The most likely outcome - to me - is Buttigieg first, Sanders second. The question, that is very much unresolved, is whether this is enough to make Buttigieg the establishment candidate.
The possible upset would be if Klobuchar snuck into a decent position. She performed very well in the last debate, and the next one is just a week or so away (in Iowa), with a far less crowded stage. She's from a neighbouring state, and her on the ground organisation is better than Biden's. I don't think it's impossible she ends up with a reasonable result.
The new Iowa caucuses poll average from 270 to win from January 2nd has Sanders overtaking Buttigieg to lead 21.5% to 21% with Biden 3rd on 19% and Warren 4th on 15%
Sanders has a weaker on the ground organisation that Buttigieg, especially in rural areas where his presence is almost non-existent. In small rural precincts, there will be a couple of Buttigieg organisers, a Warren one, and a Klobuchar one. I think that means that Sanders struggles to get to 15% in those places.
If the polls remain the same (which of course they won't), then I would expect Buttigieg to beat Sanders in Iowa.
That being said, there's still a month to go, and a debate with far fewer candidates. The attack on Iran probably plays into Sanders hands too. So, we'll see.
Sanders got 49.59% in the Iowa caucuses last time and his organisation will likely be better this time
But that doesn't change the fact that Sanders doesn't have people in rural areas. When the caucus comes around, and forty people gather in a chilly church hall, there will be two Buttigieg organisers, one Warren one, and probably a Biden and a Klobuchar one. He has fewer offices, and fewer paid staffers than 2016.
I would expect that Sanders will do exceptionally well in urban Iowa, and around the universities. I would expect him to do much less well in conservative, rural Iowa.
And Biden and Klobuchar will also be competing for that more conservative rural vote with Buttigieg, Sanders only has a rapidly fading Warren to compete with in urban, liberal Iowa
Do you really think that Biden and Buttigieg don't have field offices and organisers in urban parts of Iowa?
Thanks for the comments, all. I didn't know Cheltenham had a university! The guy does want to live in the south for family reasons. Does anyone know Southampton at all?
On the leadership question, I'm keeping an open mind at present. Let's hear what the candidates have to say.
It’s hardly the world’s best uni, but it’s there. Got some nice buildings as well (that’s Francis Close Hall not Pittville). It’s also reasonably easy to get to universities in Bristol, Oxford and Worcester.
The most likely outcome - to me - is Buttigieg first, Sanders second. The question, that is very much unresolved, is whether this is enough to make Buttigieg the establishment candidate.
The possible upset would be if Klobuchar snuck into a decent position. She performed very well in the last debate, and the next one is just a week or so away (in Iowa), with a far less crowded stage. She's from a neighbouring state, and her on the ground organisation is better than Biden's. I don't think it's impossible she ends up with a reasonable result.
The new Iowa caucuses poll average from 270 to win from January 2nd has Sanders overtaking Buttigieg to lead 21.5% to 21% with Biden 3rd on 19% and Warren 4th on 15%
Sanders has a weaker on the ground organisation that Buttigieg, especially in rural areas where his presence is almost non-existent. In small rural precincts, there will be a couple of Buttigieg organisers, a Warren one, and a Klobuchar one. I think that means that Sanders struggles to get to 15% in those places.
If the polls remain the same (which of course they won't), then I would expect Buttigieg to beat Sanders in Iowa.
That being said, there's still a month to go, and a debate with far fewer candidates. The attack on Iran probably plays into Sanders hands too. So, we'll see.
Sanders got 49.59% in the Iowa caucuses last time and his organisation will likely be better this time
He’s not running against Hillary this time...
Just as well given his recent health scare. A nice gentle jog is the most he should go on.
But that doesn't change the fact that Sanders doesn't have people in rural areas. When the caucus comes around, and forty people gather in a chilly church hall, there will be two Buttigieg organisers, one Warren one, and probably a Biden and a Klobuchar one. He has fewer offices, and fewer paid staffers than 2016.
I would expect that Sanders will do exceptionally well in urban Iowa, and around the universities. I would expect him to do much less well in conservative, rural Iowa.
And Biden and Klobuchar will also be competing for that more conservative rural vote with Buttigieg, Sanders only has a rapidly fading Warren to compete with in urban, liberal Iowa
Do you really think that Biden and Buttigieg don't have field offices and organisers in urban parts of Iowa?
