In my book, The Power of the Pitch: Transform Yourself into a Persuasive Presenter and Win More Business, I define a pitch as anytime you speak with the intent to persuade. In this blog, I will comment on the important pitches of the day, including debates, interviews and speeches on television and radio as well as live appearances. I'll analyze not only the presenter's content, but his or her delivery in an effort to provide you with fresh insight as well as lessons that you can apply to your own pitches. So, stay tuned. There is no shortage of opportunities worthy of my commentary.

President Barak Obama missed an important opportunity to build hope for the success of his economic program this evening on CBS’s 60 Minutes program.  With the economy in a recession that could spiral down into a full blown depression, the American people are looking for assurance from the President that the steps that the administration and the Federal Reserve are taking will work.  Instead we saw a man who appeared uncertain, wishy-washy and light hearted.  

Asked by Steve Croft if he thought that the people on Wall Street believed in him, Obama skirted the question.  He began with, “Part of my job is to communicate to them “look, I believe in the market, I believe in financial innovation and I believe in success and that I want them to do well” and then went on to say that the pay on Wall Street is out of balance.  He failed to answer the question in an inspiring manner.  For instance, he might have said, “There are some on Wall Street who have concerns.  And over the next days and weeks my administration and I will be taking steps to ensure that Wall Street understands that the plans that we putting will place will take us out of the recession and create a period of tremendous growth in the country.”

Asked who will work for the banks and investment firms if their investment professionals are limited to bonuses of $250,000, the President said that these people should go to North Dakota, Iowa or Arkansas, where people would be thrilled to earn $75,000. This type of condescending statement doesn’t add credence to his earlier statement that he “believes in success” and will only further the schism between him and Wall Street.

A number of times during the interview, Obama laughed inappropriately and gave the appearance that his was making light of the economic situation.  Asked by Croft why he was laughing about the predicament of the automobile industry, Obama explained it as “gallows humor.”

Furthering the perception that the President lacked conviction, were the number of non-positive words that he use liberally throughout the interview:

·         “uh” - 122 times

·         “I think” – 11 times

·         “I tried” – 4 times

Think about how Winston Churchill (“We will not surrender”), Franklin Delano Roosevelt (“The only thing we have to fear is fear itself”) or Martin Luther King (“We as a people will get to the promise land”) would have spoken.

Lastly, I’d like to see our President sound more Presidential by dropping some his colloquialisms, such as the word “stuff”, as in “He (Geitner) has a lot of stuff on his plate.”  His wife was “planting stuff” in the garden.  When asked about the White House, he described it as “pretty nice digs.”

Here’s how I rate the President’s 60 Minutes interview on the three most important parts of any presentation on a scale of 0 – 10, with 10 being the highest:

·         How he looked:  7. He looked sharp in his navy blue suit, light blue shirt and blue tie. Nice smile, good eye contact.  I’ve taken on point away for his not wearing over the calf socks and therefore exposing his leg as he sat with his legs crossed during the interview. Another two points for the inappropriate laughter.

·         How he sounded:  5. The preponderance of weak words were a killer.

·         What he said:  5. He missed the chance to create hope, and hope is what he need now more than ever.

·         Overall score: 6

As we reflect back on the life of a great man on this Martin Luther King Jr. Day, I’m reminded about what a dynamic speaker this man was.  He had the unparalleled ability to not only powerfully deliver the message, but to choose positive, inspiring words.   

Never once did I hear him utter a “non-positive” word. Non-positive words are neither positive nor negative, they’re somewhere in the middle. Some of the most frequently used non-positives are “think,” “believe” and “feel,” as in “I think I provide excellent service.” That begs the question, do you or don’t you? Other examples of non-positives include “hopefully,” “probably” and “maybe.”

But Martin Luther King Jr. never equivocated. He was never wishy-washy. He was always direct, positive and confident. One of my favorite examples is when he spoke in Birmingham, AL, on the night before his death April 4, 1968. As he finished his rousing speech, he prophetically concluded “I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight that we as a people will get to the promise land.”

