Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » First results from Iowa have Buttgieg in the lead

13

Comments

  • speedy2speedy2 Posts: 981
    This is why I'm not calling the Iowa State Delegates for Buttigieg yet:
    https://twitter.com/jakemerci/status/1224822697949044738
  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 3,492
    HYUFD said:
    by my maths there's 14% not accounted for in that?

    but the real question is will Pete have picket any momentum from tonight? I think he might well have,
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,148
    BigRich said:

    HYUFD said:
    by my maths there's 14% not accounted for in that?

    but the real question is will Pete have picket any momentum from tonight? I think he might well have,
    https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1224863204066676737?s=20
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    edited February 2020

    Situation in the Deputy race

    https://twitter.com/CLPNominations/status/1224823709678161923?s=20

    Murray nominated by Perthshire South and Kinross and Glasgow Pollock tonight. There should be enough Scottish CLPs left for him to reach 33

    Allin-Khan got 4 CLPs tonight: Brentwood and Ongar, North Wiltshire, Wimbledon, Vale of Glamorgan

    Fascinating to note that Scottish Labour organises itself along Scottish Parliamentary constituencies and not Westminster ones. Sign of the times.

    Worth noting that this strategy gives SLab a little more weight in the process. If they’d chosen to organise along Westminster boundaries there’d be only 59 Scottish CLPs, but by using Holyrood boundaries, they have 73 Scottish CLPs. They’re not as daft as they look! ;)
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,218
    From the FiveThirtyEight:

    Digging into the results a bit … The largest county where all precincts are reporting is Iowa County. Clinton won this county 51 to 49 percent in 2016, and this year it was also an extremely close race: Buttigieg and Warren each got 26 percent of the state delegate equivalents there, while Sanders got 24 percent and Biden got 20 percent. Now, it probably wasn’t the same voters as 2016, and the voters probably didn’t break down this neatly, but it’s worth noting that the sum of Sanders and Warren’s shares this year almost exactly equal Sanders’s share in 2016.
  • To pound it home again, the polling in Iowa was... not wonderful. Even taking into account that it was a caucus, the dramatic Biden slump wasn't reflected in surveys during the last month.
  • Nigelb said:

    Wasn't Casino in a big hole with Sanders ?
    Must be mighty relieved tonight.

    I was - not any more!

    I'm still in a giant one with Bloomberg though.
  • No one else has said it, so well done @rcs1000 for reading Iowa so well.
  • No one else has said it, so well done @rcs1000 for reading Iowa so well.

    Seconded. Great tip.
  • What last night opens up is a three way battle for the mantle of the moderate candidate between Joe Biden, Michael Bloomberg and Pete Buttigieg. If one of these doesn’t emerge quickly as undisputed champion of the moderates, Bernie Sanders is going to be very hard to stop.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,468

    Tim_B said:

    Tim_B said:

    speedy2 said:

    Nigelb said:

    speedy2 said:

    Foxy said:

    speedy2 said:

    Dem elite to move onto Pete as the stop Bernie candidate?

    We are dealing with a PR system here.

    Until he gets above 10% with African Am. Buttigieg will not be the nominee.

    The African Am. vote by itself is not large enough for someone to win on it's own but large enough to prevent someone winning.

    Likewise the establishment vote on it's own is not enough.
    What percentage of the South Bend AA population voted for Pete by your calculation?

    Why do you think Pete is so much more unliked by AAs than the other contenders? I don't think that he is.
    I know that in all opinion polls Buttigieg is getting close to 0% among African Am.

    And it has been well documented why he is not liked, he is perceived by minorities as a Mayor who had a heavy hand against minorities, and also the perception that he is a young rich white snob.

    Bloomberg has also got a similar issue to Buttigieg...
    Odd, as Buttigieg is the only leading candidate who is not at least a millionaire.

    Perception is everything.
    Sanders is a millionaire but he doesn't talk or behave like one in public.

    That how Trump won the working class vote, by talking and behaving like a working class man.
    Trump won the working class vote because the Democrats abandoned it, and because they felt he understood and listened to them. Nobody thinks Trump is working class!
    Trump behaves how a poor person expects a millionaire would behave (stretch limo's, gold chandelier etc).
    In my younger days growing up in Yorkshire, the phrase would be "fur coat, no knickers". :smile:
    Yes, I've heard the same phrase from people in Nottingham referring to residents in West Bridgford.
    Fur coat, ragged drawers, as I recall it. What a thought upon which to start the day. And Good Morning everyone.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,868
    Money on PB winning Iowa available at 1.22 on BFE
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,609

    Tim_B said:

    Tim_B said:

    speedy2 said:

    Nigelb said:

    speedy2 said:

    Foxy said:

    speedy2 said:

    Dem elite to move onto Pete as the stop Bernie candidate?

    We are dealing with a PR system here.

    Until he gets above 10% with African Am. Buttigieg will not be the nominee.

    The African Am. vote by itself is not large enough for someone to win on it's own but large enough to prevent someone winning.

    Likewise the establishment vote on it's own is not enough.
    What percentage of the South Bend AA population voted for Pete by your calculation?

    Why do you think Pete is so much more unliked by AAs than the other contenders? I don't think that he is.
    I know that in all opinion polls Buttigieg is getting close to 0% among African Am.

    And it has been well documented why he is not liked, he is perceived by minorities as a Mayor who had a heavy hand against minorities, and also the perception that he is a young rich white snob.

    Bloomberg has also got a similar issue to Buttigieg...
    Odd, as Buttigieg is the only leading candidate who is not at least a millionaire.

    Perception is everything.
    Sanders is a millionaire but he doesn't talk or behave like one in public.