But that doesn't change the fact that Sanders doesn't have people in rural areas. When the caucus comes around, and forty people gather in a chilly church hall, there will be two Buttigieg organisers, one Warren one, and probably a Biden and a Klobuchar one. He has fewer offices, and fewer paid staffers than 2016.
I would expect that Sanders will do exceptionally well in urban Iowa, and around the universities. I would expect him to do much less well in conservative, rural Iowa.
And Biden and Klobuchar will also be competing for that more conservative rural vote with Buttigieg, Sanders only has a rapidly fading Warren to compete with in urban, liberal Iowa
Do you really think that Biden and Buttigieg don't have field offices and organisers in urban parts of Iowa?
I have seen the Scottish Parliament. Somebody, somewhere, is missing a B&Q. It's made even worse by th fact it's in Edinburgh, which is stuffed to the gunnels with nice buildings. How the hell Cardiff, which is a slightly worse version of Bristol, ended up with a nicer Parliament is beyond me.
Oi! Both Bristol and Cardiff are fine cities. Certainly far better than London.
I was recently asked by someone who wants to live within reach of a reasonably rich cultural environment without paying a fortune whether Bristol or Southampton were any good - concerts, open lectures, that sort of thing - and not as expensive as London or Oxford. Any advice?
Bristol would be nearly as expensive as Oxford, otherwise I would have thought it would be a match for it. It’s a pleasanter city than Oxford in many crucial respects actually. But I would have thought the obvious place to look for that combination while avoiding vast expense would be Cheltenham.
Winchester
Really?
I want to like Winchester, but I've found it to be a cultural non-entity. Admittedly on little evidence.
Salisbury seems much better, with perhaps a similar background.
I tried to expand the entry but I got caught by the six-minute rule. Yes, Salisbury is better, but there's something about Winchester I like. I think it's a question of scale: it's the kind of place where you can easily walk to-and-fro. I think I imposed my own desires on the OP rather than answering the question...
I'll give Winchester another chance then. I was thinking about buying an out-of-town retreat and thus looked at Winchester. Today's retreat may well become my home in the future.
Thanks for the comments, all. I didn't know Cheltenham had a university! The guy does want to live in the south for family reasons. Does anyone know Southampton at all?
On the leadership question, I'm keeping an open mind at present. Let's hear what the candidates have to say.
Southampton is a bit meh. It was nice before the Luftwaffe and concrete, but now its architecturally just dull. Good transport links to London and you can get a ship to that Europe or a train to Southampton Airport or a longer train to Gatwick Airport, plus you can get to anywhere on the South Coast. But apart from the transport links, nothing springs to mind, to be honest. It's ok-ish.
But that doesn't change the fact that Sanders doesn't have people in rural areas. When the caucus comes around, and forty people gather in a chilly church hall, there will be two Buttigieg organisers, one Warren one, and probably a Biden and a Klobuchar one. He has fewer offices, and fewer paid staffers than 2016.
I would expect that Sanders will do exceptionally well in urban Iowa, and around the universities. I would expect him to do much less well in conservative, rural Iowa.
And Biden and Klobuchar will also be competing for that more conservative rural vote with Buttigieg, Sanders only has a rapidly fading Warren to compete with in urban, liberal Iowa
Do you really think that Biden and Buttigieg don't have field offices and organisers in urban parts of Iowa?
And can you exclude creationists from the search for a new physics teacher?
Depends on if, like Sir Fred Hoyle, you think the Big Bang Theory is creationist. It is also the one currently taught in schools. In my limited experience Physics teachers are much more likely to be practising Christians than biology teachers are, although I haven’t met any Young Earth Creationists in that role.
Thanks for the comments, all. I didn't know Cheltenham had a university! The guy does want to live in the south for family reasons. Does anyone know Southampton at all?
On the leadership question, I'm keeping an open mind at present. Let's hear what the candidates have to say.
Southampton is a bit meh. It was nice before the Luftwaffe and concrete, but now its architecturally just dull. Good transport links to London and you can get a ship to that Europe or a train to Southampton Airport or a longer train to Gatwick Airport, plus you can get to anywhere on the South Coast. But apart from the transport links, nothing springs to mind, to be honest. It's ok-ish.