Despite the previous five days of social unrest during which 2,500 African Americans were jailed, there appeared to be no doubt in his mind about getting to the promise land. No “I think,” “I believe,” “maybe” or “hopefully,” just a simple, yet profound “we as a people will get to the promise land.”

And now, here we are 41 years later on the eve of the U. S. Presidential Inauguration of the first African American U. S. President.  Martin Luther King Jr.’s words inspired a generation of Americans of all races and, perhaps, a young boy by the name of Barrack Obama.

Caroline Kennedy has attracted significant media attention since declaring herself a candidate to replace Hillary Clinton in the Senate seat once held by her uncle, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.  Never having held or sought public office before, she has shied away from the public stage other than her speeches at the DNC Conventions in 2000 and 2008.  

Now the significant media attention that she has received has given us a good look at Ms. Kennedy as a communicator and the result is painful to observe.  In television and print interviews in December, the perception that she created was one of uncertainty and ambiguity.

During an interview with New York Times reporters on December 27, 2008, she used the expression “you  know” 138 times.  When you use fillers such as “you know” or “uh”, it is a signal to the listener that you are filling your time with meaningless words while you think of what you are going to say next.  The result is that you appear uninformed, nervous or both. 

In the following answer to a question about how serving as a Senator might impact her relationship with her family, she used “you know” seven times:

“I mean, both of us have had a lot of commitments, you know, up till now I think we’ve both put our family first. And my kids are really supportive of this idea, I think they understand that it will make — you know, bring change for them. But you know, again, I think this is, you know, I think he’s someone who’s committed to, you know, education, science education, you know, he makes children’s museums, you know, this is, he —“

Moreover, she comes across as uncertain by using the non-positive expression “I think.”  By saying “I think” she places some doubt in the mind of the listener about her confidence in what she’s saying.  It’s as if she’s saying, I think this is correct, but I’m not positive.  In the above answer she said “I think” four times and 128 during the entire interview.

Click here to read the New York Times interview.  Click her to see a five-minute edit of her 30-minute interview on Manhattan’s local news channel NY1.

Ms. Kennedy’s articulation gaffs likely won’t have a significant impact on her quest for the New York Senate seat, but it will diminish her perception as a communicator.  Ultimately, it will have a negative impact on her effectiveness as a leader.

Do you have fillers and non-positives in your conversations with people?  To find out, tape record yourself and listen carefully to the words you chose.  If you hear fillers and non-positive words, practice eliminating them in everyday conversation.  Just give yourself a mental slap every time you get ready to use one.  Soon you’ll be free of these distracting words and on your way to creating the perception of a confident, positive communicator.    

Lloyd John Ogilvie, Pastor Emeritus of First Presbyterian Church, Hollywood, and former Chaplain, U.S. Senate, delivered a speech last Friday that kept the rapt attention of the two hundred members and guests of the Rotary Club of Los Angeles. Those of us fortunate enough to attend were treated to an inspiring Thanksgiving message delivered by a master communicator.

Avoiding the normal extraneous comments made by most speakers, Ogilvie startled the audience by shouting “You bigot!” as he opened his talk with a humorous story about a man who accosted him because he thought a sign in front of the church read “Presbyterians” instead of “Pedestrians.”

Ogilvie then went on to speak of one of the greatest qualities of life – gratitude. Pointing out that gratitude is the not only the essence of Thanksgiving, it is a way of life. After all, he said, “God created it. We require it. And people never tire of it.” Moreover, Ogilvie pointed out that gratitude produces an attitude of humility. Yet, he cautioned, as important as gratitude is, there are some who thrive on withholding it as a way of controlling others. All that does, said Ogilvie, is create resentment.

