Listen, folks, presentation and rhetoric matter far more than substance. So if you think Biden's aesthetic choices don't matter because his speech was substantively correct, you're being, in my not at all humble opinion, damned foolish.
And bear in mind, if you think his speech was substantively good, that you surely went into watching it with predispositions to agree with him.* You weren't persuaded by the substance - you found the substance amenable to your way of thinking. If you found it great, it's because of the pleasure of having your predispositions validated, nothing more.
The important question is what effect the speech had on moving the needle on support for a future Trump presidency, nothing else. So if you're a never-Trumper, your personal response to the speech is irrelevant.
And as far as moving the needle on support for Trump, again, presentation and rhetoric matter far more in moving people than substance does.
*I, too, am predisposed to believe that Trump and his cultists are fascistic. Biden can't persuade me of what I already think is obviously true.
Whatever the substance of any speech, rhetoric and presentation will have more of an effect on those who watch - which is why I read speeches rather than watch them.
You surely heard - and saw - what you wanted to hear and see. You did not go in with an open mind. You weren't persuaded by the substance - you were pre-persuaded. As a practical matter, I'm not interested in the mundane fact that those inclined to agree with the President did so.
My concern is with his opponents and with the uncommitted. His opponents also heard and saw what they wanted to see, but did the President make it easier rather than harder for them to see that? I think so.
And what of those who are uncommitted, that you wanted Biden to sway to your side? The presentation matters to them most of all. And they did not see a traditional patriotic scene that would tend to instill trust, but a dark fascist aesthetic, which - even if they did not consciously recognize it as fascist - was distinctly undemocratic.
Perhaps the purpose was to create a dark and gloomy atmosphere, to instill a sense of fear that would move people. And if so, perhaps it worked. I'm not an expert on human motivation. But I'm questioning the choices made precisely because I'm not an expert, yet I'm worried about the real world effect of the speech.
Joe Biden’s historic speech was too damn nice