George Osborne’s future at the Evening Standard is believed to be in doubt, with sources at the newspaper expecting the former chancellor to leave the publication.
Osborne was appointed to edit the daily London newspaper in March 2017 and since then has continued to juggle the job with several other roles, including a £650,000-a-year post advising the investment fund BlackRock, and as chair of the Northern Powerhouse Partnership.
Amid rampant speculation over the editor’s future among staff, the Evening Standard did not respond to multiple requests for comment on Friday afternoon.
Sources at the newspaper said the publication was changing direction under its new chief executive, Mike Soutar – the founder of the free magazine Shortlist who joined the Evening Standard at the end of last year – as he seeks to reduce financial losses of £11m a year.
The newspaper, which distributes 800,000 copies a day across London, has been hit hard by the decline in print advertising revenue. Its free distribution model means that it has high fixed costs, which cannot be offset with price rises. At the same time the outlet is facing the challenge of 4G mobile phone signal coming to the London Underground, giving readers an alternative to reading a print newspaper.
The company has been pushing investment in its website while having to make job cuts and several long-serving staff members have departed.
A key issue facing the Evening Standard is the role of its owner, the Russian businessman Evgeny Lebedev, and his willingness to subsidise the operation. The company’s accounts say the losses mean the outlet “requires continuous financial support from the shareholders”.
At least it's Thomas, not Oliver. Thomas Cromwell was loyal to the King and mostly competent. His problem that he was low born, made enemies, and entirely owed his position to the whim of the King.
"Now, as the focus turns to New Hampshire and its primary next Tuesday, Mr. Buttigieg has emerged as a formidable top-tier contender, harnessing the momentum from Iowa and campaigning with confidence and a large dose of swagger."
Are they saying the advice from the NCSC is wrong?
The US government is now floating the idea of aquiring a controlling interest in Nokia and Ericsson, so it should be abundantly clear to even our dimmest MPs that we should not trust any supplier. The only way out of this mess is open standards and systems and a much greater diversity of suppliers. Simply banning Huawei is going to leave us even more dependent on companies that do not deserve our trust either.
Doesn't Investor AB still hold a blocking stake in Ericsson?
I spy with my little eye something equaly important in this poll. Republicans beat Democrats by 1 point in N.Hampshire, that has moved N.H. to toss up in the polling average for the first time since 2016.
If N.H. is a toss up then Trump will win upper Maine and it's Electoral Vote just like 2016.
Are they saying the advice from the NCSC is wrong?
The US government is now floating the idea of aquiring a controlling interest in Nokia and Ericsson, so it should be abundantly clear to even our dimmest MPs that we should not trust any supplier. The only way out of this mess is open standards and systems and a much greater diversity of suppliers. Simply banning Huawei is going to leave us even more dependent on companies that do not deserve our trust either.
Doesn't Investor AB still hold a blocking stake in Ericsson?
No idea, but it's not the feasability that bothers me, it's what I think it suggests. That the US government wants countries using suppliers that are under their thumb. It's not Chinese spying that worries them, it's spying being harder for the US that is the issue.
As Dr Johnson wisely observed trying to fix a language is like trying to bind the sea in chains.
The French ruined their language with all those silly symbols.
But you'll be all delighted to know that sometime in the next few weeks I'll be publishing a based on the thread on the Oxford comma and what it means for betting (on politics).
Silly symbols-wise, German is even worse, as I discovered earlier this week when trying to guide a German colleague to ^. Every key on a German keyboard does double or triple duty. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_keyboard_layout
The message coming from your eyes says leave it alone?
If we're going to expand we should expand it to other European nations.
My ideal is two have a two division six nations tournament with promotion/relegation.
It'll ruin the fan experience if you have to go regularly to South Africa every two years to see your team for a tournament decider.
If you’re going to expand the 6N, do it by inviting Japan. They showed their class at the World Cup, let the southern nations continue playing their own annual tournament.
As Dr Johnson wisely observed trying to fix a language is like trying to bind the sea in chains.
The French ruined their language with all those silly symbols.
But you'll be all delighted to know that sometime in the next few weeks I'll be publishing a based on the thread on the Oxford comma and what it means for betting (on politics).