As Ogilvie wove stories throughout his 25-minute speech, he held the silenced audience spellbound. His booming voice, a perfect example of the use pace, range and inflection, commanded the full attention of all. He punctuated his points with big, broad gestures. His facial expression was open and friendly as he connected with people in all parts of the room.

Ogilvie closed with the following poem from Annie Johnson Flint, who was crippled and twisted most of her life with arthritis, yet out of her ordeal of protracted pain, she developed a sensitivity to suffering that helped her understand and encourage others who also were suffering.

God hath not promised skies always blue,

Flower-strewn pathways all our lives through;

God hath not promised sun without rain,

Joy without sorrow,

Peace without pain.

God hath not promised smooth roads and wide,

Swift easy travel,

Needing no guide.

He hath not promised we shall not bear

Many a burden, many a care.

But God hath promised strength for the day,

Rest for the labor, light for the way,

Grace for the trials, help from above,

Unfailing sympathy, undying love.

Following the poem, Ogilvie proclaimed “Happy Thanksgiving.” No obligatory, unnecessary “Thank you”, simply the holiday greeting. Bravo! Surely this must be one of the best Thanksgiving messages being given in America today, delivered by a kind man with tremendous communication skills.

The November 18 edition of the Los Angeles Times featured an article entitled “Fires bring mayor’s oration skill to fore.” In the article, the Times pointed out how important it is for the mayor to take the public stage to issue reassuring messages in times of crisis, such as the fires that ravaged Southern California during the past week.

I agree with the Times that a key role of a mayor – actually any leader – is to communicate quickly and frequently during catastrophic times. It sends a message that the leader is in charge and is doing everything possible to remedy the situation.

Being an observer of the charismatic Mayor, I watched his press conference several days ago during which he gave a 58-second update. His laudatory comments notwithstanding, I found his “oration skill” in need of improvement. The issue was his repeated use of the filler word “uh”, which he used 19 times. Here’s how he began: “I’m very uh grateful uh that President Elect uh Barack Obama called last night uh and said that he is uh uh ready, willing and able to do everything he can.” Watch the enitre interview.

Considering that he spoke for 58 seconds, that’s about one “uh” every three seconds. His repeated use of “uh” makes him sound unsure of himself or like he’s grand standing  – or both.

If he were to eliminate fillers from his presentations, Mayor Villaraigosa could become one of the great communicators of our time. He has excellent vocal quality and passion and he looks good on camera. Uh, hopefully someone will uh give him uh the message.

Shortly after the polls closed in California at 8:00 p.m. PST, CNN predicted that Barack Obama would be the next President of the United States.  Moments later, in his home state of Arizona,  John McCain took the stage at a gathering of the party faithful to give a very gracious concession speech and perhaps the best oratory of his entire campaign.  As I watched this man comely, confidently urge us to come together as Americans, I wondered why he hadn’t spoken so convincingly, so presidentially before.

An hour later, Barack Obama appeared on a stage in Chicago’s Grant Park to deliver a brilliant acceptance speech to an estimated crowd of 125,000. He began by congratulating McCain for a hard fought campaign and then thanked his supporters, family, campaign manager, wife, children and deceased mother. “This victory belongs to you, “ he concluded.  

He continued by reminding us that “The road ahead will be long, our climb will be steep, we may not get there in one year or even in one term, but American, I have never been more hopeful than I am tonight that we will get there.” And then, borrowing from Martin Luther King’s speech of April 1968, concluded with “I promise you, we as a people, will get there.”

He urged us to come together as a people to resolve the many challenges facing us today. “Let us summon a new spirit of patriotism, of responsibility, where each of us resolves to pitch in and work harder and look after not only ourselves, but each other.“

Obama continued with a quote from Abraham Lincoln, “We are not enemies but friends. Though passion has strained, it must not break our bonds of affection.” To those who did not vote for him he said, “I need your help and I will be your President, too.”

