http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/02/weekinreview/02lyall.htmlBritons remain obsessed with the minutiae of social distinction, and the candidates have gone into elaborate contortions in their efforts to present themselves as ordinary working people. The Labour leader, Prime Minister Gordon Brown, whose father was a Scottish minister and who became a left-wing student leader at the University of Edinburgh, can plausibly get away with this. It is a harder act to pull off for David Cameron, the Conservative leader, and Nick Clegg, the leader of the Liberal Democrats.
...
Professor Fielding and others say that at a time like this, personality — particularly the kind that flourishes in heavily choreographed 90-minute debates — is the last thing the voters should focus on. “Glib fluency in front of the camera might win over TV viewers, but it is not an indicator of a politician’s genuine stature,” the columnist Leo McKinstry wrote recently in The Daily Mail.
The debates have changed the course of the campaign by reconfiguring the political landscape. Unexpectedly catapulted to prominence at the first debate by his earnest demeanor and smooth, fresh approach, Mr. Clegg has put his party on the map, successfully presenting himself as a viable alternative to politics as usual. Mr. Cameron has used the debates to hone his credentials as potential prime minister-in-waiting, assuaging the fears of some voters, at least, that he is too slick and callow for Britain’s top job.
But Mr. Brown, a naturally uncomfortable person, has fared poorly next to his self-assured opponents. The spin from his aides that being telegenic is less important than being serious hasn’t gained traction with the public. Told to humanize his campaign by interacting with ordinary voters, Mr. Brown sabotaged the effort last week when he forgot he was wearing a microphone, angrily dismissing a lifelong Labour supporter as a “bigoted woman” after she expressed worries about immigration.