Once again, I’m blogging about the takeaways from the presidential nominee’s speech to (in this case) her convention on Thursday night. Beyond the world of politics, what can we learn about public speaking from this excellent example of a public speech, one that – just like Mr. Trump’s – was watched by millions of people and will get attention long after the moment itself is gone?

1.A speech is a great place to draw a contrast. I’ve often said that a presentation is not a good format for detail. Way too many speakers attempt an information dump and overload their presentations with details that the audience will never remember. But a contrast – this is not like that – works well, because the simple rhetorical structure helps us understand what’s being said.

In this case, Secretary Clinton used the speech to contrast her positions and Mr. Trump’s, and the result was clear and effective rhetoric. Indeed the technique can be used to create a sense of difference between two positions that are not, in fact, very dissimilar. Because of the ‘rule of threes’, a mere three examples will make the contrast appear much deeper than it may in fact be. In this situation, of course, the two politicians’ positions are quite far apart, and the contrast was very clear.

2.Never forget the power of the rhetorical question. Will we stay true to that motto?. . . Ask yourself: Does Donald Trump have the temperament to be Commander-in-Chief?. . . But I ask you: how can we just stand by and do nothing? In several places throughout the speech, Secretary Clinton asked rhetorical questions – questions that strongly imply an answer and so don’t literally require an answer from the audience – in order to prod her listeners to think in one particular way. It’s an effective device to help bring people around to your side.

A couple of caveats: don’t overuse them. More than several, and the audience will begin to feel harangued. And don’t make them ambiguous. The answer (at least, from your point of view) has to be unmistakable.

3.Employ the power of repetition. I think it’s fair to say that Secretary Clinton is not a standout orator like her husband. Her speeches tend to be more matter-of-fact, and less artful, than former President Clinton’s. But she did use a repeated phrase at one point during the speech, and the result is as close to poetry, perhaps, as the Secretary came during the evening:

If you believe that companies should share profits with their workers, not pad executive bonuses, join us.

If you believe the minimum wage should be a living wage… and no one working full time should have to raise their children in poverty… join us.

If you believe that every man, woman, and child in America has the right to affordable health care…join us.

If you believe that we should say “no” to unfair trade deals… that we should stand up to China… that we should support our steelworkers and autoworkers and homegrown manufacturers…join us.

If you believe we should expand Social Security and protect a woman’s right to make her own health care decisions… join us.

And yes, if you believe that your working mother, wife, sister, or daughter deserves equal pay… join us… (boldface added)

Half a dozen instances seems to be about as often as you can repeat a complex phrase like this and have it be effective. That’s often enough for people to get the idea, even though they’re hearing it for the first time, and yet not become bored with the phrase.

The Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr repeated his famous phrase “I have a dream” nine times during his speech on the Washington Mall in 1963, but that phrase had the magic of great simplicity and yet deep resonance. Such phrases are few and far between. So use the “I have a dream” test to determine how many times you can repeat your catch phrase. If it’s not as good at King’s, then keep its iterations to below nine.

4.In a serious speech lasting longer than a few minutes, a sprinkle or two of humor is essential. Most speakers misunderstand the role and uses of humor in a serious speech. They put jokes in at periodic instances in order to provide a little entertainment or contrast with the rest of the presentation. But that’s pandering to your audience out of fear for their attention spans.

There are two good reasons to use humor. First, to clarify your values or point of view. There’s no faster way to ensure that everyone’s on the same page than to get the whole audience laughing at a joke.

Secretary Clinton said: “Now, you didn’t hear any of this from Donald Trump at his convention. He spoke for 70-odd minutes – and I do mean odd.” The audience laughed at this mild joke – and discovered something about itself and its attitude toward Mr. Trump in doing so.

The second reason to use humor is to expand your (the speaker’s) rules of the road. Every speaker sets a whole series of rules as she begins to speak. Some are explicit, some implicit. Your choice of tone lets the audience know how light or heavy the speech is going to be. Your level of personal disclosure lets the audience know what’s at stake for you (and by implication for them) in the speech. And you may set explicit rules about timing and the level of interaction. (“Please hold your questions for the end.”)

Using humor says, in effect, to the audience – ‘pay attention, because although I began seriously I will permit myself occasional touches of humor’. That means the genre of your speech is more broadly defined than a completely serious speech. It gives you more room to maneuver.

Note that I don’t recommend beginning with a joke. First, you’re at your most nervous, so you probably will blow the punch line – far worse that if you’d never tried for a joke at all. And second, you set the expectation that the speech is going to be funny throughout. So unless you mean to keep cracking the one-liners, don’t start with how you don’t mean to go on.

5.Finally, begin and end on the same note, theme, or topic. Secretary Clinton began her speech talking about her daughter, who introduced her, and ended her speech talking about her mother, who passed away in 2011. Thus she completed a thematic mothers-and-daughters loop that was extraordinarily appropriate given the historic nature of her candidacy in general and this speech in particular, marking the first time a woman has been nominated for the American presidency by a major political party.

The presentation as a whole didn’t possess the storytelling strength of former President Clinton’s speech earlier in the week, or the compelling emotional unity of Chelsea Clinton’s speech moments before. Secretary Clinton’s speech was more of a political laundry list. But in the opening and closing moments she allowed emotion and thematic strength to add a bit of poetry to the speech overall.