Silly symbols-wise, German is even worse, as I discovered earlier this week when trying to guide a German colleague to ^. Every key on a German keyboard does double or triple duty. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_keyboard_layout
International keyboard issues are on that list of things that you never realise are a massive problem, until you come across them first hand!
South Africa are on course to join the Six Nations after the next World Cup, in a move which will radically alter the international rugby landscape.
Sportsmail has learned that negotiations have been going on behind the scenes for some time and there is now a sense of inevitability that the Springboks will take their place in Europe’s annual Test tournament in 2024. One source told this newspaper: ‘Things are falling nicely into place.’
It is understood that the plan in principle would involve expanding the championship to a seven-team event — rather than South Africa’s entry coming at the expense of struggling Italy. That would create pressure on an already congested calendar, but the rewards are regarded as too enticing to ignore.
The Boks won the World Cup last November, beating England 32-12 in Yokohama. Adding such a powerful nation to the tournament would be a stunning coup for the northern unions and although the time frame is not finalised, the indications are that the change would take place in 2024.
There will be many profound repercussions. South Africa play in the southern hemisphere’s Rugby Championship, along with Australia, New Zealand and Argentina. Their departure would leave a gaping hole, but it may allow for the integration of Japan, whose exploits at their home World Cup have led to demands for them to be accommodated in one of the two regular international competitions.
In recent months, there has been speculation linking Japan and Fiji with entry into the Six Nations, but Sportsmail sources claim this is unlikely.
There has been some debate as to why I count Buttigieg as a divisive figure in the Democratic Party.
The answer is simple, just like Sanders, Buttigieg is from one extreme end of his Party. He doesn't offer anything to the other extreme end and the way that he is winning (the Iowa fiasco) angers the other extreme even more.
Just like Trump getting the nomination and the extreme faction on the other side bolted from the Republican party, a Buttigieg or Sanders nomination will also result in a faction on the extremes leaving the Democrats at least for this election.
I spy with my little eye something equaly important in this poll. Republicans beat Democrats by 1 point in N.Hampshire, that has moved N.H. to toss up in the polling average for the first time since 2016.
If N.H. is a toss up then Trump will win upper Maine and it's Electoral Vote just like 2016.
Anybody who cares about the future of democracy in America wants Trump to win in 2020.
It would be grossly unfair for a Democrat to be President during the Trump Economic Hangover.
(The US fiscal deficit is going to be larger in 2020 than at any time other than the Global Financial Crisis. Running that deficit late in an economic cycle is insanely irresponsible. What ever happened to fiscal prudence?)
I spy with my little eye something equaly important in this poll. Republicans beat Democrats by 1 point in N.Hampshire, that has moved N.H. to toss up in the polling average for the first time since 2016.
If N.H. is a toss up then Trump will win upper Maine and it's Electoral Vote just like 2016.
Anybody who cares about the future of democracy in America wants Trump to win in 2020.
It would be grossly unfair for a Democrat to be President during the Trump Economic Hangover.
(The US fiscal deficit is going to be larger in 2020 than at any time other than the Global Financial Crisis. Running that deficit late in an economic cycle is insanely irresponsible. What ever happened to fiscal prudence?)
That Medicover for all who want it is now considered dangerously right wing is the real reason that the Democrats are in real trouble.
Why does he have the power to do so? Surely they are all appointed by the ministers themselves - is the idea that they are not going to be replaced, or that he will somehow become responsible for appointing replacements?
There has been some debate as to why I count Buttigieg as a divisive figure in the Democratic Party.
The answer is simple, just like Sanders, Buttigieg is from one extreme end of his Party. He doesn't offer anything to the other extreme end and the way that he is winning (the Iowa fiasco) angers the other extreme even more.
Just like Trump getting the nomination and the extreme faction on the other side bolted from the Republican party, a Buttigieg or Sanders nomination will also result in a faction on the extremes leaving the Democrats at least for this election.
Sanders isn't a member of the Dems.
It is the same crap as Corbyn, who was barely a member of the Lab party for decades and, as leader, surrounded himself with Communists and Stalinist news commentators.
I humbly suggest the electorate will give the same verdict.
