Cleggmania: The Rise of Nick Clegg

Cleggmania: The Rise of Nick Clegg

Catherine Mayer
Time Magazine London
May 3, 2010 Issue

If politics is show biz for plain people, Nick Clegg may have strayed into the wrong profession. During his April 20 campaign stop at an agricultural college in southwestern England, a clutch of young female students proclaimed their boyish visitor to be both "hot" and "cool." They were less sure why Clegg was there or what he represents. That pretty much defines Cleggmania, a syndrome that has spread across the U.K. with astonishing speed.

In a matter of days, the Liberal Democrat has been catapulted from the comparative obscurity of third-party politics to top the ratings as Britain's most popular political leader since Winston Churchill. Why? Because of TV. Britain's first-ever televised leadership debate on April 15 pitted Clegg, 43, against the Conservative front runner David Cameron and Labour's incumbent Prime Minister Gordon Brown. Clegg effectively hijacked what one might call the hopey-changey message hitherto monopolized by Cameron, and subsequent polls have shown the Liberal Democrats leapfrogging one or both of the larger parties in the public's affections. If that love translates into crosses on ballot papers when Britons choose a new government on May 6, Clegg and his Lib Dems could secure the biggest slice of the popular vote and a pivotal role in the next government.

Canvassing support in a verdant farmland setting just over two weeks ahead of that election, Clegg refrains from counting chickens. That's wise, not least because Britain's electoral system, like the one used in U.S. congressional elections, disadvantages third parties like the Liberal Democrats, whose support is widely distributed. "Almost 1 in 4 people voted for us last time, and we got, what, 10% of the seats in this place," Clegg told TIME in a lengthy late-February interview in his House of Commons office. Back then, the sheer improbability of the Lib Dems acquiring real power had dampened media interest in the party. Now there's a strong prospect of a minority Conservative or Labour government heavily reliant on the Lib Dems and willing to do deals to keep them sweet. That makes Clegg everyone's most wanted. (The Lib Dems' early morning press conferences have been "absolute bedlam," confides a Clegg aide. "We don't have to bribe journalists with food to get them there.")

A key question for those milling journalists is whether the Lib Dem surge will endure until voting day. Boris Johnson, London's famously outspoken Conservative mayor, derided "Cleggophilia" in a newspaper column as "the biggest load of media-driven nonsense since the funeral of Diana." Johnson might take note of the bouquets that still pile up in front of Kensington Palace on the anniversary of the Princess's death. Part of Diana's appeal was as an unlikely icon of defiance against the old order. The Lib Dems, who emerged from 2009's scandals about parliamentarians' misuse of official expense accounts less damaged in the public's perception than other parties, could benefit, if only marginally, from a protest vote against their more sullied rivals. It's no coincidence that efforts to puncture the Clegg balloon are focusing on his own expense claims, including one for a $3.85 cake pan. He can expect more and tougher scrutiny, not least of his performance in two further TV debates between the leaders on April 22 and April 29.

Clegg, this time talking to TIME in a crowded train carriage entirely reserved for his swollen media entourage, says he is keeping "a healthy sense of perspective" but believes his first TV joust and the unprecedented opportunity it gave him to appeal directly to a mass audience "tapped into a real longing for greater choice. People say to me, 'We don't like being told the only choice is between these two old parties.' "

So what might the third choice entail? Electoral reform is the Lib Dems' top, and most self-interested, priority. Clegg also aims to cut Britain's deficit and proposes a substantial budget saving by scrapping the planned $123 billion replacement of Britain's Trident nuclear submarines. On his country's most important alliance, Clegg says he is "infused with a sense of relief" to see Barack Obama in the White House but nevertheless hopes for a recalibration of relations between Washington and London. "We can grow up a bit, repatriate foreign policy. We don't need to be a satellite of the United States."

Such views belong to an ideology Clegg describes as "unambiguously liberal," dedicated to promoting fairness and dismantling vested interests. "Liberal economics starts and finishes with level playing fields," he says. "We've had this grotesque oligopoly in the financial-services sector under both Conservative and Labour parties, where [policy was] twisted and distorted to suit the needs of a particular sector because it was treated as this great goose that was laying golden eggs in the City of London."

"Greedy bankers" feature frequently in Cleggian rhetoric. The antipathy may be mutual. A November poll, the first of many to predict that the elections could produce a hung Parliament, triggered a brief run on the pound. Clegg's opponents continue to warn that an indecisive electoral outcome would weaken Britain's currency, though in truth the pound sank to its lowest ebb against the dollar in March 2008, when the Conservatives' poll lead was substantial. But there's no doubt markets are jittery about the rise of the Lib Dems.

So too are Little Englanders and Euroskeptics and the many other flavors of Brit who see "abroad" as a bit of a threat. Clegg is a passionate pro-European, a former employee of the European Commission and former member of the European Parliament who pokes gentle fun at opponents of European integration for holding the "19th century view that agreeing on stuff with other nationalities is an insult to your national pride." He'd like Britain to adopt the euro as its currency "when conditions are right." And as that bible of Little England, the Mail on Sunday newspaper, pointed out to its readers on April 18, Clegg is "only a quarter English," scion of a Dutch mom and a half-Russian dad. His wife Miriam Gonzalez Durantez is Spanish, their kids have distinctly foreign names — Antonio, Alberto and Miguel — and Clegg employs (sharp intake of breath) "a German spin doctor."

