I watched the speech again. In all fairness, the first time I saw the speech, I was doing several things at once and I didn't really tune in like I did the last time I saw it.
Same thing happened during Zell's speech. But Zell's speech was so powerful that it grabbed me even while I was doing other stuff.
Anyways, after watching Bush's speech more closely, I make the following observations:
It was fair-to-good speech for it's intended purpose. But the first half may have been a missed opportunity in that it could have been much better in terms of catching, and holding your average undecided-non-political-junkie. But, I could be wrong.
In the second half, the humor was great, and Bush's words on terrorism were solid.
All in all, I still think it was not as powerful as his first acceptance speech in 2000.
I also disagree that in order for the speech to be more powerful and interesting that it would have do be "red meat" or that it would have to sacrifice what he was trying to do.
Still, depending on the soundbites, it could help. And I don't think Bush hurt himself at all.
I'm glad you watched it again. Evidence of openmindedness. I am not gaga over polling results, but recent polls would seem to indicate that there was something in the speech that got to at least a few of those who couldn't figure out which way to jump. I hope the dims keep misunderestimating W. :)