Southampton is rapidly becoming dominated by the University as well - everything else seems to be shutting down.
I was recently asked by someone who wants to live within reach of a reasonably rich cultural environment without paying a fortune whether Bristol or Southampton were any good - concerts, open lectures, that sort of thing - and not as expensive as London or Oxford. Any advice?
Bristol would be nearly as expensive as Oxford, otherwise I would have thought it would be a match for it. It’s a pleasanter city than Oxford in many crucial respects actually. But I would have thought the obvious place to look for that combination while avoiding vast expense would be Cheltenham.
Thanks for the comments, all. I didn't know Cheltenham had a university! The guy does want to live in the south for family reasons. Does anyone know Southampton at all?
On the leadership question, I'm keeping an open mind at present. Let's hear what the candidates have to say.
It depends what they want - if village life is what they are looking for, Oxfordshire has some very nice places, which are within easy reach of the city. If you go for something that isn't commutable to London, the prices really drop.
I have seen the Scottish Parliament. Somebody, somewhere, is missing a B&Q. It's made even worse by th fact it's in Edinburgh, which is stuffed to the gunnels with nice buildings. How the hell Cardiff, which is a slightly worse version of Bristol, ended up with a nicer Parliament is beyond me.
I think Holyrood is a very interesting bit of architecture, although there is nothing Scottish about it, and I would rate it architecturally above the Berlin and Canberra parliaments, which were also expensive projects.
Apart from the project mismanagement, you can see why it cost so much to build. There are no two straight lines in the place. It's a very fluid design. Parts of the building work better than others in my view but it's all visually interesting.
(Anguished sotto voce groan) I know what you mean, and it works in theory, but I was looking at it and all I could think of is "shed"...
I think Holyrood works visually better on the inside than the outside. I particularly like the committee rooms:
For something Scottish they should choose a classical design to reflect Scotland's 300 year love affair with classicism. Starting just across the road:
Ending up in the 1950s with the National Library. What classicism means in the 21st century, I'm not sure:
I have seen the Scottish Parliament. Somebody, somewhere, is missing a B&Q. It's made even worse by th fact it's in Edinburgh, which is stuffed to the gunnels with nice buildings. How the hell Cardiff, which is a slightly worse version of Bristol, ended up with a nicer Parliament is beyond me.
Oi! Both Bristol and Cardiff are fine cities. Certainly far better than London.
I was recently asked by someone who wants to live within reach of a reasonably rich cultural environment without paying a fortune whether Bristol or Southampton were any good - concerts, open lectures, that sort of thing - and not as expensive as London or Oxford. Any advice?
Bristol would be nearly as expensive as Oxford, otherwise I would have thought it would be a match for it. It’s a pleasanter city than Oxford in many crucial respects actually. But I would have thought the obvious place to look for that combination while avoiding vast expense would be Cheltenham.
Winchester
Really?
I want to like Winchester, but I've found it to be a cultural non-entity. Admittedly on little evidence.
Salisbury seems much better, with perhaps a similar background.
I tried to expand the entry but I got caught by the six-minute rule. Yes, Salisbury is better, but there's something about Winchester I like. I think it's a question of scale: it's the kind of place where you can easily walk to-and-fro. I think I imposed my own desires on the OP rather than answering the question...
I'll give Winchester another chance then. I was thinking about buying an out-of-town retreat and thus looked at Winchester. Today's retreat may well become my home in the future.
Thank you, but please don't make precipitate decisions on my ill-considered guesses. I like Winchester, but only because it (just!) falls within the set of Places I Can Afford. There may well be nicer places that would suit you better but are off my mental map.
The most likely outcome - to me - is Buttigieg first, Sanders second. The question, that is very much unresolved, is whether this is enough to make Buttigieg the establishment candidate.
The possible upset would be if Klobuchar snuck into a decent position. She performed very well in the last debate, and the next one is just a week or so away (in Iowa), with a far less crowded stage. She's from a neighbouring state, and her on the ground organisation is better than Biden's. I don't think it's impossible she ends up with a reasonable result.