He cleverly concluded his speech with the plight of a 106 year old African American woman, Ann Nixon Cooper, who cast her vote in Atlanta this morning. When she was born, said Obama, she couldn’t vote because she was a woman and she was black. During her life she witnessed the depression, the bombing of Japan, WWII, the civil injustice of the 60s, the landing of a man on the moon and the fall of the Berlin wall. Through those times, he said, “We were told we can’t and we pressed on with that American creed ‘yes we can’.”  “And this year she touched her finger to a screen and cast her vote. Because after 106 years in America, through the best of times and the darkest of hours, she knows how America can change. Yes, we can.”

He concluded by asking if our children should live to the next century, “What change will they see? What progress will we have made?” “This is our chance to answer that call,” he said. “This is our moment. When people doubt us we will respond with ‘Yes we can’”.

This was a well written speech delivered passionately and flawlessly. He held the audiences’ attention by raising and lowering the tones and volume of his voice to emphasize his key points. Gone were the pesky fillers (“uh”) and non- positives (“I think”) that plagued his debates.  See the full speech.

John McCain has served our country well and would likely have been a very capable leader.  Obama has the same leadership potential, plus an important quality that challenged McCain…tremendous communication skills. We have just elected our next great communicator.

Finally, after two previous attempts, John McCain got it right. If you’re a subscriber to my blogs, you’ll recall that I explained why Barack Obama previously has had superior performances. During the past two weeks, the press buzzed with the notion that the third debate was McCain’s last chance to show voters that he has what it takes to be President…and he delivered.

A defining moment came six minute into the debate when McCain mentioned Obama’s encounter with “Joe the Plumber” (Joe Wurzelbacher). During a campaign trip through Ohio a few days before, Joe had expressed concern to Obama that he would not be able to buy a plumbing business due to Obama’s tax plan. Looking directly into the TV camera, McCain said, “Joe, I want to tell you, I’ll not only help you buy that business that you worked your whole life for and I’ll keep your taxes low and I’ll provide available and affordable health care for you and your employees. And I will not stand for a tax increase on small business income.”

Using the story of Joe was a brilliant way to illustrate what McCain sees as a flawed tax plan. Stay tuned for McCain to use Joe the Plumber as a metaphor for Obama’s concept of “spreading the wealth”.

 A second defining moment came 19 minutes into the debate when McCain responded to Obama’s comparing McCain to George W. Bush. “Senator Obama,” said McCain, “I’m not President Bush. If you wanted to run against President Bush you should have run four years ago.” This was the perfect response to Obama’s most successful strategy to date – linking McCain to George Bush. Too bad for the Republicans that McCain hadn’t introduced this comment earlier, although I suspect we’ll hear it repeated again over the next several weeks.

McCain seemed to be particularly alert during this debate. At one point he corrected moderator Bob Shieffer by saying “change” when Shieffer had misspoken and said “climate ‘control’”. In addition, on two occasions McCain complimented Obama on his eloquence and cautioned the audience to listen to the vague words Obama was using (i.e. “have to ‘look at’ offshore drilling”).

On other occasions McCain was sharp and witty. Following Obama’s response that education vouchers don’t work, McCain shot back, “Because there aren’t enough vouchers, therefore we shouldn’t do it, even if it’s working. I got it.” Not only was this an poignant observation, but instead of looking angry, McCain let out a big laugh.

As with the two previous debates, Obama demonstrated poise and confidence with his off camera behavior. His ability to focus intently on McCain while McCain answered questions was remarkable. He continued to maintain unflappable facial expressions during some of McCain’s most vehementous pronouncements. Nothing seemed to bother Obama.

However, in sharp contrast to his previous performances, McCain’s off camera expressions were very different. In the first debate, McCain appeared disgusted with Obama whenever Obama spoke. This time he maintained a pleasant expression, frequently laughed, looked at Obama while Obama was speaking and spoke directly to the camera when it was appropriate to connect with the TV audience. It was clear that McCain had received some good coaching over the past several weeks.

