|
July 11, 2000
|
Conventionally Speaking
| A National Stage |
|
Later this month in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Republicans will gather to nominate Texas Governor George W. Bush as their candidate for the presidency. In August, Democrats will do the same in Los Angeles, California, for Vice President Al Gore. These national conventions will feature plenty of red, white, and blue balloons; long-winded speeches by party leaders; and wall-to-wall news coverage. But what's likely to remain in the memories of Americans watching is the speech each candidate makes to accept his party's nomination. "Almost every acceptance speech is important," presidential historian Michael Beschloss told PBS just before the1996 conventions.
These occasions often mark the first time that a candidate has the widespread attention of the people who will be voting in November. As nominees Bush and Gore stand at the convention podiums, they will have the chance to show the American public how they speak, how they present themselves personally, and what their visions are for the nation's future.
|
|
The upcoming Republican and Democratic national conventions will place presidential candidates George W. Bush and Al Gore in the national spotlight. How can their speeches make a difference in the election?
|
Bush and Gore will be following a political tradition that began in 1932. Before that time presidential candidates were usually informed of their nominations at their homes. They would send their thanks and formal acceptance via messenger. Democratic presidential nominee Franklin Delano Roosevelt took a markedly different approach, Beschloss noted in his PBS interview:
|
|
|
|
| Word Power |
|
Some of the memorable lines from more recent acceptance speeches have made effective use of metaphor—the implied comparison of one object or idea with another object or idea.
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
| An Earlier Metaphor |
|
The granddaddy of metaphors used by presidential nominees came at the Democratic convention of 1896 from William Jennings Bryan. Bryan, who ran against eventual winner William McKinley in the November election, was a noted public speaker. And while he was not delivering an acceptance speech at his party convention, he delivered a stirring address on the national economy. Bryan and the populist movement to which he belonged believed that America should shift from the gold standard to a so-called "free silver" standard. This change would have meant using the abundance of silver in America to create coins—and in effect to create more money for people to use than was available from the rarer supply of gold. The "free silver" idea had particular appeal to farmers and other workers: many were in debt, and a larger national supply of money could help them pay off those debts. Opponents to "free silver" argued that creating so much new money would make it worth much less, especially in foreign trade. With this debate as the backdrop, Bryan mounted the podium, delivered his address, and finished with a battle cry against the supporters of the gold standard:
After Bryan lost the presidential election to McKinley, support for "free silver" decreased until the movement disappeared. The gold standard remained in place until the Great Depression of the 1930s.
|
|
|