The new Iowa caucuses poll average from 270 to win from January 2nd has Sanders overtaking Buttigieg to lead 21.5% to 21% with Biden 3rd on 19% and Warren 4th on 15%
Sanders has a weaker on the ground organisation that Buttigieg, especially in rural areas where his presence is almost non-existent. In small rural precincts, there will be a couple of Buttigieg organisers, a Warren one, and a Klobuchar one. I think that means that Sanders struggles to get to 15% in those places.
If the polls remain the same (which of course they won't), then I would expect Buttigieg to beat Sanders in Iowa.
That being said, there's still a month to go, and a debate with far fewer candidates. The attack on Iran probably plays into Sanders hands too. So, we'll see.
Sanders got 49.59% in the Iowa caucuses last time and his organisation will likely be better this time
He’s not running against Hillary this time...
Just as well given his recent health scare. A nice gentle jog is the most he should go on.
He could take Hills at one handed press-ups, easy....
"I shall be defending Ussher's chronology as an honorable effort for its time and arguing that our usual ridicule only records a lamentable small-mindedness based on mistaken use of present criteria to judge a distant and different past
Ussher represented the best of scholarship in his time. He was part of a substantial research tradition, a large community of intellectuals working toward a common goal under an accepted methodology…"
High praise indeed from sadly-missed Stephen Jay Gould.
Thanks for the comments, all. I didn't know Cheltenham had a university! The guy does want to live in the south for family reasons. Does anyone know Southampton at all?
On the leadership question, I'm keeping an open mind at present. Let's hear what the candidates have to say.
Southampton is a bit meh. It was nice before the Luftwaffe and concrete, but now its architecturally just dull. Good transport links to London and you can get a ship to that Europe or a train to Southampton Airport or a longer train to Gatwick Airport, plus you can get to anywhere on the South Coast. But apart from the transport links, nothing springs to mind, to be honest. It's ok-ish.
One of my earliest memories - I was just two - was being awe-struck by the size of the Queen Mary and the Queen Elizabeth, both in port at the same time.
I have seen the Scottish Parliament. Somebody, somewhere, is missing a B&Q. It's made even worse by th fact it's in Edinburgh, which is stuffed to the gunnels with nice buildings. How the hell Cardiff, which is a slightly worse version of Bristol, ended up with a nicer Parliament is beyond me.
Oi! Both Bristol and Cardiff are fine cities. Certainly far better than London.
I was recently asked by someone who wants to live within reach of a reasonably rich cultural environment without paying a fortune whether Bristol or Southampton were any good - concerts, open lectures, that sort of thing - and not as expensive as London or Oxford. Any advice?
Bristol would be nearly as expensive as Oxford, otherwise I would have thought it would be a match for it. It’s a pleasanter city than Oxford in many crucial respects actually. But I would have thought the obvious place to look for that combination while avoiding vast expense would be Cheltenham.
Winchester
Really?
I want to like Winchester, but I've found it to be a cultural non-entity. Admittedly on little evidence.
Salisbury seems much better, with perhaps a similar background.
I tried to expand the entry but I got caught by the six-minute rule. Yes, Salisbury is better, but there's something about Winchester I like. I think it's a question of scale: it's the kind of place where you can easily walk to-and-fro. I think I imposed my own desires on the OP rather than answering the question...
I'll give Winchester another chance then. I was thinking about buying an out-of-town retreat and thus looked at Winchester. Today's retreat may well become my home in the future.
Thank you, but please don't make precipitate decisions on my ill-considered guesses. I like Winchester, but only because it (just!) falls within the set of Places I Can Afford. There may well be nicer places that would suit you better but are off my mental map.
The Omnium property fund fiver won't be spent rashly.
Other peoples experiences and impressions of places are really important. You can only get a fleeting glance yourself, unless you live there.
Unfortunately in the UK these simple decisions are now the most important we all make.
But that doesn't change the fact that Sanders doesn't have people in rural areas. When the caucus comes around, and forty people gather in a chilly church hall, there will be two Buttigieg organisers, one Warren one, and probably a Biden and a Klobuchar one. He has fewer offices, and fewer paid staffers than 2016.
I would expect that Sanders will do exceptionally well in urban Iowa, and around the universities. I would expect him to do much less well in conservative, rural Iowa.
And Biden and Klobuchar will also be competing for that more conservative rural vote with Buttigieg, Sanders only has a rapidly fading Warren to compete with in urban, liberal Iowa
Do you really think that Biden and Buttigieg don't have field offices and organisers in urban parts of Iowa?
