A contrast in communication skills shows the race is not always to the glib
...Zito seems to comprehend Trump's appeal better than most in the media. She is right about the way he communicates. Most in the media are used to having to parse Clinton speak, but they don't seem to get the off the cuff style that has been so successful for Trump. If they see him as an inarticulate clown, they are misreading him. He did not get to be a billionaire by talking. He did it by working with people to complete projects that others were willing to invest in.
The decisions we make on how to communicate to people are fragile things; they can change lives, cause chaos and regret, or take us to a better place by tapping into something deep.
Last week two politicians made news for the ways they communicated to Americans: Clinton's words were crafted, deliberate and dishonest; President Trump's words were a string of thoughts bouncing everywhere — with no craft, no massaging and they contained great gaps of context.
The press reacted wistfully to the former; to the latter, it went into full meltdown. Again.
Michael Kinsley once observed that "a gaffe is when a politician tells the truth."
By this definition — and this is how the press appears to view it — Trump speaks in gaffes.
Now, that doesn't mean Trump is always accurate in what he says, but he says (or tweets) what he truly thinks at that moment.
We in the press are just not accustomed to this type of honesty. Most politicians are loath to veer from carefully vetted talking points; they don't commit "gaffes" because they never tell you what they really think. Instead, they talk around the point or tell you what they think you want to hear. Trump never does this.
Trump's willingness to say what he thought during the 2016 campaign endeared him to his supporters. Unlike the press, Trump supporters understood that Trump shot from the hip and would make mistakes. To many of them, his walking-back of some of what he said then makes sense; is a sign of learning, not of duplicity.