Oral Exam

But more than that, he did something that far too few speakers do: He didn't belt out applause lines. Partly as an ex-president and celebrity for life, he knows that people will listen-even to extended thoughts and paragraphs. He, more than anyone else so far, spelled out the stakes-what a good keynote should have done, but, I'll take it from a former president as well.

He was not formally eloquent. He didn't soar. We heard little poetry, and more numbers in one speech than you might hear in a whole day from Barack Obama. But he loved being there. He loved explaining. He finds poetry in specificity. Clinton warmed to his own argument, so that by the end it was hard to believe he didn't passionately want Obama to win.

For me, seeing him at the podium at a convention inspires both nostalgia and post-traumatic-stress disorder. In 1996, as his chief speechwriter, I worked on Clinton's acceptance speech. He was in full procrastination mode; we had some perfunctory meetings in the White House before setting off on a Harry Truman-style train trip. We thought he would be trapped and have to work on the speech. Instead, he preferred to wave from the front of the train. I churned out draft after draft, never sure if he was reading them. Twenty-four hours before the speech, he finally kicked in-and worked nonstop to write nearly an entirely new draft around the metaphor of "bulding a bridge to the 21st Century," a phrase he had been testing on the stump. We weren't finished as we piled into the limousine for the ride to the convention hall. (Hillary scolded, "You work. I'll wave.") Let's just say it was harrowing. It was all broadcast live on television-the motorcade, flags flapping, motorcycles, crowds cheering …and in the back of the presidential limousine, the unmistakable blue glow of a laptop. One of the network anchors, watching this, intoned, "Let this be a lesson for all the young people watching tonight. Don't save your work for the last minute."

Joe Biden gave a very good, but not a great, speech.

He is strongest when he is most human-when he pours on the "schmaltz," as I doubt they say in Scranton. The family stories, the lessons learned from father and mother, the notion that work conveys dignity and not just a paycheck, all were plainspoken and quite moving.  There can be no doubt that even when Joe Biden is laying it on thick, he believes every word of what he is saying. (When he recounted the story about his mother telling him to bloody the nose of bullies, on the screen his elderly mother could be seen saying to the person next to her, "That's true!") He will be a candidate with a wonderful touch, who will be fun to watch.

The policy sections were a bit more ...senatorial. Biden's discussion of foreign policy was passionate and impressive; his touching on domestic concerns a bit more episodic. He was willing to attack McCain (as, say, Lieberman and Edwards shrank from doing against George W. Bush). But the long list of items where "John McCain was wrong and Barack Obama was right" does not add up to a memorable critique. His repeated metaphor, based on his father's admonition, that the country needs help to get back up when it is knocked down, was effective, but doesn't add up to a theory of where the country is economically, and what government can do about it. Democrats don't sound like they're simply worried about the poor these days, but they don't do enough to paint an optimistic picture of American growth and future prosperity, either.

Obama's brief visit showed a rollicking sense of political theater. ("Hillary Clinton rocked the house!") In the room, reconciliation seemed genuine. Maybe it is up to the nominee, in the end, to fully lay out the case tomorrow - where, precisely, we are in our national journey, where we made a wrong turn, where we should go next. Obama should not tell us his story; he needs to tell us ours. He can cap off what is shaping up to be for the Democrats a very successful convention.

Hillary Clinton's Speech
Posted at 11:45  p.m. ET Aug 26

MICHAEL GERSON

The lead-up to Hillary Clinton's speech tonight was a statement by team Clinton: We can show a fairly lifeless convention how these things should be done. The video introduction was among the best I've seen—energetic, humorous and memorable.  Her affectionate welcome by the crowd—with her beaming, misty-eyed husband looking on—must have felt to Democrats like a return to the golden age of the 1990s, when the Clintons outsmarted and outfought hapless Republicans at every turn.  (Some of us remember those years with less nostalgia.) 

The speech that followed was good for Hillary Clinton, and less obviously good for Barack Obama. Clinton effectively assumed the roles of feminist hero, defeating ancient prejudices, and of party elder, honoring the Democratic fallen.

But the kind of party unity she endorsed consisted of shared adherence to Democratic talking points—universal health care, increasing the minimum wage, equal pay for equal work—instead of a shared enthusiasm for Obama himself.  She offered no compelling praise for his character and judgment.  There was no mention (at least that I can recall) of the historic nature of Obama's own quest for the presidency. Hillary Clinton's endorsement of Obama was perfunctory—the minimum she could get away with without hurting her own future in the party.  Team Obama is likely to smile in public and seethe in private.

And, amazingly, Clinton's attacks on McCain (whom she called a "friend" in her speech) were actually mild by convention standards—the kind of generic attacks that any Democrat could make on any Republican. She clearly disagrees with McCain on many issues—but she could not muster disdain for the man.