Personally speaking - she could have the looks and body of a screen goddess, and the voice of a siren, and I’d still find her unattractive.

I don’t see her attraction or appeal anywhere.

If Ann had better delivery, then I could say with certainty that she performs her act as an ironic ruse. Sometimes I really do think she intends to construct a reductio ad absurdum of the hard-right- but frankly, she isn’t enough of a performer for that to be so. She must be a really deluded, standoffish and sad person (who also makes terrible arguements).

Limbaugh sounds ingratiatingly bombastic to me (I’m a good old boy and just you listen to me, now, while I tell it like it is). He is Forghorn Leghorn without the humor, and a puerile delivery. Yes - he strings words together with nary a pause for breath (it seems). But I’d prefer that the words made some sense, and actually connected logically.

Listening to Coulter is like listening to nails on a chalkboard. That woman can screech. I’m not sure I’ve ever heard what she actually said, first time through. Maybe she emits harmonics that cause my brain to freeze.

Regardless of their verbal delivery skills - I don’t rate either as a strong communicator. Their ability to present a cogent argument, complete with supporting evidence, is completely absent. They never ‘argue the case’ - they simply beat you down with a barrage of unsubstantiated talking points.

Their core communication method seems simply to be to complain and moan and whine - which does have an appeal to certain audiences (those who already agree with many of their statements). But argue and communicate? Not so much.

What kind of publicity, if any, would Ann Coulter have received over the past 10 years if she had been a old fat man instead of a leggy blond woman wearing short skirts, assuming that the old fat man version spouted the exact same opinions?

. . .

OK. I’m back from Coulter’s site. You were right.