Here are my impressions of last night's leaders' debate, the first ever of its kind in British history.
- Best overall performance: Nick Clegg (Lib Dems). Clegg's mission last night was to raise his public profile and that of the Liberal Democrats. He did so admirably. Clegg also provided some of the best analysis of the pathologies of Labour and the Conservatives by noting that their shared commitment to renewing the Trident nuclear weapons program demonstrated the inability to think beyond a Cold War geopolitical mindset and that the more Brown and Cameron argued, the more they sounded the same. Hands down he came across as the most impressive of the three candidates. Could this make the public less adverse to the prospect of a hung parliament? 68
- Biggest surprise of the night: Gordon Brown (Labour). Even outside of the Labour spin that attempted to lower expectations to the point where anything better than passing out on stage could be framed as glorious, most analysts expected that he would be pretty rubbish in a televised debate format. But Brown was solid, delivering his message clearly, and pressing Cameron at every available opportunity. He actually provided the two wittiest lines of the night while pounding the Conservative : 'you can airbrush your posters, but you cannot airbrush your policies' and 'this is not Question Time, this is answer time David'. 60
- Most predictable performance of the night: David Cameron (Conservatives). He was poised, confident, and articulate. But most of what he had to say lacked depth, substance, or details apart from repeating the necessity of a £6 billion government spending cut to be financed through the euphemism of 'efficiency savings' . You also have to wonder about someone who is unable to comprehend that one can cut waste while maintaining spending levels. To give him credit, he put his public school education to work by starting with a clever rhetorical trick known as a captatio benevolentaie by personally apologizing for the MP expenses scandal. Still, I suspect that overall, Cameron's performance was a wash; it probably reinvigorated the Tory base but did not do enough to woo anyone on the fence or poach supporters from the other two parties. 55
- Biggest rhetorical flop of the night: The use of 'real people' anecdotes by all three candidates. This kind of folksy presentation is a staple of North American debates and psychological studies have shown that anecdotes have a more profound impact on audiences than systematic evidence. However, when Clegg, Brown, and Cameron deployed them, it seemed forced. Moreover, the anecdotes missed the mark by often being tangential to the issue being debated.
- Worst attempt at trying to appear 'normal': Cameron repeatedly stating that his son goes to a state school. Dave, you don't earn prol points for putting your child into the same system used by 93% of the population and then presenting it like some kind of heroic achievement.
- Most disgraceful consensus of the night: All three leaders showed a lack of creativity, imagination, and humanity in positioning immigration as a necessary evil imposed by EU rules that constitutes a security threat to the UK. It was disheartening to see the latent influences of UKIP, the BNP, and the Daily Mail coming through here.
- Biggest elephant in the room left unacknowledged by all three leaders: Why is it that public sector workers and the general public get targeted for massive cuts in wages and services in order to pay for the costs of mitigating the damage caused by the excessive risks taken by City bankers? How is that fair or equitable exactly?
Comments