There are urban parts of Iowa?
Des Moines - about the size of York.
Yes I know. It was a joke.
Well, Bill Bryson has been saying that for years and he should know.
And can you exclude creationists from the search for a new physics teacher?
Depends on if, like Sir Fred Hoyle, you think the Big Bang Theory is creationist. It is also the one currently taught in schools. In my limited experience Physics teachers are much more likely to be practising Christians than biology teachers are, although I haven’t met any Young Earth Creationists in that role.
It always amuses me that the Big Bang Theory was first posited by a Catholic priest.
I have seen the Scottish Parliament. Somebody, somewhere, is missing a B&Q. It's made even worse by th fact it's in Edinburgh, which is stuffed to the gunnels with nice buildings. How the hell Cardiff, which is a slightly worse version of Bristol, ended up with a nicer Parliament is beyond me.
I think Holyrood is a very interesting bit of architecture, although there is nothing Scottish about it, and I would rate it architecturally above the Berlin and Canberra parliaments, which were also expensive projects.
Apart from the project mismanagement, you can see why it cost so much to build. There are no two straight lines in the place. It's a very fluid design. Parts of the building work better than others in my view but it's all visually interesting.
(Anguished sotto voce groan) I know what you mean, and it works in theory, but I was looking at it and all I could think of is "shed"...
I think Holyrood works visually better on the inside than the outside. I particularly like the committee rooms:
For something Scottish they should choose a classical design to reflect Scotland's 300 year love affair with classicism. Starting just across the road:
Ending up in the 1950s with the National Library. What classicism means in the 21st century, I'm not sure:
That last one needs some red, vertical banners.
It's a 1930s design, completed after the Second World War, so I guess it's typical of the monumentalism of that time. The National Library facade is humanised by Hew Lorimer's sculptures that don't really come out in the small photo.
I have seen the Scottish Parliament. Somebody, somewhere, is missing a B&Q. It's made even worse by th fact it's in Edinburgh, which is stuffed to the gunnels with nice buildings. How the hell Cardiff, which is a slightly worse version of Bristol, ended up with a nicer Parliament is beyond me.
Oi! Both Bristol and Cardiff are fine cities. Certainly far better than London.
I was recently asked by someone who wants to live within reach of a reasonably rich cultural environment without paying a fortune whether Bristol or Southampton were any good - concerts, open lectures, that sort of thing - and not as expensive as London or Oxford. Any advice?
Bristol would be nearly as expensive as Oxford, otherwise I would have thought it would be a match for it. It’s a pleasanter city than Oxford in many crucial respects actually. But I would have thought the obvious place to look for that combination while avoiding vast expense would be Cheltenham.
Winchester
Really?
I want to like Winchester, but I've found it to be a cultural non-entity. Admittedly on little evidence.
Salisbury seems much better, with perhaps a similar background.
I tried to expand the entry but I got caught by the six-minute rule. Yes, Salisbury is better, but there's something about Winchester I like. I think it's a question of scale: it's the kind of place where you can easily walk to-and-fro. I think I imposed my own desires on the OP rather than answering the question...
I'll give Winchester another chance then. I was thinking about buying an out-of-town retreat and thus looked at Winchester. Today's retreat may well become my home in the future.
Thank you, but please don't make precipitate decisions on my ill-considered guesses. I like Winchester, but only because it (just!) falls within the set of Places I Can Afford. There may well be nicer places that would suit you better but are off my mental map.
I visited Winchester once and only once in August 2018 and found it inundated with young tourists - apart for the mighty Cathedral itself which was most impressive and tranquil. It seems the young tourists were only there to parade up and down the street admiring each other without quite realising why they were there.
Thanks for the comments, all. I didn't know Cheltenham had a university! The guy does want to live in the south for family reasons. Does anyone know Southampton at all?
On the leadership question, I'm keeping an open mind at present. Let's hear what the candidates have to say.
Southampton is a bit meh. It was nice before the Luftwaffe and concrete, but now its architecturally just dull. Good transport links to London and you can get a ship to that Europe or a train to Southampton Airport or a longer train to Gatwick Airport, plus you can get to anywhere on the South Coast. But apart from the transport links, nothing springs to mind, to be honest. It's ok-ish.