    That how Trump won the working class vote, by talking and behaving like a working class man.
    Trump won the working class vote because the Democrats abandoned it, and because they felt he understood and listened to them. Nobody thinks Trump is working class!
    Trump behaves how a poor person expects a millionaire would behave (stretch limo's, gold chandelier etc).
    In my younger days growing up in Yorkshire, the phrase would be "fur coat, no knickers". :smile:
    Yes, I've heard the same phrase from people in Nottingham referring to residents in West Bridgford.
    West Bridgford was known as "Bread and Butter Island" when I was a kid. No idea why.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,868

    Nigelb said:

    Wasn't Casino in a big hole with Sanders ?
    Must be mighty relieved tonight.

    I was - not any more!

    I'm still in a giant one with Bloomberg though.
    Sanders can be laid at six and a half (and Bloomberg at ten) for next president. Both look like good bets, given the insurance policy of a trump win.
  • No one else has said it, so well done @rcs1000 for reading Iowa so well.

    Seconded. Great tip.
    Indeed, but who does RCS think will be the Democratic Nominee ... Here's hoping he says Bloomberg so I can justify loading more money on him.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    HYUFD said:
    The Read Deal Liz Wiz deserves privacy.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    HYUFD said:

    Joe Kennedy is probably having mixed emotions tonight.

    He shouldn't, Sanders is now likely to be the eventual nominee after Biden's collapse (maybe with Buttigieg as VP nominee), then Trump is likely to be re elected. If Joe Kennedy wins the Massachusetts Senate race in November he will be ideally placed to follow in his great uncle's footsteps (and where his grandfather just missed out on following his assassination) in 2024
    I’m not sure “just missed out” covers a failure to win the nomination after being assassinated!
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,609
    The Good Lady Wife's latest project as producer (and screenwriter) is now out there:

    https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/lucy-boynton-marianne-faithfull-biopic-947385/
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Wow.

    Shocking news emerging from Anfield, in the post match drugs test several of the Liverpool players have tested positive for calpol.

    Calpol contains an NSAID it’s banned in sport for a reason.

    #dirtycheatingbastards
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670

    No one else has said it, so well done @rcs1000 for reading Iowa so well.

    Who needs careful analysis when you can just repeatedly post made up nonsense from an InfoWars host?
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    That was a stupid error by Pelosi.

    Even more sure that Trump's going to win huge.
  • No one else has said it, so well done @rcs1000 for reading Iowa so well.

    Seconded. Great tip.
    Indeed, but who does RCS think will be the Democratic Nominee ... Here's hoping he says Bloomberg so I can justify loading more money on him.
    I couldn’t be more opposite than you on that bet.
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    "A spokeswoman for Mr Trump's re-election campaign attacked Mrs Pelosi on Twitter, writing: "Her hatred for @realdonaldtrump has blinded her to the repulsive nature of her smug, elitist behavior."

    It's the meme of our times: politicians who are really elitist themselves managing to portray their opponents as that very thing whilst garnering the white working class vote.

    I'd bet £100,000 on Trump's re-election. Not that I have it, in case anyone comes back with an offer.
  • Good morning, everyone.

    Well, I think I might have to stay out of leadership betting in the future. Except maybe on the Lib Dems. They, at least, have the good manners to let me finish ahead.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,468

    That was a stupid error by Pelosi.

    Even more sure that Trump's going to win huge.

    Long time to go. Things can change, although the Democrats tacticians don't seem to be at the top of their profession.
  • I don't follow American politics much as my views generally are (a) Trump will walk re-election and (b) the DNC are morons. And the entertainment in whichever nowhere state this is proves my point b.

    Former Mayor Pete? Love how when he talks he copies Obama in both cadence and finishing each major point with his voice dropping in pitch. I get the impression his politics are more centre ground than some of them (not difficult when you're up against bonkers Bernie) but I don't it matters as the American voter seems to love the Donald.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,405
    Why would you take the job - the only thing you would get is the pain of failure - Boris will claim any success for himself.
  • What's going on there? It seems rather careless to sack the incumbent, apparently for no reason, and then have your star replacement and your plan B turn it down.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,424

    What's going on there? It seems rather careless to sack the incumbent, apparently for no reason, and then have your star replacement and your plan B turn it down.
    Boris Johnson has massively cocked things up because he didn’t think them through.

    I’m shocked. Shocked, I tell you.
  • Alistair said:

    No one else has said it, so well done @rcs1000 for reading Iowa so well.

    Who needs careful analysis when you can just repeatedly post made up nonsense from an InfoWars host?
    TBF I think the Gorilla Mind Pizzagate Youth Serum guy's numbers checked out in the end...
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670

    Alistair said:

    No one else has said it, so well done @rcs1000 for reading Iowa so well.

    Who needs careful analysis when you can just repeatedly post made up nonsense from an InfoWars host?
    TBF I think the Gorilla Mind Pizzagate Youth Serum guy's numbers checked out in the end...
    They have Buttieg at 16%
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,609

    What's going on there? It seems rather careless to sack the incumbent, apparently for no reason, and then have your star replacement and your plan B turn it down.
    Gove now likeliest, as I said yesterday.

    A shame Hague turned it down. He would have been ideal. Could see it being difficult for Cameron to be inside the tent again though. "This is what a big majority looks like, Dave...."
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468
    Completely off topic but I generally think design students will end up studying the Extinction Rebellion symbol. It’s an absolute masterpiece of symbol design.

    Dunno what other cities are like but Newcastle is full of ‘Act Now’ posters.
  • Alistair said:

    Alistair said:

    No one else has said it, so well done @rcs1000 for reading Iowa so well.

    Who needs careful analysis when you can just repeatedly post made up nonsense from an InfoWars host?
    TBF I think the Gorilla Mind Pizzagate Youth Serum guy's numbers checked out in the end...
    They have Buttieg at 16%
    Pollsters are not in a position to cast stones this morning.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,729
    Does anyone know what the IOWA result actually is...?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,424

    What's going on there? It seems rather careless to sack the incumbent, apparently for no reason, and then have your star replacement and your plan B turn it down.
    Gove now likeliest, as I said yesterday.

    A shame Hague turned it down. He would have been ideal. Could see it being difficult for Cameron to be inside the tent again though. "This is what a big majority looks like, Dave...."
    Although it should be noted Cameron gained far more seats than Johnson in his first election, and did pretty well in his second too.

