Has anyone else noticed the length of time our blessed (snigger) leader pauses between words when giving a speach.

<big fat cheesy grin>
I noticed it ............... before, but its becoming ................ really annoying, is it .................... that he's not got .................... much to say .................. and is stringing it out?
<big fat cheesy grin>

Im expecting him to fill out his speaches with "Screw Flanders!" over and over again soon!

Bush does it too. I would refer to it as faux profundity. Its meant to give an impression of statesmanlike gravitas, as if every word was a well-crafted pearl of wisdom.

In Bush's case, its also probably due to the fact that he can't read very fast.

Tony Blair does have a distinctive way of speaking. He certainly makes every word counts.

Have you noticed that Michael Howard tries to make his every word count by speaking slowly?

Love him or loath him Blair is bloody good,I as most will know cant stand him but he has done wonders for the labour party.

Well royjames I have to agree with your view that Tony Blair is
b. good, and he has done the Labour Party a lot of good too. He has won two elections with substantial majorities - that's why he's still the leader of the Labour Party.

His speaking style is though very interesting. I am not myself a royalist, but I recall he hit the right note for the nation when he spoke about the death of Princess Diana - "the people's princess" I think he called her. He speaks with sincerity and conviction, even if at times it sounds a bit preachy. I think when he pauses during a speech, he is actually considering every word he says, and how it will weigh with the public. Love him, or loathe him, as royjames says, he is indeed b. good.

Originally posted by royjames
Love him or loath him Blair is bloody good,I as most will know cant stand him but he has done wonders for the labour party.
I believe this thread is about the way he speaks, so be sure to keep it on topic...

I agree Mr Blair is leaving cavernous pauses between words these days. He is, in my opinion either a) faking sincerity b) striving for gravitas c) trying desperately not to say anything that will be proved untrue by a subsequent enquiry/report d) struck dumb momentarily because he has fouled himself.

Everyone in my lounge said the same thing at the same time last night, pausing for emphassis works, pausing after every third word regardless makes him look like an idiot.

At the other end of the speaking spectrum, has anyone else noticed how young people (particularly teenagers from working class backgrounds) speak in a kind of superfast babble, with no breaks between words and often accompanied by hand chopping movements and other aggressive body language.

I think the reason for the difference is that in Balir's case, he knows that people will wait to hear what he has to say, whereas in the latter case they want to make sure they can get a word in edgeways within the cacophany of sounds.

It really has got more pronounced.

People picked up on it before, particularly John Culshaw. And rather than change it because it makes him look funny he pronounces it even more and revels in it.

Quite similar to his relationship with Bush, most people can't understand what he sees in him, and because of that he is ever more devoted just to show how right and sure of himself he is.

I think it's a posh thing....my CO used to stand us on the parade square and talk for bleedin hours about nothing and he too used to drag things out....

I remember the time he announced we weren't going to Bosnia cos the CRII wasn't fully battle tested and it took him an 1 hr 45 mins to tell us what he could have said in 10 mins...alright for him stood there in his comfies leaning against his podium but when you're stood there to attention in the heat of Germanys summer in Black coveralls it becomes too much....

It's a bit like the US secretary of state Colin Powell (I think) last year when he gave that really pointless speech about erm, erm...nothing really...


No doubt I have got the name wrong so i'm now looking into it but i'm sure you all know what i'm referring to

One things for shure, we are going to get a hell of a lot of Blair, Howard and Kennedy speak over the next few weeks, how nice it would be to hibernate for the period.

I was taught that it's better to have a bit of quiet than to stick in an 'erm'.

Also, those pauses give them time to either read the autocue, listen to teh earpiece or think on the spot as to what they're going to say next. ;)

Originally posted by redrobbo

Have you noticed that Michael Howard tries to make his every word count by speaking slowly?

................Yes..........................

................such...........................sin cere

................speech..........................tr aining

Bit hard to talk fast and listen to someone talking in your ear, telling you what to say!

Originally posted by JoePritchard
I was taught that it's better to have a bit of quiet than to stick in an 'erm'.

Are you picking on me again there JP :D

When Tony Blair was on tv yesterday I had to look twice - at first glance I thought it was Rory Bremner doing an impression of him!

Seems to be turning into a caricature of himself...and it's scary to watch.

Originally posted by royjames
Love him or loath him Blair is bloody good,I as most will know cant stand him but he has done wonders for the labour party.

Good for the labour party?? considering Blair is the first prime minister that stands for labour but has the same goals as Conservatives, yes hes ok.

Maybe hes more liberal as I dont have any major problems with him one way or the other. And possibly he opted to stand for Labour because he had a better chance of getting elected in that position..

call be a sinic!

He over emphasises every word. His acting is blatant and poor.

Perhaps he speaks slowly so those who didn't vote labour last time will understand him.

Originally posted by max
Perhaps he speaks slowly so those who didn't vote labour last time will understand him.

Or to allow his core supporters to be able to understand him. :D

Just done a lightspeed survey poll on email where you get entered for a prize draw and it was asking questions about all 3 leaders and how you can liken them to cars. etc ie, If Tony Blair was a car, would he be a 1...mercedes
2.BMW.. etc and so on.

If they were hotels, which would they be, ie The ritz, The Hilton etc.

My answers were that it is all about image and how they are perceived by us.
It looks as though they are trying to get an idea of polls now by emails

I must admit that I had not noticed that Tony Blair spoke particularly slowly, but no doubt I will now it has been brought to my attention.

Originally posted by royjames
Love him or loath him Blair is bloody good,I as most will know cant stand him but he has done wonders for the labour party.

Totally agree, he is the best Prime Minister I have lived under, and has done and is doing a marvelous job. If Michael Howard and the Tories get in : We, the ordinary folk have had it, they will screw us, as they did the last time for every penny wev'e got.

Apologies if this is moving slightly off thread but I can't help being intrigued by Gordon Brown's delivery of speeches. Is it just me or is anyone else distracted by the way he silently mouths (or is it a chew, a gnarl or a grimace?) between phrases or sentences?

I simply can't concentrate on what he's saying - I'm just waiting for the next oral contortion where he dosen't say anything.

Originally posted by max
Perhaps he speaks slowly so those who didn't vote labour last time will understand him. :D

Originally posted by t020
Or to allow his core supporters to be able to understand him. :D

They do say that imitation is the highest form of flattery so, I thank you for your flattery.

he does seem..................... to have become.............................. a parody of himself

Originally posted by max
They do say that imitation is the highest form of flattery so, I thank you for your flattery.

And that sarcasm is the lowest form of wit, Sir Maxwell.

Originally posted by redrobbo
nd he has done the Labour Party a lot of good too. He has won two elections with substantial majorities - that's why he's still the leader of the Labour Party.
.

He is also the reason why the Labour Party has lost many of it's long standing members. In Sheffield alone I can count at least 30 people, including myself, who have torn their party cards up. So all is not sweet smelling in the garden.

These figures tell of declining LP membership http://www.politics.co.uk/election-2005/labour-membership-hits-record-low-$6019186.htm