One of my earliest memories - I as just two - was being awe-struck by the size of the Queen Mary and the Queen Elizabeth, both in port at the same time.
Can beat that. Travel to Portsmouth. *Both* carriers are in.
But that doesn't change the fact that Sanders doesn't have people in rural areas. When the caucus comes around, and forty people gather in a chilly church hall, there will be two Buttigieg organisers, one Warren one, and probably a Biden and a Klobuchar one. He has fewer offices, and fewer paid staffers than 2016.
I would expect that Sanders will do exceptionally well in urban Iowa, and around the universities. I would expect him to do much less well in conservative, rural Iowa.
And Biden and Klobuchar will also be competing for that more conservative rural vote with Buttigieg, Sanders only has a rapidly fading Warren to compete with in urban, liberal Iowa
Do you really think that Biden and Buttigieg don't have field offices and organisers in urban parts of Iowa?
There are urban parts of Iowa?
Des Moines - about the size of York.
Yes I know. It was a joke.
Well, Bill Bryson has been saying that for years and he should know.
Oh, sorry, you meant your comment was a joke?
I feel there's substance underneath the fluffy daftness. Meanwhile I'm planning on using the fluffy daftness to get a really good night's sleep.
That reads as though any Iranian retaliatory action would be justified (ignoring that the assassination was itself retaliation for attacks on US positions/ people). And the answer to the first question is already known:
Thanks for the comments, all. I didn't know Cheltenham had a university! The guy does want to live in the south for family reasons. Does anyone know Southampton at all?
On the leadership question, I'm keeping an open mind at present. Let's hear what the candidates have to say.
Southampton is a bit meh. It was nice before the Luftwaffe and concrete, but now its architecturally just dull. Good transport links to London and you can get a ship to that Europe or a train to Southampton Airport or a longer train to Gatwick Airport, plus you can get to anywhere on the South Coast. But apart from the transport links, nothing springs to mind, to be honest. It's ok-ish.
One of my earliest memories - I was just two - was being awe-struck by the size of the Queen Mary and the Queen Elizabeth, both in port at the same time.
First time I took the helm of a boat (a UFO34, as it happens) motoring down the Itchen one foggy morning, we soon found ourselves under the towering bow of the QEII. "Should we be here?" I gently enquired. "No," replied the skipper, "but it's OK because they can't see us."
Thanks for the comments, all. I didn't know Cheltenham had a university! The guy does want to live in the south for family reasons. Does anyone know Southampton at all?
On the leadership question, I'm keeping an open mind at present. Let's hear what the candidates have to say.
Southampton is a bit meh. It was nice before the Luftwaffe and concrete, but now its architecturally just dull. Good transport links to London and you can get a ship to that Europe or a train to Southampton Airport or a longer train to Gatwick Airport, plus you can get to anywhere on the South Coast. But apart from the transport links, nothing springs to mind, to be honest. It's ok-ish.
One of my earliest memories - I was just two - was being awe-struck by the size of the Queen Mary and the Queen Elizabeth, both in port at the same time.
First time I took the helm of a boat (a UFO34, as it happens) motoring down the Itchen one foggy morning, we soon found ourselves under the towering bow of the QEII. "Should we be here?" I gently enquired. "No," replied the skipper, "but it's OK because they can't see us."
That reads as though any Iranian retaliatory action would be justified (ignoring that the assassination was itself retaliation for attacks on US positions/ people). And the answer to the first question is already known:
The most likely outcome - to me - is Buttigieg first, Sanders second. The question, that is very much unresolved, is whether this is enough to make Buttigieg the establishment candidate.
The possible upset would be if Klobuchar snuck into a decent position. She performed very well in the last debate, and the next one is just a week or so away (in Iowa), with a far less crowded stage. She's from a neighbouring state, and her on the ground organisation is better than Biden's. I don't think it's impossible she ends up with a reasonable result.
The new Iowa caucuses poll average from 270 to win from January 2nd has Sanders overtaking Buttigieg to lead 21.5% to 21% with Biden 3rd on 19% and Warren 4th on 15%
Sanders has a weaker on the ground organisation that Buttigieg, especially in rural areas where his presence is almost non-existent. In small rural precincts, there will be a couple of Buttigieg organisers, a Warren one, and a Klobuchar one. I think that means that Sanders struggles to get to 15% in those places.