    Given how emphatic the victory last month has been, I think people are forgetting just how big a mess the Tories were in in 2005. He was their fourth leader in eight years, and had taken over from somebody appointed basically as a caretaker because the party membership had messed up so spectacularly with their previous choice.

    They had won fewer seats and a smaller share of the vote than Labour just have, and even that was a distinct improvement on the two previous elections.

    Would Johnson have done better under the same circumstances? Possibly, but it would have been difficult.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,424

    Does anyone know what the IOWA result actually is...?

    A massive boost for Donald Trump.
  • F1: new market up.

    I've backed Hamilton have under 20.5 season points finishes at 1.73. I think there are 22 races on the calendar. China is very likely to be cancelled due to the Coronavirus. Vietnam might be too. Japan's a less likely but credible possibility. If any two of those, therefore, get cancelled, the bet wins (or is voided).

    If China only is cancelled that means the bet wins with a single DNF.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    The Good Lady Wife's latest project as producer (and screenwriter) is now out there:

    https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/lucy-boynton-marianne-faithfull-biopic-947385/

    The evening I spent drinking with Marianne Faithful was one of the most fun times I’ve had...

    Sadly I can’t remember that much 😂
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,359

    What's going on there? It seems rather careless to sack the incumbent, apparently for no reason, and then have your star replacement and your plan B turn it down.
    Gove now likeliest, as I said yesterday.

    How

    A shame Hague turned it down. He would have been ideal. Could see it being difficult for Cameron to be inside the tent again though. "This is what a big majority looks like, Dave...."
    How desperately short of talent can you be if Gove is the answer. A pygmy among pygmies.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 10,222
    Nice one rcs1000 (though not sure this is definite yet - BF still have odds worth taking).
  • StockyStocky Posts: 10,222
    Stocky said:

    Nice one rcs1000 (though not sure this is definite yet - BF still have odds worth taking).

    Scrap that - odds gone now - was 1.2 a couple of minutes ago
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,609
    Charles said:

    The Good Lady Wife's latest project as producer (and screenwriter) is now out there:

    https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/lucy-boynton-marianne-faithfull-biopic-947385/

    The evening I spent drinking with Marianne Faithful was one of the most fun times I’ve had...

    Sadly I can’t remember that much 😂
    There are whole decades she can't remember that much! She lived on a wall in Soho for three years when the drugs were at their worst.....
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    What's going on there? It seems rather careless to sack the incumbent, apparently for no reason, and then have your star replacement and your plan B turn it down.
    I heard Perry’s interview yesterday. It was self serving tosh. “I’m wonderful and visionary and disruptive and people don’t get me” why the Scottish government “behaved disgracefully” and Boris Johnson hadn’t gotten involved personally

    She clearly presided over a complete mess. At some point it doesn’t matter who’s fault that is. The boss gets sacked.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,941
    edited February 2020

    Charles said:

    The Good Lady Wife's latest project as producer (and screenwriter) is now out there:

    https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/lucy-boynton-marianne-faithfull-biopic-947385/

    The evening I spent drinking with Marianne Faithful was one of the most fun times I’ve had...

    Sadly I can’t remember that much 😂
    There are whole decades she can't remember that much! She lived on a wall in Soho for three years when the drugs were at their worst.....
    Spoiler alert please! I've not seen the film yet.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Charles said:

    The Good Lady Wife's latest project as producer (and screenwriter) is now out there:

    https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/lucy-boynton-marianne-faithfull-biopic-947385/

    The evening I spent drinking with Marianne Faithful was one of the most fun times I’ve had...

    Sadly I can’t remember that much 😂
    There are whole decades she can't remember that much! She lived on a wall in Soho for three years when the drugs were at their worst.....
    She was off the drugs but on whisky and fags when I got to know her
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Charles said:

    The Good Lady Wife's latest project as producer (and screenwriter) is now out there:

    https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/lucy-boynton-marianne-faithfull-biopic-947385/

    The evening I spent drinking with Marianne Faithful was one of the most fun times I’ve had...

    Sadly I can’t remember that much 😂
    There are whole decades she can't remember that much! She lived on a wall in Soho for three years when the drugs were at their worst.....
    Spoiler alert please! I've not seen the film yet.
    Don’t google “Marianne Faithful” and “Mars Bar”
  • Charles said:

    The Good Lady Wife's latest project as producer (and screenwriter) is now out there:

    https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/lucy-boynton-marianne-faithfull-biopic-947385/

    The evening I spent drinking with Marianne Faithful was one of the most fun times I’ve had...

    Sadly I can’t remember that much 😂
    As I was saying to Michelle Obama the other day over dinner, I’m not a name dropper..
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,729
    ydoethur said:

    Does anyone know what the IOWA result actually is...?

    A massive boost for Donald Trump.
    Yes.. I get that ;) but I fail to understand how Sanders is getting votes. He's hard left and would surely lose against Trump./??
  • ydoethur said:

    What's going on there? It seems rather careless to sack the incumbent, apparently for no reason, and then have your star replacement and your plan B turn it down.
    Gove now likeliest, as I said yesterday.

    A shame Hague turned it down. He would have been ideal. Could see it being difficult for Cameron to be inside the tent again though. "This is what a big majority looks like, Dave...."
    Although it should be noted Cameron gained far more seats than Johnson in his first election, and did pretty well in his second too.

    Given how emphatic the victory last month has been, I think people are forgetting just how big a mess the Tories were in in 2005. He was their fourth leader in eight years, and had taken over from somebody appointed basically as a caretaker because the party membership had messed up so spectacularly with their previous choice.

    They had won fewer seats and a smaller share of the vote than Labour just have, and even that was a distinct improvement on the two previous elections.

    Would Johnson have done better under the same circumstances? Possibly, but it would have been difficult.
    But, the Tories sorted themselves out - and they also did better than Labour last year because the 2005 results were on the old boundaries and they were at 210 seats on the new ones.

