Part of the reason that direct Presidential statements now seem so peculiar is that he doesn't know who he's talking to. The previous President was talking to the public as a public official, having sufficiently imagined both. He spoke to the Court of the Aeropagus and the citizens assembled on the field at Gettysburg. If you concieve of government as happening by company and enterprise, a faction seizes the mechanism of governance and runs it as a corporation. But if you conceive of government as an answer to the question of social order, you are drawn into a different relationship with the people, and you can address them in that way. There is a certain collective someone you are speaking to. The corporatist, as opposed to the publicist, has no one to address when he addresses everybody. Compare a CEO giving a general talk, and a CEO talking to the people of the company. In the first case, they simply haven't imagined the public in general. Perhaps this is why there are so many television personalities in the administration -- they have a manner and a vocabulary of speaking to all and sundry, but they haven't imagined the folks on the other side of the camera as being particularly worthwhile.
Perhaps this is another aspect of the Republic and the Machiavel. Rhetoric flourishes in the republic, or at least complete sentences. The Machiavel has a different approach to meaning. The language becomes, not strained, exactly, but where the language becomes important, they're almost at antinomy, because the Machiavel's order is originary, not classcally ordered. In making all things new, individual words take on a strange, rather than familiar, context. Think of how many debates in the first term focused on odd terms abstracted from their constitutional context -- they become headlines, or perhaps captions, and their meaning becomes the present use. Now, you can do that with individual words, but not sentences. The Machiavel sounds like a parody when he speaks, because he is waiting to one day unseat the classical order of the sentence.
None of this is criticism -- these are the two necessary aspects, synthesis and diaresis. But it is much more logical to be governed by the synthesis.