« | Home | »


Tags: |

I don’t think I’ve ever seen anything quite like the Tory press’s onslaught on Nick Clegg over the last couple of days. One minute, the Lib Dems can’t get in the news, no matter what they do; the next minute, they’re notorious cat-stranglers. No, it’s even worse: they’re (gasp!) partly foreign! Well, sort of – Dutch mother, Russian grandfather, Spanish wife. ‘Is anything about this man British?’ yowled the Mail. It seemed a self-defeating way of putting it, since the answer is yes – he is.

The Torygraph followed up today with a thinnish-feeling item about donor’s cheques being routed through Clegg’s personal accounts on their way to a researcher. This sounded more chaotic than anything else, and oversold by the paper’s coverage. The Mail returned to the fray with a story about a ‘Nazi slur’: translated out of Mail-speak, that meant Clegg had somewhere said people in Britain go on about the war a bit too much. That’s one of those thunderingly self-evident truths that no one in public life is allowed to say; I’m beginning to really warm to Thick Nick. Even the Guardian had a go, comparing his background with Cameron’s to plug the line that the two men are a very similar type of super-entitled clever public schoolboy who went into politics because they had such good connections.

The pile-on has a number of simple explanations. One is narrative arc: he’s gone up, it’s time for him to come down. Being the people who pull him down gives the papers power, and they like that.

On the right, though, the problem is much more acute. David Yelland, former editor of the Sun, wrote a candid piece about this for the Guardian. Murdoch has no ties to the Lib Dems, never makes any attempt to cultivate them, and has no ‘in’ with the party. Yelland:

Just imagine the scene in many of our national newspaper newsrooms on the morning a Lib-Lab vote has kept the Tories out of office. “Who knows Clegg?” they would say.

There would be a resounding silence.

“Who can put in a call to Gordon?” another would cry.

You would hear a pin drop on the editorial floor.

The fact is these papers, and others, decided months ago that Cameron was going to win. They are now invested in his victory in the most undemocratic fashion.

If that became more widely known, it would win quite a few votes for Clegg. The other papers are in a similar position: no one bothers to cultivate the Lib Dems and therefore the party doesn’t owe anything to anybody in the press.

Comments on “Cat-Stranglers”

  1. Camus123 says:

    The Mail piece also includes this stunning revelation: he also claimed Britain found it hard to accept that Germany had been a ‘vastly more prosperous nation’ and that ‘we need to be put back in our place’. Almost makes me want to vote Lib Dem.

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/election/article-1267921/GENERAL-ELECTION-2010-Nick-Clegg-Nazi-slur-Britain.html#ixzz0lvUm6G8D

  2. pinhut says:

    Andrew Sullivan picked up on the supposed ‘Nazi slur’, at once showing that 1) it was nothing but common sense, and 2) that he continues to know absolutely nothing about British politics or the mindset of most British people.

    The worrying thing is that the Lib Dems are being painted as interlopers and are a mainstream political party. It shows how closed things are at the top. Now, how long before they work ‘terrorist’ into one of these smears.

Comment on this post

Log in or register to post a comment.

  • Recent Posts

    RSS – posts

  • Contributors

  • Recent Comments

    • name on Who is the enemy?: Simply stating it is correct doesn't make it so, I just wish you would apply the same epistemic vigilance to "Muslim crimes" as you do to their Hebrew...
    • Glen Newey on Unwinnable War: The legal issue admits of far less clarity than the simple terms in which you – I imagine quite sincerely – frame them. For the benefit of readers...
    • Geoff Roberts on The New Normal: The causes go back a long way into the colonial past, but the more immediate causes stem from the activities of the US forces in the name of freedom a...
    • sol_adelman on The New Normal: There's also the fact that the French state denied the mass drownings of '61 even happened for forty-odd years. No episode in post-war W European hist...
    • funky gibbon on At Wembley: If England get France in the quarter finals of Euro 16 I expect that a good deal of the fraternity will go out the window

    RSS – comments

  • Contact

  • Blog Archive

  • From the LRB Archive

    Stephen W. Smith:
    The French Intervention in Mali
    7 February 2013

    ‘Depending on what counts as military intervention, France changed the course of history by force in sub-Saharan Africa about thirty times between 1945 and 1990.’

    Bruce Whitehouse:
    What went wrong in Mali?
    30 August 2012

    ‘The Republic of Mali has long been seen as the exception to the dictatorships or civil wars that have seemed the rule in West Africa since the end of the Cold War.’

    Jeremy Harding: Algeria’s Camus
    4 December 2014

    ‘Camus liked to hector the settlers, whose behaviour reflected the structural injustices of colonialism. All the same, he felt that certain misconceptions in metropolitan France needed straightening out.’

    Hugh Roberts: The Hijackers
    16 July 2015

    ‘American intelligence saw Islamic State coming and was not only relaxed about the prospect but, it appears, positively interested in it.’

Advertisement Advertisement