Whereas McCain dramatically improved in his style and content, Obama committed the same vocal errors of the previous debates. He came across as unsure of himself with the expression “I think”, which he said 41 times. (“I think he (Biden) shares my core values.” “Here’s what I think we have to do.”) Furthering the perception of uncertainty, he used the filler “uh” at least 169 times, thus eclipsing his first debate (146 times). By eliminating the fillers and non-positives, Obama will be perceived as much direct and definitive.

McCain stumbled over his concluding remarks and would have come across stronger had he said, “I urge you to give me an opportunity to serve again” instead of “I hope …” Obama, on the other hand, was smooth and fluid. Unlike McCain, he urged people to vote for him with his final comment “I would ask for your vote.” This would have been stronger by omitting the word “would” and simply saying “I ask for your vote.”

For the most part, the post debate polls show Obama as the clear winner, which makes me wonder who the media is polling. My bet is that the success of this debate will catapult McCain into a much closer race with Obama than the polls are indicating now. And you can bet that Joe the Plumber will play an important role.  

Here we are 48 hours after the Second Presidential Debate on October 7 and most of the polls have picked Senator Barack Obama the winner over Senator John McCain. A CNN/Opinion Research Corp. survey suggests that Obama won, 54% to 30% over McCain.

Although I see the debate as being much closer, I give the nod to Obama again on this second debate for one major reason, Obama’s ability to connect with an audience. Obama comes across as very likeable, McCain generally like a grumpy old man. And for 90% of the voters, that’s what it’s going to come down to. Forget the issues, the incessant blaming and the candidates’ questionable past acquaintances. For McCain to win he must make some dramatic changes to the way he is perceived or it will be a slow burn to defeat.

A close look at the debate will help you understand my perspective. When the moderator, Tom Brokaw, introduced the candidates, both stepped briskly onto the stage, waved, smiled and shook hands with each other. This was in sharp contrast to McCain’s stiff, curt appearance the month before – a nice improvement.

But a significant differentiatorbetween the two men continued to be how one acted while the other answered questions. McCain usually busied himself by jotting down some notes or reviewing his talking points. Obama, on the other hand, maintained a pleasant facial expression and locked his eyes on McCain seemingly so as not to miss a single gesture, movement or word. It gave the perception of a man so confident in his message that he didn’t need to study his notes and could instead focus on the responses of his opponent.

Similarly, when Obama answered questions he typically engaged the audience by addressing not only the inquirers, but everyone in the town hall setting. For the most part, McCain directed his answers only to those who asked the questions, thus missing important opportunities to engage the audience and build rapport. Moreover, McCain frequently blinked rapidly and darted his eyes around the room when responding to questions from Brokaw or the Internet. This is usually a sign that someone is uncomfortable or lying or both, which is not how McCain wants to be perceived.

Although there were few meaningful sound bites, McCain scored points when he reminded Obama that he said he would cut taxes when things got bad, then looked at Obama and said, “I’ve got news for you. This is bad.” Obama, fond of speaking in generalities, made his point clearly when he said, “If you make less than a quarter of a million dollars a year, you will not see a single dime of your taxes go up. If you make $200,000 a year or less, your taxes will go down.”

For the record, both men continued making some of the same vocal errors. Obama, prone to filling his language with fillers (“uh”), had about 40, down from 146 in the first debate, compared to McCain’s three, down from 31. McCain’s use of the words “my friends” (at least 12 times) was both irritating and impersonal. A simple “you” would have done the trick. Equally bothersome, but less repeated, was the expression “the point is.”  

So, no knockout punches, but the advantage goes to Obama for his Rock Star Attitude – showing people that he likes them.

Click here to view the entire debate.

Stay tuned next Wednesday, October 15 at 6:00 p.m. PDT for the third and final Presidential Debate from Hofstra University where Bob Schieffer will moderate a 90-minutes session focusing on domestic and economic issues. As usual, I’ll post a blog shortly thereafter.

Click here to receive future blog posts automatically.

