Today is the big debate between Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton and her opponent Republican nominee Donald Trump. This is not a political blog but having done my undergraduate degree in Political Science, I have interest in keeping abreast of what’s happening around the world. Presidential debates are of particular interest to me but not because of the actual policy discussions. I am much more fascinated by how presidential nominees use this platform to communicate and persuade. Master communicators know that what you say is just as important as how you say it.
I think the majority of presidential candidates over the last three elections (when I started to take greater notice) have been great communicators who were able to weave in persuasion tactics with their policies. Going back further than the 2004 election, there is one communicator who trumps (pun intended) them all – Bill Clinton.
Regardless of how you view him either politically or personally, there are some key takeaways from his style of communication that he uses to connect to his audiences to win them over. Exhibit A of Bill Clinton’s masterful comprehension of the art of communication and persuasion was seen during a town hall debate during the 1992 election. Clinton faced off against then president George H.W. Bush and eccentric billionaire tycoon Ross Perot.
In the town hall debate format, questions come from an audience composed of undecided voters. I really like watching these debates because questions from these debates tend to deliver the biggest gaffes from candidates. They also can lend a hand in a candidate soaring to victory. The latter was the case in the 1992 election for Clinton. During the debate, Clinton was asked the following question by a woman in the audience:
“How has the national debt personally affected each of your lives? And if it hasn’t, how can you honestly find a cure for the economic problems of the common people if you have no experience in what’s ailing them?”
Here is Clinton’s masterful response to the question:
There were three things that really stuck out for me in Clinton’s answer:
He actually listened to the question
Clinton was fortunate that his opponent Bush had the opportunity to answer this question first. Bush did not listen to the question in its entirety and thereby lost its context. The woman asked how the national debt impacted the candidates’ lives – not the impact on the general US populous. Bush’s misfire right off the bat caused the moderator to interject to clarify the question. His answer was a lost cause right there as the little momentum he had was snuffed out like a bucket of cold water thrown on a fire. Bush then went on to question if she was implying that because he was wealthy, the national debt did not affect him. The problem with answering with an accusatory question at this level is twofold – you aren’t actually answering the question and you are raising the level of tension in the conversation.
Clinton understands the question immediately. He plays this very well by asking the audience member to tell him again how the national debt/recession affected her. He plays right into the feelings at the heart of the issue. You can feel it by the way Clinton asks her to speak about it –he shows that he sees eye-to-eye with her immediately.
His eye contact
Clinton is renowned for his ability to make someone he is speaking with to feel like they are the only person in the room. One of my business heroes Tim Ferriss (don’t you worry, I’ll be getting to his 4 Hour Work Week book in due time) had a piece on his website that spoke to this. Clinton is pacing towards the woman as he reaffirms how the US economy was impacted her and made her feel. And at the same time, he never unlocks his eyes from hers during the question. You don’t need to be in the room to feel that level of trust he is establishing with the audience member by making that moment about her.
He is relatable
This brings us to our next point – Clinton connects with others because he communicates that he felt their pain. When Bush responds to the woman in the audience with “You ought to be in the White House for a day”, it was a cringe worthy response. Clinton on the other hand shows empathy.
Clinton gets right to it by mentioning that as governor of a small state, he is put under more pressure to do more with less thanks to the federal government. He hits this point out of the park by pointing behind himself to President Bush. This creates the perfect contrast effect between a guy who is in your corner compared to an elite that cannot understand your struggles as demonstrated by the manner in which Bush handled the question only moments prior. Clinton continues his takedown of the question through the power of repetition. He emphasizes that he knew people in his state on a first name basis that were gravely affected by the recession who were like her. He hammers away on how he knew people by giving several examples. By doing that, he implicitly expresses that he understands and is impacted in the same way.
He started a conversation…and so should you!
By understanding the question and making himself relatable, Clinton creates a forum for a conversation. I’ve said before that to succeed at interviews and networking events, you need to make your interactions conversational. This establishes trust and allows for your true self to shine through. When that happens, you are more relatable. And as we talked about previously, the most likable people get the promotions. By exhibiting great non-verbal communication like maintaining eye contact and finding ways to empathize with your colleagues, it will be pretty hard for someone not to like you!
Watch this YouTube video again and again today to pick up all the nuances of Clinton’s masterful communication style. Take some notes and start applying it to your everyday life. Who knows, maybe you will be the next president in 2020!