    10 years after losing office, is there any sign of Labour doing the same?
  • Completely off topic but I generally think design students will end up studying the Extinction Rebellion symbol. It’s an absolute masterpiece of symbol design.

    Dunno what other cities are like but Newcastle is full of ‘Act Now’ posters.

    Not really. XR have successfully branded themselves with the Left loony brush now, and turned off a lot of concerned middle-class professionals with their anarchist anti-capitalist antics.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    edited February 2020

    Charles said:

    The Good Lady Wife's latest project as producer (and screenwriter) is now out there:

    https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/lucy-boynton-marianne-faithfull-biopic-947385/

    The evening I spent drinking with Marianne Faithful was one of the most fun times I’ve had...

    Sadly I can’t remember that much 😂
    As I was saying to Michelle Obama the other day over dinner, I’m not a name dropper..
    She came to speak to the union when I was at university - the president knew I was a fan of hers and took me out for dinner with her.

    That make you feel more secure?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,153

    Completely off topic but I generally think design students will end up studying the Extinction Rebellion symbol. It’s an absolute masterpiece of symbol design.

    Dunno what other cities are like but Newcastle is full of ‘Act Now’ posters.

    I was thinking along those lines just yesterday. Simple to draw, easily identifiable, clear meaning- its effective.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,153

    Completely off topic but I generally think design students will end up studying the Extinction Rebellion symbol. It’s an absolute masterpiece of symbol design.

    Dunno what other cities are like but Newcastle is full of ‘Act Now’ posters.

    Not really. XR have successfully branded themselves with the Left loony brush now, and turned off a lot of concerned middle-class professionals with their anarchist anti-capitalist antics.
    Yes, but that does not really speak to the effectiveness of both their marketing themselves for the last year (long haul is another matter) and brand design.
  • Completely off topic but I generally think design students will end up studying the Extinction Rebellion symbol. It’s an absolute masterpiece of symbol design.

    Dunno what other cities are like but Newcastle is full of ‘Act Now’ posters.

    Not really. XR have successfully branded themselves with the Left loony brush now, and turned off a lot of concerned middle-class professionals with their anarchist anti-capitalist antics.
    I think XR activists shutting down clean electric mass public transport stopping people from getting to work was the moment they jumped the shark and went from being an organisation seriously concerned about the environment to anarcho loons.

    Environmentalism should be taken seriously, XR not so much.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468

    Completely off topic but I generally think design students will end up studying the Extinction Rebellion symbol. It’s an absolute masterpiece of symbol design.

    Dunno what other cities are like but Newcastle is full of ‘Act Now’ posters.

    Not really. XR have successfully branded themselves with the Left loony brush now, and turned off a lot of concerned middle-class professionals with their anarchist anti-capitalist antics.
    What has that got to do with anything?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,992

    Charles said:

    The Good Lady Wife's latest project as producer (and screenwriter) is now out there:

    https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/lucy-boynton-marianne-faithfull-biopic-947385/

    The evening I spent drinking with Marianne Faithful was one of the most fun times I’ve had...

    Sadly I can’t remember that much 😂
    There are whole decades she can't remember that much! She lived on a wall in Soho for three years when the drugs were at their worst.....
    Best, shirley.
  • Charles said:

    What's going on there? It seems rather careless to sack the incumbent, apparently for no reason, and then have your star replacement and your plan B turn it down.
    I heard Perry’s interview yesterday. It was self serving tosh. “I’m wonderful and visionary and disruptive and people don’t get me” why the Scottish government “behaved disgracefully” and Boris Johnson hadn’t gotten involved personally

    She clearly presided over a complete mess. At some point it doesn’t matter who’s fault that is. The boss gets sacked.
    After hearing her interview I thought she clearly doesn't know the words "grace" and "humility". I think its safe to say she won't be getting any further government roles.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,609

    Charles said:

    The Good Lady Wife's latest project as producer (and screenwriter) is now out there:

    https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/lucy-boynton-marianne-faithfull-biopic-947385/

    The evening I spent drinking with Marianne Faithful was one of the most fun times I’ve had...

    Sadly I can’t remember that much 😂
    There are whole decades she can't remember that much! She lived on a wall in Soho for three years when the drugs were at their worst.....
    Spoiler alert please! I've not seen the film yet.
    It's not been made yet!
  • mattmatt Posts: 3,789
    Per the headline, did the last results and the aggregate of all of them also have Buttigieg in the lead or is it still undecided?
  • Stocky said:

    Stocky said:

    Nice one rcs1000 (though not sure this is definite yet - BF still have odds worth taking).

    Scrap that - odds gone now - was 1.2 a couple of minutes ago
    There's a fair chunk available now at 1.18 (out from 1.02). It looks like the price crashed because punters just waking up overreacted to the midnight-ish updates.
  • Completely off topic but I generally think design students will end up studying the Extinction Rebellion symbol. It’s an absolute masterpiece of symbol design.

    Dunno what other cities are like but Newcastle is full of ‘Act Now’ posters.

    Not really. XR have successfully branded themselves with the Left loony brush now, and turned off a lot of concerned middle-class professionals with their anarchist anti-capitalist antics.
    I think XR activists shutting down clean electric mass public transport stopping people from getting to work was the moment they jumped the shark and went from being an organisation seriously concerned about the environment to anarcho loons.

    Environmentalism should be taken seriously, XR not so much.
    In my town, one of their own daubed ‘A’ anarchist symbols on a number of town centre (including historic) buildings as well.
  • Completely off topic but I generally think design students will end up studying the Extinction Rebellion symbol. It’s an absolute masterpiece of symbol design.

    Dunno what other cities are like but Newcastle is full of ‘Act Now’ posters.

    Not really. XR have successfully branded themselves with the Left loony brush now, and turned off a lot of concerned middle-class professionals with their anarchist anti-capitalist antics.
    What has that got to do with anything?
    A brand isn’t just the symbol, it’s the image.

