One of the most amazing – and welcome – aspects of this election campaign has been how Nick Clegg has completely stolen the show, as Jonathan Freedland noted in his Guardian article yesterday. But it’s not just at home that ‘Cleggmania’ has been in evidence: the foreign press in particular have been fascinated by his rise without trace.
Here, for example, is how a major feature in the New York Times begins:
LIVERPOOL, England — Chris Garlick arrived a skeptic, but departed a convert.
“I think he’s refreshing,” Mr. Garlick said of Nick Clegg, the earnest, fresh-faced leader of the newly insurgent Liberal Democratic party, who has thrown an enormous wrench into conventional British politics as the country prepares for its general election on Thursday.
“I think he’s backed up his policies with concrete particulars, and I like the way he presents himself,” said Mr. Garlick, who is 43 and usually votes Conservative. “He doesn’t do the aggressive, in-your-face arguing that a lot of politicians do.”
This is just the sort of voter that Mr. Clegg is looking for as he tries to make good on the early excitement of his campaign, in which he used an assured, revelatory performance in a televised leaders’ debate to turn a two-party race into a three-way contest.
And the paper has an interesting choice of analogy for the three major party leaders:
Mr. Clegg has the campaigner’s habit of answering questions with canned, well-rehearsed paragraphs. But if Mr. Brown by now seems like a piñata that remains attached to the ceiling even though chunks have been hacked off, and Mr. Cameron seems like a sleek, self-satisfied seal, then Mr. Clegg seems like a happy terrier, wagging his tail and full of excitement as he faces an uncertain future.
You can read the NYT’s article in full here.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
The street in Australia named after my great great grandfather
Lib Dems pick Richard Kilpatrick as candidate for the Greater Manchester Mayoral election
David Warren
Roland
David Raw
Peter Chambers
2 Comments
I think Clegg has certainly done a great job of raising the profile of the Lib Dems. I think his popularity has a lot to do with his age and possibly generation, particularly since it’s the same Generation as Obama. I quite liked this piece in the Independent the other day. (http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/jonathan-pontell-cleggs-rise-is-the-sound-of-generation-jones-clearing-its-throat-1961191.html) which addresses the leaders’ generations. The main point is that Clegg and Cameron are both part of the emerging generation between the Boomers and Xers: Generation Jones.
When you research Generation Jones, which I just did, you find that this concept/term has gained much traction in several countries. It looks like it is a regular part of national discussions, with widespread acceptance by experts and media. While it has gotten some media interest here, it hasn’t gotten nearly as much in this country. That’s unfortunate. This is the generation which will be running the show for the foreseeable future, and Brits need to get a grasp of who Jonesers are and what makes them tick. I think one helpful starting point in this process is looking at this pretty good overview here: http://www.generationjones.org.uk/ . And then, I’d recommend doing a bit more research to fill in some of the detail. I believe this will be an increasingly discussed topic, and it makes sense to get in ahead of the curve.
Yes – its worth noting that Cameron (9 Oct 1966) and Clegg (7 Jan 1967) were born within three months of each other. Though Obama (4 Aug 1961) is a fair bit older. Or perhaps it just feels like it to me? (He’s the only one of the three older than me!)
But I’ve always thought that one of the main reasons for the fairly steady rise of the Lib Dems, over the 27 years I’ve been a member, and maybe significantly longer, is that more Tories and Labour voters die bewteen elections, to be replaced by young people less suceptible to the old tribal politics.