There has been some debate as to why I count Buttigieg as a divisive figure in the Democratic Party.
The answer is simple, just like Sanders, Buttigieg is from one extreme end of his Party. He doesn't offer anything to the other extreme end and the way that he is winning (the Iowa fiasco) angers the other extreme even more.
Just like Trump getting the nomination and the extreme faction on the other side bolted from the Republican party, a Buttigieg or Sanders nomination will also result in a faction on the extremes leaving the Democrats at least for this election.
Sanders isn't a member of the Dems.
It is the same crap as Corbyn, who was barely a member of the Lab party for decades and, as leader, surrounded himself with Communists and Stalinist news commentators.
I humbly suggest the electorate will give the same verdict.
Buttigieg is undoubtedly right in the centre of the Democrats.
I spy with my little eye something equaly important in this poll. Republicans beat Democrats by 1 point in N.Hampshire, that has moved N.H. to toss up in the polling average for the first time since 2016.
If N.H. is a toss up then Trump will win upper Maine and it's Electoral Vote just like 2016.
Anybody who cares about the future of democracy in America wants Trump to win in 2020.
It would be grossly unfair for a Democrat to be President during the Trump Economic Hangover.
(The US fiscal deficit is going to be larger in 2020 than at any time other than the Global Financial Crisis. Running that deficit late in an economic cycle is insanely irresponsible. What ever happened to fiscal prudence?)
Fiscal Prudence? It turned Japanese.
When President Kennedy asked his economists how high can he increase the deficit the reply was as high as he liked until inflation rises.
That still applies today, look at Japan, 0% inflation and government debt the largest in the world with no negative consequences on interest rates.
Look at America, the deficit explodes yet interest rates fell because inflation fell.
South Africa are on course to join the Six Nations after the next World Cup, in a move which will radically alter the international rugby landscape.
Sportsmail has learned that negotiations have been going on behind the scenes for some time and there is now a sense of inevitability that the Springboks will take their place in Europe’s annual Test tournament in 2024. One source told this newspaper: ‘Things are falling nicely into place.’
It is understood that the plan in principle would involve expanding the championship to a seven-team event — rather than South Africa’s entry coming at the expense of struggling Italy. That would create pressure on an already congested calendar, but the rewards are regarded as too enticing to ignore.
The Boks won the World Cup last November, beating England 32-12 in Yokohama. Adding such a powerful nation to the tournament would be a stunning coup for the northern unions and although the time frame is not finalised, the indications are that the change would take place in 2024.
There will be many profound repercussions. South Africa play in the southern hemisphere’s Rugby Championship, along with Australia, New Zealand and Argentina. Their departure would leave a gaping hole, but it may allow for the integration of Japan, whose exploits at their home World Cup have led to demands for them to be accommodated in one of the two regular international competitions.
In recent months, there has been speculation linking Japan and Fiji with entry into the Six Nations, but Sportsmail sources claim this is unlikely.
If true, I'm not sure what to make of it. The 6 Nations teams should be happy that a great team like South Africa wants to join them, and it will make them stronger. On the other hand, I like the whole Northern Hemisphere vs Southern Hemisphere thing, even if the Northern Hemisphere almost always comes off worse. In what other context can you support France in a sporting event?
There has been some debate as to why I count Buttigieg as a divisive figure in the Democratic Party.
The answer is simple, just like Sanders, Buttigieg is from one extreme end of his Party. He doesn't offer anything to the other extreme end and the way that he is winning (the Iowa fiasco) angers the other extreme even more.
Just like Trump getting the nomination and the extreme faction on the other side bolted from the Republican party, a Buttigieg or Sanders nomination will also result in a faction on the extremes leaving the Democrats at least for this election.
Sanders isn't a member of the Dems.
It is the same crap as Corbyn, who was barely a member of the Lab party for decades and, as leader, surrounded himself with Communists and Stalinist news commentators.
I humbly suggest the electorate will give the same verdict.
Wasn't one of the recent Conservative leadership candidates found not to be a member? At the back of my mind, Ken Clarke?
I spy with my little eye something equaly important in this poll. Republicans beat Democrats by 1 point in N.Hampshire, that has moved N.H. to toss up in the polling average for the first time since 2016.