The parties of both candidates exhaled a collective sigh of relief as the first and only Vice Presidential Campaign for 2008 came to a close last night. Unlike her performance during the CBS interview with Katie Couric, Governor Sarah Palin came across as informed and knowledgeable. Senator Joe Biden eliminated his tendency to shoot from the lip. Regardless of party lines, the candidates exceeded the expectations of the largest television audience to watch such an event. Although the CNN poll picked Senator Joe Biden 51% over Governor Sarah Palin 36%, the candidates were dead even based on their communications skills.

While Biden, a 36-year veteran of the Senate and the current chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, displayed his significant of knowledge of foreign affairs, it was Palin who won points for her folksy likability. Both candidates walked out onto the stage smiling and waving. Palin, looking sharp in a black suit, blew a kiss to the audience. As they smiled and shook hands, Palin asked, “May I call you Joe?”

 Palin’s colloquial language was in sharp contrast to Biden’s more formal style. Expressions like “I betchya”, “gettin’ down to gettin’ done”, “darn right” and “say it ain’t so Joe” flowed effortlessly from her lips. I’m sure this was a conscious effort to expand her appeal to middle class America. Her seemingly spontaneous comment about the third grade class that was watching the debate in her home of Wasilla getting extra credit brilliantly advanced her all American appeal.

Palin went on the attack early, frequently punctuating her assertions with winks and the squinting of her eyes. Her first volley “Senator I do respect your years in the U. S. Senate, by I think Americans are craving something new and different…” was followed by the poignant “the Joe six packs and hockey mom s across the nation, I think we need to ban together and say ‘never again’”. Later she sharply criticized Obama’s time table for the withdrawal of troops from Iraq with “Your plan is a white flag of surrender,” adding “it goes beyond naiveté.”

Nonetheless, Biden’s strong, measured responses displayed his knowledge and experience as a tested politician. Absent was his tendency to fire off a comment without forethought. It was interesting to see how he typically took a beat to answer questions, a lesson I’m sure he practiced tirelessly in rehearsals.

Although Palin held her own during the debate, she shirted some questions and instead craftily directed her responses to topics she was more comfortable discussing. All too frequently she went on to discuss her defeat of big oil companies in Alaska, a tactic she will need to correct for future press interviews.

Cool and confident in a dark suit, light blue tie and white shirt, Biden frequently flashed a big, broad smile. Meanwhile, Palin continually displayed her uncanny ability to smile while on the attack. I suspect this unnerved Biden, as his nonverbal response was to immediately fire back an even bigger, somewhat contrived smile.  

Both candidates connected with the television audience by looking directly at the camera on their strong, well practiced opening and closing statements, thus bringing to a conclusion the much anticipated Vice Presidential Debate of 2008.  

Click here to view the entire debate.

Stay tuned for the 90-minute Presidential Debate on Tuesday, October 7 at 6:00 p.m. PDT from Belmont University where moderator Tom Brokaw will call on members of the audience and draw questions from the Internet. In the spirit of the Town Hall, all questions will come from the audience or Internet and not the moderator.

Click here to receive my future and archived blogs.

The first televised Presidential debate featuring Vice President Richard M. Nixon and Senator John F. Kennedy on September 26, 1960, draws an uncanny parallel to the one which took place 48 years to the date later. In the earlier debate, the television audience thought that Kennedy won primarily based on his strong visual appearance and engaging style. The debate of last Friday produced a similar outcome.

Although both candidates presented their respective party’s platforms last Friday well, I give the edge for voter appeal to Senator Barack Obama primarily based on his nonverbal connection. Obama generally had a pleasant expression on his face and smiled at some of Senator John McCain’s responses, particularly during the last half of the debate. He artfully answered questions to Jim Lehrer (the moderator), McCain, the audience in the hall and the television audience. On a number of occasions he spoke directly to the camera (i.e. the television audience), especially during his opening and closing statements. Clearly Obama understands The Rock Star Attitude™ (show people you like them and they will like you back), which has created his broad appeal to the U. S. public.

