Modern politics is supposed to be about big money, polling, backroom deals, and internet sophistication. Of course all of these elements have a role in campaigns. But the Iowa Caucuses were striking in that both the Republican and Democratic voters picked the two best public speakers for the two top slots to represent their parties.

In modern politics, this is unusual. John Kerry really wasn’t a great communicator. Bob Dole, not that great. And of course there is the strange case of George W. Bush receiving the Republican Nomination—twice.

Most of the time, public speaking simply plays a part, sometimes a small part, in voter selection. In 2008 Iowa, voters appear to have placed a heavy premium on public speaking skills.

I believe that if you put a random focus group of non-voters in a room and asked them to rank the 10 or so Democrats running for President a year ago and to rank each one purely in terms of speaking skills, these focus group individuals would have picked Obama and Edwards. Similarly, a focus group of non-voters asked to rate the speaking skills of the 10 or so Republicans running for president a year ago, these focus group participants would have selected Huckabee and Romney.

This trend is consistent with what futurist John Nesbit wrote about in the 1980s in his Megatrends books, i.e. the more high tech the world becomes, the more “high touch” the world becomes, meaning the more importance people put on so-called soft skills like public speaking.