If N.H. is a toss up then Trump will win upper Maine and it's Electoral Vote just like 2016.
Anybody who cares about the future of democracy in America wants Trump to win in 2020.
It would be grossly unfair for a Democrat to be President during the Trump Economic Hangover.
(The US fiscal deficit is going to be larger in 2020 than at any time other than the Global Financial Crisis. Running that deficit late in an economic cycle is insanely irresponsible. What ever happened to fiscal prudence?)
I agree but I think the threat to democracy from an unrestrained Trump unworried about reelection is greater.
South Africa are on course to join the Six Nations after the next World Cup, in a move which will radically alter the international rugby landscape.
Sportsmail has learned that negotiations have been going on behind the scenes for some time and there is now a sense of inevitability that the Springboks will take their place in Europe’s annual Test tournament in 2024. One source told this newspaper: ‘Things are falling nicely into place.’
It is understood that the plan in principle would involve expanding the championship to a seven-team event — rather than South Africa’s entry coming at the expense of struggling Italy. That would create pressure on an already congested calendar, but the rewards are regarded as too enticing to ignore.
The Boks won the World Cup last November, beating England 32-12 in Yokohama. Adding such a powerful nation to the tournament would be a stunning coup for the northern unions and although the time frame is not finalised, the indications are that the change would take place in 2024.
There will be many profound repercussions. South Africa play in the southern hemisphere’s Rugby Championship, along with Australia, New Zealand and Argentina. Their departure would leave a gaping hole, but it may allow for the integration of Japan, whose exploits at their home World Cup have led to demands for them to be accommodated in one of the two regular international competitions.
In recent months, there has been speculation linking Japan and Fiji with entry into the Six Nations, but Sportsmail sources claim this is unlikely.
If true, I'm not sure what to make of it. The 6 Nations teams should be happy that a great team like South Africa wants to join them, and it will make them stronger. On the other hand, I like the whole Northern Hemisphere vs Southern Hemisphere thing, even if the Northern Hemisphere almost always comes off worse. In what other context can you support France in a sporting event?
Unless the idea is that South Africa play their home matches in Europe it’s ridiculous. Six nations matches are very closely spaced - having two or three matches in 2/3 weeks including a 14hr plane journey and a switch between summer and winter conditions should be a non starter.
I spy with my little eye something equaly important in this poll. Republicans beat Democrats by 1 point in N.Hampshire, that has moved N.H. to toss up in the polling average for the first time since 2016.
If N.H. is a toss up then Trump will win upper Maine and it's Electoral Vote just like 2016.
Anybody who cares about the future of democracy in America wants Trump to win in 2020.
It would be grossly unfair for a Democrat to be President during the Trump Economic Hangover.
(The US fiscal deficit is going to be larger in 2020 than at any time other than the Global Financial Crisis. Running that deficit late in an economic cycle is insanely irresponsible. What ever happened to fiscal prudence?)
Fiscal Prudence? It turned Japanese.
When President Kennedy asked his economists how high can he increase the deficit the reply was as high as he liked until inflation rises.
That still applies today, look at Japan, 0% inflation and government debt the largest in the world with no negative consequences on interest rates.
Look at America, the deficit explodes yet interest rates fell because inflation fell.
Japan has zero inflation because the Japanese still stuff their savings in JGBs, even when yields are zero or worse.
The US is able to run big deficits without interest rates rising because -so far- the Chinese have been happy to recycle their trade surpluses into US Treasuries.
"Whoever ends up winning Iowa the WH2020 Dem nomination battle is now framed as between Bernie and Buttigieg"
What an extraordinary thread heading from OGH, seemingly totally ignoring the chances of Michael Bloomberg until he suddenly remembers him as an after thought, answering his own question as regards whether his huge financial investment into his campaign will make any difference ... "I don't know" is his equivocal reply. Well the betting market certainly has a much more positive view of Bloomberg's prospects where he is the second favourite with the Betfair Exchange to win the Democratic nomination with odds of 5.12, compared with Sanders on 2.65. Meanwhile Biden and Buttigieg languish in 3rd an 4th places both on odds of 7.5.
