American View of the Clegg-Huhne Hustings

I went to the Clegg-Huhne hustings last night in London and took a guest to get the benefit of her view.  My guest is an American, doing a PhD at the LSE on the psychology of leadership, and doesn’t have pre-formed views of British politics but helped Sen. Bill Bradley’s campaign in 2000.  I didn’t tell her my views before getting hers.

Her opinion on last night, in summary:

1. Where was the music and balloon drop at the end?

2. Nick is the better candidate by miles, she thought him very charismatic.

3. She reckons Nick’s speech was written by someone with some sense of psychology, but that he may have expected to speak first.

4. She could imagine Nick doing well in American politics but not so much Chris, except she thought American voters may think Nick looks too young or a man for good times but not a crisis.

5. As a psychologist she thinks Chris’ body language at certain points ”screamed defeat” and she noticed more than me that he repeats certain words (e.g. “craven”).

6. She suspects Nick’s personality type is “leader”, he genuinely believes in himself, and Chris’ personality type is “manager” and his hold on his past achievements belies nervousness now.

7. Chris answered the questions and Nick spoke to the person asking the question.

8. Surprised they used the word “redistribution” which American politicians wouldn’t, and that we have policy on votes at 16. 

9. Thought they were wise not to lower themselves to laying into Saj Karim.

There was a fair amount of brainy scientific Harvard psycho-stuff to explain these conclusions.  But I wasn’t able to understand it so won’t try to repeat.

---

Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)

• Clegg on Trident: legal inconsistency
• Comments on Chris Huhne’s announcement speech
• Good moves by Clegg