That such a cosmopolitan should find himself cast as Britain's favorite pol is telling. Cleggmania is a sign not only of how devoutly Britons yearn for something new politically but also of how profoundly Britain itself has changed. The country's top-down political system was devised in an age when people knew their place. Modern Britons have no such certainties. Somehow or other, they are beginning to think that Nick Clegg speaks for them.

Thanks Tex, that is an interesting article.

It is unfair to say that people do not know what Nick Clegg represents. In the two debates we have had so far he has had ample opportunity to show us what he stands for and what he stands against.

I can very much see him getting a larger slice of Parliament than ever before, I have been maintaining that for months. But I don't think it is because people suddenly like him or his party in large droves, but because they are fed up with the main two parties when there is so little between them this year. In effect we are being asked to decide between a Tony Blair clone and Tony Blair's deputy. No wonder people are choosing to vote for somebody else!

I'm certainly not going to vote Lib-Dem, mostly because I am not pro-Europe but nor am I anti-Europe, I just want some cold hard facts about what we are getting ourselves into. I don't like Nick Clegg's almost blind love of the EU, nor would I ever vote UKIP who want to pull us out altogether, no questions asked. I want to be part of Europe, but I want it to be less bloated and less bureaucratic than it has been so far.

The other issue for why he and his party are making gains is of course as the author also comments, one that people are laying blame for this economic downturn squarely on business. The Lib-Dems have been a strong advocate of making them pay for their recklessness, and quite right too. The market should never be allowed to dictate policy otherwise what are elections for? Sorry Tex, but I hope that we never go down the Free Market Capitalism route. It might work for you, but Europe still holds to a few threads of socialism that means we expect businesses to be held accountable for their actions and we expect them to hold a duty of care toward their employees and to the countries in which they operate. There has been too little of that in the last 30 years under Thatcher and Blair and the Lib-Dems are riding high on an anti-corporate feeling right now.

One thing is certain is that this election is not going to be clear cut. In 12 days we will know the outcome.

I found it interesting and figured you'd like it, too.

He comes off as a leftist to me. But he also is riding on the same thing Bama did.... economy. It'll be fun to watch where he takes you guys if he's elected.

I don't think you understand me. I like the free market but i also think those who destroyed this economy (Wall Street and others) should be held accountable. They committed crimes some of them. Other things were lax regulation of laws already in place. Things need to tighten up some.

He is absolutely a leftist and doesn't pretend otherwise in the way that Zanu-Labour does. As I said before, I feel that he might have something valid to say during a time of economic boom but the support he gets is in saying the right things in pointing the finger of blame at industry for these problems.

I don't think he will win the election because of so many other factors. We don't know how representative the poll is that has been judging these debates, probably not very accurate. But if he does win I'll eat my hat.

I have an old i'll send ya via FedEx that you can eat.

I don't think he'll win myself from what i've read. People won't move that far to the left there, i don't think. Papers here are writing articles now and then on how much gov'ts in Europe are moving to the right (not far right). Germany is an example with Merkel.

Another thing... Cable2 really likes this guy. Good reason for him to lose.

TexasBlue wrote:I don't think he'll win myself from what i've read. People won't move that far to the left there, i don't think.

No, you're right about that. We are very much a centrist country and Clegg is too far left for most people's tastes. He won't win because third place is where the Lib-Dems have always been. There will undoubtedly be a hung Parliament and the Lib-Dems will have the most infleunce they have ever had, but they are not going to win.

TexasBlue wrote:Papers here are writing articles now and then on how much gov'ts in Europe are moving to the right (not far right). Germany is an example with Merkel.

That is probably rather overstated. Some governments are moving slightly right, but it is only in a fiscal sense. Europeans still blame big business for this catastrophic economic downturn so giving more freedom to business right now is out of the question of the minds of the electorate, especially in this country. The Social Democracies of Europe are not going to be dismantled any time soon. Margaret Thatcher is the closest we have ever had to a US style Republican and we'll never see her like again. She was a necessary evil in 1979 against a Labour party in disarray but I don't think we'll ever take your path again.

TexasBlue wrote:Another thing... Cable2 really likes this guy. Good reason for him to lose.

Haha, Do you have any idea where cable2 is from? English is clearly not his native language and I'm trying to figure it out. I'm thinking either South America or Meditteranean Europe by his language skills (Southern France, Spain, Portugal Italy, Greece etc).

That's what i meant by moving to the right. What some here call Liberalism is centrist over there. If you guys move to the right, it's best we can hope for.

Cable, if i remember right, told me a year ago or so that he lived in Italy. But from all his rhetoric and posts, i sincerely believe he is either of Arab descent or a convert to Islam. Nobody would have the hangups he does over Bush/Gitmo/Iraq/Afghanistan, etc like he does. Even DAS doesn't go to those lengths and he's far left in my opinion. Very rarely do i reply to him. I'll make a reply on an original post but when he starts his sh!t, i don't even bother because what he does is in fact a form of trolling... which is trying to instigate a fight. Even Moonman told him he thought he was off his rocker a couple months ago.