simply no way to get all this accomplished. But presidents somehow still feel compelled to address every domestic and foreign policy issue that comes to mind.
This time the president began by seeming to indicate he would focus on a few themes instead of a long list of issues. I was hopeful. But then he proceeded to work his way through the same long list.
There were several moments when he sounded like he was about to conclude. But alas, more issues. There was one moment about ten minutes before he finally did conclude when he got very emotional and recommitted himself to continue to champion his “save the middle class” cause. This sounded like it came straight “from the heart,” was very sincere, and extremely convincing.
Was he finally going to step up and become the compelling full-of-passion leader that many people think he is capable of being? But then he quieted down… and reviewed more issues.
At best, I think these state of the union speeches are opportunities for presidents to activate their earned bully pulpit and simply restate precisely what they believe in with as much passion as possible. They would do better to avoid getting bogged down in long lists of problems. Rather this is an ideal opportunity to rally the well-intentioned troops both inside and outside Congress around a strong vision, and to do it with all the self-confidence they can muster.
The simple goal here would be to fire-up those who are already followers and to ask them to get out there and help convert the undecided. Then it might be possible through follow-up speeches and events to build an impressive momentum that overwhelms the opposition’s negative approach.
Long lists of issues tend to lead to confusion about what might be possible to accomplish. But rallying people around a compelling bold and exciting big idea can feel satisfying. And when people feel confident in a leader they tend to think less about problems. Rather they take comfort in thinking they are in competent hands and everything will eventually be alright.
Larry D. Lauer 