    A brand image can be greatly tarnished by the behaviour of the proprietor, or those who purport to represent them.
  • Completely off topic but I generally think design students will end up studying the Extinction Rebellion symbol. It’s an absolute masterpiece of symbol design.

    Dunno what other cities are like but Newcastle is full of ‘Act Now’ posters.

    Not really. XR have successfully branded themselves with the Left loony brush now, and turned off a lot of concerned middle-class professionals with their anarchist anti-capitalist antics.
    I think XR activists shutting down clean electric mass public transport stopping people from getting to work was the moment they jumped the shark and went from being an organisation seriously concerned about the environment to anarcho loons.

    Environmentalism should be taken seriously, XR not so much.
    In my town, one of their own daubed ‘A’ anarchist symbols on a number of town centre (including historic) buildings as well.
    Not a surprise. Loons attract each other.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,148
    edited February 2020

    ydoethur said:

    What's going on there? It seems rather careless to sack the incumbent, apparently for no reason, and then have your star replacement and your plan B turn it down.
    Gove now likeliest, as I said yesterday.

    A shame Hague turned it down. He would have been ideal. Could see it being difficult for Cameron to be inside the tent again though. "This is what a big majority looks like, Dave...."
    Although it should be noted Cameron gained far more seats than Johnson in his first election, and did pretty well in his second too.

    Given how emphatic the victory last month has been, I think people are forgetting just how big a mess the Tories were in in 2005. He was their fourth leader in eight years, and had taken over from somebody appointed basically as a caretaker because the party membership had messed up so spectacularly with their previous choice.

    They had won fewer seats and a smaller share of the vote than Labour just have, and even that was a distinct improvement on the two previous elections.

    Would Johnson have done better under the same circumstances? Possibly, but it would have been difficult.
    But, the Tories sorted themselves out - and they also did better than Labour last year because the 2005 results were on the old boundaries and they were at 210 seats on the new ones.

    10 years after losing office, is there any sign of Labour doing the same?
    Labour are on 202 seats so about the same as the Tories were after the boundary changes after 2005.

    Plus even if a Labour majority is unlikely in 2023/24 as the Tories failed to win a majority in 2010, the Tories still ended up with enough seats to form a coalition with the LDs and a Starmer led Labour Party would have both the SNP and the LDs as potential coalition partners.

    The Tories got 32% in 2005, the same as Labour got last year, Cameron only took the Tories up to 36% in 2010 remember and it is not impossible to see Starmer doing the same
  • Charles said:

    Charles said:

    The Good Lady Wife's latest project as producer (and screenwriter) is now out there:

    https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/lucy-boynton-marianne-faithfull-biopic-947385/

    The evening I spent drinking with Marianne Faithful was one of the most fun times I’ve had...

    Sadly I can’t remember that much 😂
    As I was saying to Michelle Obama the other day over dinner, I’m not a name dropper..
    She came to speak to the union when I was at university - the president knew I was a fan of hers and took me out for dinner with her.

    That make you feel more secure?
    Interesting you bring up security.

    I’m not impressed by name droppers. I’ve encountered a few in my life and - in my experience - rather than impressing me with their importance, I walk away being convinced of their own insecurity and lack of surety about themselves.

    You do it a lot. So perhaps reflect on that.
  • HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    What's going on there? It seems rather careless to sack the incumbent, apparently for no reason, and then have your star replacement and your plan B turn it down.
    Gove now likeliest, as I said yesterday.

    A shame Hague turned it down. He would have been ideal. Could see it being difficult for Cameron to be inside the tent again though. "This is what a big majority looks like, Dave...."
    Although it should be noted Cameron gained far more seats than Johnson in his first election, and did pretty well in his second too.

    Given how emphatic the victory last month has been, I think people are forgetting just how big a mess the Tories were in in 2005. He was their fourth leader in eight years, and had taken over from somebody appointed basically as a caretaker because the party membership had messed up so spectacularly with their previous choice.

    They had won fewer seats and a smaller share of the vote than Labour just have, and even that was a distinct improvement on the two previous elections.

    Would Johnson have done better under the same circumstances? Possibly, but it would have been difficult.
    But, the Tories sorted themselves out - and they also did better than Labour last year because the 2005 results were on the old boundaries and they were at 210 seats on the new ones.

    10 years after losing office, is there any sign of Labour doing the same?
    Labour are on 202 seats so about the same as the Tories were after the boundary changes after 2005.

    Plus even if a Labour majority is unlikely in 2023/24 as the Tories failed to win a majority in 2010, the Tories still ended up with enough seats to form a coalition with the LDs and a Starmer led Labour Party would have both the SNP and the LDs as potential coalition partners.

    The Tories got 32% in 2005, the same as Labour got last year, Cameron only took the Tories up to 36% in 2010 remember and it is not impossible to see Starmer doing the same
    The Tories would have been up twelve seats on the new boundaries, so 210 seats as opposed to 198 and higher than what Labour achieved in GE2019:

    https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN05280
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,148
    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    Joe Kennedy is probably having mixed emotions tonight.

    He shouldn't, Sanders is now likely to be the eventual nominee after Biden's collapse (maybe with Buttigieg as VP nominee), then Trump is likely to be re elected. If Joe Kennedy wins the Massachusetts Senate race in November he will be ideally placed to follow in his great uncle's footsteps (and where his grandfather just missed out on following his assassination) in 2024
    I’m not sure “just missed out” covers a failure to win the nomination after being assassinated!
    Bobby Kennedy won the California primary the night he was shot but obviously he then did not get the nomination even his death was the likely but not certain cause (Humphrey may still have got it at the convention)
  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,191

    "A spokeswoman for Mr Trump's re-election campaign attacked Mrs Pelosi on Twitter, writing: "Her hatred for @realdonaldtrump has blinded her to the repulsive nature of her smug, elitist behavior."

    It's the meme of our times: politicians who are really elitist themselves managing to portray their opponents as that very thing whilst garnering the white working class vote.