McCain would have been the clear victor had it not been for his odd facial expressions, particularly while Obama was answering questions. For the most part McCain looked irritated and annoyed. He frequently smiled and shook his head at Obama’s responses. McCain answered the questions directly to Lehrer and didn’t look at Obama, even when Obama was speaking. Moreover he never looked at the live audience and only briefly looked at the camera. Were McCain to have been more engaging, as he was in the Saddleback College interview, he would have created a much more likable perception.

But, it was the message that was the strong point for McCain. For the most part, he answered questions in a direct, positive, unambiguous manner. Obama, on the other hand, frequently relied on talking points from his campaign.

Obama didn’t come off as confident as he could have by beginning most responses with a stutter, such as “A, a, as I said before,” “He, he, here’s what I can tell the American people” and “Le, le, let me just make a couple of points.” McCain, on the other hand, typically took a beat and then responded, often in professorial style, especially when talking about foreign affairs.

In addition to his repeated stammers, Obama had an incredible number of fillers: 146 “uhs” and 8 “you knows”. By peppering his presentation with filler words, Obama created the perception of uncertainty. McCain used some fillers, too, but far fewer: 31 “uhs” and one “you know”.

Further eroding his perception of confidence, Obama used many non-positives. For example instead of saying “I think the first question is whether we should have gone into the war in the first place”, he would have come across much stronger simply by saying “The question is whether …” In all, Obama used 32 “I thinks” and four “I believes”.  McCain used some non-positives, too, but many fewer: 14 “I thinks” and one “I believe.”

McCain continually pounded Obama for his lack of knowledge and experience of foreign affairs. On a number of occasions he said that Obama “doesn’t understand” and “doesn’t get it.” Obama didn’t help himself by stating eight times that Senator McCain was “right”. McCain demonstrated his significant knowledge about Georgia, Ukraine and Russia and dove deep into the issues. By comparison, Obama seemed to be on the surface. For his part, Obama continually attempted to link McCain with the Bush administration.

Both men had some good sound bites. McCain said the financial rescue plan is “not the beginning of the end, but the end of the beginning.” Obama, “When I’m president I will go line by line to make sure we’re not spending money unwisely.”

McCain used some nice humor several times. Once when Lehrer asked Obama to repeat his statement to McCain, McCain asked Lehrer “Are you afraid I couldn’t hear him?” Earlier he describe the current financial environment as “the greatest fiscal crisis of our time and I’ve been around for a little while.”

 Both men had articulation issues by dropping “g”s (doin’, talkin’, tryin’) and not enunciating words clearly (hafta, gonna, becuz, wanna, gotta). McCain says “hunderd” instead of “hundred”. By improving their articulation both Obama and McCain will add polish to their presentations.

McCain demonstrated his ability to stay focused when answering questions by speaking over the interruptions of Obama and not allowing Obama interrupt him. Obama illustrated similar skills, although McCain interrupted him fewer times.

Both candidates used good inflection as they emphasized key words and phrases. McCain frequently lowered his volume to emphasize important points. Both had strong, well-rehearsed closing statements. McCain, who spoke last, was exceptional.

In the end, Obama was more likeable with his friendly, open, engaging expressions. McCain spoke more confidently and demonstrated academic knowledge of the topics. But, just remember, likeability is based 55% on how you look, 38% on how you sound and 7% on what you say. I suppose you might say it was Obama 55, McCain 45.

My advice to John McCain: Get a new speech coach or listen to the one you have if he or she’s telling you to be more engaging. For Obama, speak positively and succinctly on point.

I welcome your comments regarding my observations and/or your perceptions of the candidates. To view the entire debate, click here.

Stay tuned for the 90-minute Vice Presidential Debate this Thursday, October 2 at 6:00 p.m. PDT. I’ll post my comments within 24 hours of the debate’s conclusion.