If the polls remain the same (which of course they won't), then I would expect Buttigieg to beat Sanders in Iowa.
That being said, there's still a month to go, and a debate with far fewer candidates. The attack on Iran probably plays into Sanders hands too. So, we'll see.
Sanders got 49.59% in the Iowa caucuses last time and his organisation will likely be better this time
He’s not running against Hillary this time...
No he is running against a divided opposition so a lower voteshare would be enough to win
The most likely outcome - to me - is Buttigieg first, Sanders second. The question, that is very much unresolved, is whether this is enough to make Buttigieg the establishment candidate.
The possible upset would be if Klobuchar snuck into a decent position. She performed very well in the last debate, and the next one is just a week or so away (in Iowa), with a far less crowded stage. She's from a neighbouring state, and her on the ground organisation is better than Biden's. I don't think it's impossible she ends up with a reasonable result.
The new Iowa caucuses poll average from 270 to win from January 2nd has Sanders overtaking Buttigieg to lead 21.5% to 21% with Biden 3rd on 19% and Warren 4th on 15%
Sanders has a weaker on the ground organisation that Buttigieg, especially in rural areas where his presence is almost non-existent. In small rural precincts, there will be a couple of Buttigieg organisers, a Warren one, and a Klobuchar one. I think that means that Sanders struggles to get to 15% in those places.
If the polls remain the same (which of course they won't), then I would expect Buttigieg to beat Sanders in Iowa.
That being said, there's still a month to go, and a debate with far fewer candidates. The attack on Iran probably plays into Sanders hands too. So, we'll see.
Sanders got 49.59% in the Iowa caucuses last time and his organisation will likely be better this time
He’s not running against Hillary this time...
No he is running against a divided opposition so a lower voteshare would be enough to win
Thanks for the comments, all. I didn't know Cheltenham had a university! The guy does want to live in the south for family reasons. Does anyone know Southampton at all?
On the leadership question, I'm keeping an open mind at present. Let's hear what the candidates have to say.
Southampton is a bit meh. It was nice before the Luftwaffe and concrete, but now its architecturally just dull. Good transport links to London and you can get a ship to that Europe or a train to Southampton Airport or a longer train to Gatwick Airport, plus you can get to anywhere on the South Coast. But apart from the transport links, nothing springs to mind, to be honest. It's ok-ish.
One of my earliest memories - I as just two - was being awe-struck by the size of the Queen Mary and the Queen Elizabeth, both in port at the same time.
Can beat that. Travel to Portsmouth. *Both* carriers are in.
Up to a point, Lord Copper, but the RMS QE & QM were both bigger than HMS QE & PoW - although all of them would look jolly impressive.
That reads as though any Iranian retaliatory action would be justified (ignoring that the assassination was itself retaliation for attacks on US positions/ people). And the answer to the first question is already known:
Comments
https://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/476689-bloomberg-rises-to-third-place-alongside-warren-in-national-poll
In my limited experience Physics teachers are much more likely to be practising Christians than biology teachers are, although I haven’t met any Young Earth Creationists in that role.
On the leadership question, I'm keeping an open mind at present. Let's hear what the candidates have to say.
It depends what they want - if village life is what they are looking for, Oxfordshire has some very nice places, which are within easy reach of the city. If you go for something that isn't commutable to London, the prices really drop.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfjWANrhl5g
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ussher_chronology
"I shall be defending Ussher's chronology as an honorable effort for its time and arguing that our usual ridicule only records a lamentable small-mindedness based on mistaken use of present criteria to judge a distant and different past
Ussher represented the best of scholarship in his time. He was part of a substantial research tradition, a large community of intellectuals working toward a common goal under an accepted methodology…"
High praise indeed from sadly-missed Stephen Jay Gould.
Other peoples experiences and impressions of places are really important. You can only get a fleeting glance yourself, unless you live there.
Unfortunately in the UK these simple decisions are now the most important we all make.
Oh, sorry, you meant your comment was a joke?
https://twitter.com/SkyNewsBreak/status/1213143737255284736?s=20
Sanders meanwhile is raising the most, up to $34 million to $22 million for Biden and $21 million for Warren
New Thread