    I'd bet £100,000 on Trump's re-election. Not that I have it, in case anyone comes back with an offer.

    Here's how it works:
    If you are very rich or a politician then you are a smug elitist. If you are a very rich politician who says racist stuff and can't (or pretends not to be able to) spell then you are anti-elitist. "I can't be a member of the elite: look I'm a racist moron" seems to convince enough people.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708
    edited February 2020
    Alistair said:

    They have Buttieg at 16%

    I mean as the actual Selzer poll result, apparently Cernovich's numbers were confirmed by Clare Malone at 538.
  • matt said:

    Per the headline, did the last results and the aggregate of all of them also have Buttigieg in the lead or is it still undecided?

    The latest results still have Pete Buttigieg with a small lead:

    https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/02/04/us/elections/results-iowa-caucus.html

    Bernie Sanders could still overhaul him in theory, but he's running out of road and there is nothing in the latest batch of results to suggest that the initial batch was atypical of the rest.

    For Bernie Sanders to overtake Pete Buttigieg now, he'd need to poll about 4% better than Pete Buttigieg in the remaining precincts. Given how scattered the vote has been in the rest of the results and how close the vote has been everywhere, that seems implausible.
  • not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 4,449

    ydoethur said:

    Does anyone know what the IOWA result actually is...?

    A massive boost for Donald Trump.
    Yes.. I get that ;) but I fail to understand how Sanders is getting votes. He's hard left and would surely lose against Trump./??
    I can’t understand how Jeremy Corbyn got votes. He’s hard left and would surely lose against Boris Johnson.

    Now do you see? The hard left don’t care about winning
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,148
    edited February 2020

    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    What's going on there? It seems rather careless to sack the incumbent, apparently for no reason, and then have your star replacement and your plan B turn it down.
    Gove now likeliest, as I said yesterday.

    A shame Hague turned it down. He would have been ideal. Could see it being difficult for Cameron to be inside the tent again though. "This is what a big majority looks like, Dave...."
    Although it should be noted Cameron gained far more seats than Johnson in his first election, and did pretty well in his second too.

    Given how emphatic the victory last month has been, I think people are forgetting just how big a mess the Tories were in in 2005. He was their fourth leader in eight years, and had taken over from somebody appointed basically as a caretaker because the party membership had messed up so spectacularly with their previous choice.

    They had won fewer seats and a smaller share of the vote than Labour just have, and even that was a distinct improvement on the two previous elections.

    Would Johnson have done better under the same circumstances? Possibly, but it would have been difficult.
    But, the Tories sorted themselves out - and they also did better than Labour last year because the 2005 results were on the old boundaries and they were at 210 seats on the new ones.

    10 years after losing office, is there any sign of Labour doing the same?
    Labour are on 202 seats so about the same as the Tories were after the boundary changes after 2005.

    Plus even if a Labour majority is unlikely in 2023/24 as the Tories failed to win a majority in 2010, the Tories still ended up with enough seats to form a coalition with the LDs and a Starmer led Labour Party would have both the SNP and the LDs as potential coalition partners.

    The Tories got 32% in 2005, the same as Labour got last year, Cameron only took the Tories up to 36% in 2010 remember and it is not impossible to see Starmer doing the same
    The Tories would have been up twelve seats on the new boundaries, so 210 seats as opposed to 198 and higher than what Labour achieved in GE2019:

    https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN05280
    Yet that 12 seat difference is largely irrelevant as Labour have more coalition partners with the SNP (who have 48 seats), the LDs, Plaid, Lucas etc, the Tories only had Clegg's LDs and the DUP.

    The Tories failed to win a majority in 2010 so in the end Clegg going with Cameron not Brown was decisive
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,609

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    The Good Lady Wife's latest project as producer (and screenwriter) is now out there:

    https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/lucy-boynton-marianne-faithfull-biopic-947385/

    The evening I spent drinking with Marianne Faithful was one of the most fun times I’ve had...

    Sadly I can’t remember that much 😂
    As I was saying to Michelle Obama the other day over dinner, I’m not a name dropper..
    She came to speak to the union when I was at university - the president knew I was a fan of hers and took me out for dinner with her.

    That make you feel more secure?
    Interesting you bring up security.

    I’m not impressed by name droppers. I’ve encountered a few in my life and - in my experience - rather than impressing me with their importance, I walk away being convinced of their own insecurity and lack of surety about themselves.

    You do it a lot. So perhaps reflect on that.
    To be fair, Charles only meets people who are famous.....
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    What's going on there? It seems rather careless to sack the incumbent, apparently for no reason, and then have your star replacement and your plan B turn it down.
    Gove now likeliest, as I said yesterday.

    A shame Hague turned it down. He would have been ideal. Could see it being difficult for Cameron to be inside the tent again though. "This is what a big majority looks like, Dave...."
    Although it should be noted Cameron gained far more seats than Johnson in his first election, and did pretty well in his second too.

    Given how emphatic the victory last month has been, I think people are forgetting just how big a mess the Tories were in in 2005. He was their fourth leader in eight years, and had taken over from somebody appointed basically as a caretaker because the party membership had messed up so spectacularly with their previous choice.

    They had won fewer seats and a smaller share of the vote than Labour just have, and even that was a distinct improvement on the two previous elections.

    Would Johnson have done better under the same circumstances? Possibly, but it would have been difficult.
    But, the Tories sorted themselves out - and they also did better than Labour last year because the 2005 results were on the old boundaries and they were at 210 seats on the new ones.

    10 years after losing office, is there any sign of Labour doing the same?
    Labour are on 202 seats so about the same as the Tories were after the boundary changes after 2005.

    Plus even if a Labour majority is unlikely in 2023/24 as the Tories failed to win a majority in 2010, the Tories still ended up with enough seats to form a coalition with the LDs and a Starmer led Labour Party would have both the SNP and the LDs as potential coalition partners.

    The Tories got 32% in 2005, the same as Labour got last year, Cameron only took the Tories up to 36% in 2010 remember and it is not impossible to see Starmer doing the same
    The Tories would have been up twelve seats on the new boundaries, so 210 seats as opposed to 198 and higher than what Labour achieved in GE2019:

    https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN05280
    Yet that 12 seat difference is largely irrelevant
    Thanks. You agree with me then.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,148

    matt said:

    Per the headline, did the last results and the aggregate of all of them also have Buttigieg in the lead or is it still undecided?

    The latest results still have Pete Buttigieg with a small lead:

    https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/02/04/us/elections/results-iowa-caucus.html

    Bernie Sanders could still overhaul him in theory, but he's running out of road and there is nothing in the latest batch of results to suggest that the initial batch was atypical of the rest.

    For Bernie Sanders to overtake Pete Buttigieg now, he'd need to poll about 4% better than Pete Buttigieg in the remaining precincts. Given how scattered the vote has been in the rest of the results and how close the vote has been everywhere, that seems implausible.
    Buttigieg leads in delegates Sanders leads in the popular vote I think that is how Iowa ends up.

    Buttigieg now has to win New Hampshire's primary next week to get the nomination really, if Sanders wins New Hampshire he knocks out Warren then Biden likely wins South Carolina and Sanders goes into Super Tuesday with the left liberal vote largely united behind him and the centrist vote split between Buttigieg and Biden
  • Mr. Mark, I've never met anyone famous.

    Not hard to believe that those who move in certain social circles meet famous people more often than others.

    I'm also surprised this is a line of conversation when I have a fascinating virus-based tip on the 2020 F1 season.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,148

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    What's going on there? It seems rather careless to sack the incumbent, apparently for no reason, and then have your star replacement and your plan B turn it down.
    Gove now likeliest, as I said yesterday.

    A shame Hague turned it down. He would have been ideal. Could see it being difficult for Cameron to be inside the tent again though. "This is what a big majority looks like, Dave...."
    Although it should be noted Cameron gained far more seats than Johnson in his first election, and did pretty well in his second too.

    Given how emphatic the victory last month has been, I evious elections.

    Would Johnson have done better under the same circumstances? Possibly, but it would have been difficult.
    But, the Tories sorted themselves out - and they also did better than Labour last year because the 2005 results were on the old boundaries and they were at 210 seats on the new ones.

    10 years after losing office, is there any sign of Labour doing the same?
    Labour are on 202 seats so about the same as the Tories were after the boundary changes after 2005.

    Plus even if a Labour majority is unlikely in 2023/24 as the Tories failed to win a majority in 2010, the Tories still ended up with enough seats to form a coalition with the LDs and a Starmer led Labour Party would have both the SNP and the LDs as potential coalition partners.

    The Tories got 32% in 2005, the same as Labour got last year, Cameron only took the Tories up to 36% in 2010 remember and it is not impossible to see Starmer doing the same
    The Tories would have been up twelve seats on the new boundaries, so 210 seats as opposed to 198 and higher than what Labour achieved in GE2019:

    https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN05280
    Yet that 12 seat difference is largely irrelevant
    Thanks. You agree with me then.
    No as the next general election is quite likely to be a hung parliament if 2010 is a guide so it will all be about which coalition partners Starmer and Boris can deal with
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,148

    ydoethur said:

    Does anyone know what the IOWA result actually is...?

    A massive boost for Donald Trump.
    Yes.. I get that ;) but I fail to understand how Sanders is getting votes. He's hard left and would surely lose against Trump./??
    I can’t understand how Jeremy Corbyn got votes. He’s hard left and would surely lose against Boris Johnson.

    Now do you see? The hard left don’t care about winning
    They do care about winning but only if the winner is a socialist not a sell out centrist in their eyes
  • HYUFD said:

    matt said:

    Per the headline, did the last results and the aggregate of all of them also have Buttigieg in the lead or is it still undecided?

    The latest results still have Pete Buttigieg with a small lead:

    https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/02/04/us/elections/results-iowa-caucus.html

    Bernie Sanders could still overhaul him in theory, but he's running out of road and there is nothing in the latest batch of results to suggest that the initial batch was atypical of the rest.

    For Bernie Sanders to overtake Pete Buttigieg now, he'd need to poll about 4% better than Pete Buttigieg in the remaining precincts. Given how scattered the vote has been in the rest of the results and how close the vote has been everywhere, that seems implausible.
    Buttigieg leads in delegates Sanders leads in the popular vote I think that is how Iowa ends up.

    Buttigieg now has to win New Hampshire's primary next week to get the nomination really, if Sanders wins New Hampshire he knocks out Warren then Biden likely wins South Carolina and Sanders goes into Super Tuesday with the left liberal vote largely united behind him and the centrist vote split between Buttigieg and Biden
    The interesting question is whether Bloomberg can conjure up momentum out of the maelstrom of all that.

    He’s not a player in any of those early contests, and still polling below 10% in the Super Tuesday primaries, so the question is whether the narrative is set by then and he’s left way behind, or whether he can push himself head and shoulders above the rest out of a divided middle and set a new narrative.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,148
    Pelosi rips up Trump's speech behind him and Trump refuses to shake her hand at State of the Union

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-51381625
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,148

    HYUFD said:

    matt said:

    Per the headline, did the last results and the aggregate of all of them also have Buttigieg in the lead or is it still undecided?

    The latest results still have Pete Buttigieg with a small lead:

    https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/02/04/us/elections/results-iowa-caucus.html

    Bernie Sanders could still overhaul him in theory, but he's running out of road and there is nothing in the latest batch of results to suggest that the initial batch was atypical of the rest.

    For Bernie Sanders to overtake Pete Buttigieg now, he'd need to poll about 4% better than Pete Buttigieg in the remaining precincts. Given how scattered the vote has been in the rest of the results and how close the vote has been everywhere, that seems implausible.
    Buttigieg leads in delegates Sanders leads in the popular vote I think that is how Iowa ends up.

    Buttigieg now has to win New Hampshire's primary next week to get the nomination really, if Sanders wins New Hampshire he knocks out Warren then Biden likely wins South Carolina and Sanders goes into Super Tuesday with the left liberal vote largely united behind him and the centrist vote split between Buttigieg and Biden
    The interesting question is whether Bloomberg can conjure up momentum out of the maelstrom of all that.

    He’s not a player in any of those early contests, and still polling below 10% in the Super Tuesday primaries, so the question is whether the narrative is set by then and he’s left way behind, or whether he can push himself head and shoulders above the rest out of a divided middle and set a new narrative.
    If he does that further splits the centrist vote and boosts Sanders
  • If you want evidence of how panicky the public mood is about the coronavirus, take this snippet from South Korea:

    https://twitter.com/BBCLBicker/status/1224944990423355394
  • Mr. Meeks, in the 17th century the government was less than pleased with those who hoarded food during harvest failures. Sounds a bit similar.

    (I think Shakespeare was one of the offenders).
  • mattmatt Posts: 3,789

    matt said:

    Per the headline, did the last results and the aggregate of all of them also have Buttigieg in the lead or is it still undecided?

    The latest results still have Pete Buttigieg with a small lead:

    https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/02/04/us/elections/results-iowa-caucus.html

    Bernie Sanders could still overhaul him in theory, but he's running out of road and there is nothing in the latest batch of results to suggest that the initial batch was atypical of the rest.

    For Bernie Sanders to overtake Pete Buttigieg now, he'd need to poll about 4% better than Pete Buttigieg in the remaining precincts. Given how scattered the vote has been in the rest of the results and how close the vote has been everywhere, that seems implausible.
    Thank you. So the de facto winner is Trump?
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976

    HYUFD said:

    matt said:

    Per the headline, did the last results and the aggregate of all of them also have Buttigieg in the lead or is it still undecided?

    The latest results still have Pete Buttigieg with a small lead:

    https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/02/04/us/elections/results-iowa-caucus.html

    Bernie Sanders could still overhaul him in theory, but he's running out of road and there is nothing in the latest batch of results to suggest that the initial batch was atypical of the rest.

    For Bernie Sanders to overtake Pete Buttigieg now, he'd need to poll about 4% better than Pete Buttigieg in the remaining precincts. Given how scattered the vote has been in the rest of the results and how close the vote has been everywhere, that seems implausible.
    Buttigieg leads in delegates Sanders leads in the popular vote I think that is how Iowa ends up.

    Buttigieg now has to win New Hampshire's primary next week to get the nomination really, if Sanders wins New Hampshire he knocks out Warren then Biden likely wins South Carolina and Sanders goes into Super Tuesday with the left liberal vote largely united behind him and the centrist vote split between Buttigieg and Biden
    The interesting question is whether Bloomberg can conjure up momentum out of the maelstrom of all that.

    He’s not a player in any of those early contests, and still polling below 10% in the Super Tuesday primaries, so the question is whether the narrative is set by then and he’s left way behind, or whether he can push himself head and shoulders above the rest out of a divided middle and set a new narrative.
    Assuming that Bloomberg is only in the race to stop Sanders, I wonder if a convincing win for Buttigieg in New Hampshire - and maybe Nevada as well - convinces him to withdraw and endorse Pete? Possibly at an optimal point just before Super Tuesday, to maximise the impact.

    I'm also wondering at what point Biden gives up. Presumably not before SC (his first "guaranteed" win), but possibly soon after unless he secures a thumping victory there.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,720

    If you want evidence of how panicky the public mood is about the coronavirus, take this snippet from South Korea:

    https://twitter.com/BBCLBicker/status/1224944990423355394

    Have a look at the prices of face masks and delivery times on Amazon UK, if you think it isn't happening here.
  • matt said:

    matt said:

    Per the headline, did the last results and the aggregate of all of them also have Buttigieg in the lead or is it still undecided?

    The latest results still have Pete Buttigieg with a small lead:

    https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/02/04/us/elections/results-iowa-caucus.html

    Bernie Sanders could still overhaul him in theory, but he's running out of road and there is nothing in the latest batch of results to suggest that the initial batch was atypical of the rest.

    For Bernie Sanders to overtake Pete Buttigieg now, he'd need to poll about 4% better than Pete Buttigieg in the remaining precincts. Given how scattered the vote has been in the rest of the results and how close the vote has been everywhere, that seems implausible.
    Thank you. So the de facto winner is Trump?
    Not sure. If Donald Trump has any sense, he won't want to be facing Pete Buttigieg. He now has a clearly-signposted route through to the nomination, if he's able to take it. His weaknesses are not ones that Donald Trump can easily exploit.

    Pete Buttigieg's route remains complicated though. Much depends on the sturdiness of Joe Biden's support.
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,842
    HYUFD said:

    Pelosi rips up Trump's speech behind him and Trump refuses to shake her hand at State of the Union

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-51381625

    No-one comes out of that looking good. He was petty not to shake the proffered hand. She was spiteful to rip up the speech.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,623

    Does anyone know what the IOWA result actually is...?

    Donald Trump won.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,677

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    The Good Lady Wife's latest project as producer (and screenwriter) is now out there:

    https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/lucy-boynton-marianne-faithfull-biopic-947385/

    The evening I spent drinking with Marianne Faithful was one of the most fun times I’ve had...

    Sadly I can’t remember that much 😂
    As I was saying to Michelle Obama the other day over dinner, I’m not a name dropper..
    She came to speak to the union when I was at university - the president knew I was a fan of hers and took me out for dinner with her.

    That make you feel more secure?
    Interesting you bring up security.

    I’m not impressed by name droppers. I’ve encountered a few in my life and - in my experience - rather than impressing me with their importance, I walk away being convinced of their own insecurity and lack of surety about themselves.

    You do it a lot. So perhaps reflect on that.
    I once saw Garth Crooks in Heathrow T1.
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    Sandpit said:

    Does anyone know what the IOWA result actually is...?

    Donald Trump won.
    Both races.
This discussion has been closed.