Wait till New Hampshire
Sorry, but since Bloomberg will be taking no part in the New Hampshire Primary and his rating in the popularity stakes will not be known until the "Super Tuesday" results are in, I really don't understand the point you are making.
There has been some debate as to why I count Buttigieg as a divisive figure in the Democratic Party.
The answer is simple, just like Sanders, Buttigieg is from one extreme end of his Party. He doesn't offer anything to the other extreme end and the way that he is winning (the Iowa fiasco) angers the other extreme even more.
Just like Trump getting the nomination and the extreme faction on the other side bolted from the Republican party, a Buttigieg or Sanders nomination will also result in a faction on the extremes leaving the Democrats at least for this election.
Sanders isn't a member of the Dems.
It is the same crap as Corbyn, who was barely a member of the Lab party for decades and, as leader, surrounded himself with Communists and Stalinist news commentators.
I humbly suggest the electorate will give the same verdict.
Wasn't one of the recent Conservative leadership candidates found not to be a member? At the back of my mind, Ken Clarke?
Two major items of news this Friday evening in the US.
Firstly, many repatriation charter flights to the US from China are being undertaken by Kalitta Air. With a weird name like that, where could it possibly be based? Where else but Ypsilanti!
Secondly, after temperatures of almost 70 degrees at times yesterday, it will be below freezing overnight, and the forecast is for SNOW showers early Saturday for the north metro Atlanta area. God help those in the north Georgia mountains!
Next to this, impeachment, coronavirus and Joe Biden (who continues to prove that he is - as a friend of mine commented 30 years ago - indeed a Putz) can be seen as the trifling issues they are
There has been some debate as to why I count Buttigieg as a divisive figure in the Democratic Party.
The answer is simple, just like Sanders, Buttigieg is from one extreme end of his Party. He doesn't offer anything to the other extreme end and the way that he is winning (the Iowa fiasco) angers the other extreme even more.
Just like Trump getting the nomination and the extreme faction on the other side bolted from the Republican party, a Buttigieg or Sanders nomination will also result in a faction on the extremes leaving the Democrats at least for this election.
Sanders isn't a member of the Dems.
It is the same crap as Corbyn, who was barely a member of the Lab party for decades and, as leader, surrounded himself with Communists and Stalinist news commentators.
I humbly suggest the electorate will give the same verdict.
I also included Sanders as a divisive figure on roughly the same definition.
In British terms Boris and Stewart were divisive figures that if elected would lead to a split in the party. In the case of Boris the splinter that left was very small in votes and was a net gain.
"Whoever ends up winning Iowa the WH2020 Dem nomination battle is now framed as between Bernie and Buttigieg"
What an extraordinary thread heading from OGH, seemingly totally ignoring the chances of Michael Bloomberg until he suddenly remembers him as an after thought, answering his own question as regards whether his huge financial investment into his campaign will make any difference ... "I don't know" is his equivocal reply. Well the betting market certainly has a much more positive view of Bloomberg's prospects where he is the second favourite with the Betfair Exchange to win the Democratic nomination with odds of 5.12, compared with Sanders on 2.65. Meanwhile Biden and Buttigieg languish in 3rd an 4th places both on odds of 7.5.
Wait till New Hampshire
Sorry, but since Bloomberg will be taking no part in the New Hampshire Primary and his rating in the popularity stakes will not be known until the "Super Tuesday" results are in, I really don't understand the point you are making.
Bernie wins NH massively, Biden gets, like, one vote from old mother apple pie, Dem elite panic == Bloomberg???
Only an idea.
My money is on Pete and we are going all the way to the convention...
No good reason why SA and Japan shouldn’t be considered. But a proper promotion-relegation structure needs to be implemented first. Italy are a laughing stock; Georgia deserve their chance; all this must happen prior to expansion.
The message coming from your eyes says leave it alone?
If we're going to expand we should expand it to other European nations.
My ideal is two have a two division six nations tournament with promotion/relegation.
It'll ruin the fan experience if you have to go regularly to South Africa every two years to see your team for a tournament decider.
There is something to be said for resisting the urge to expand successful sporting events/teams.
Italy being successful in what sense exactly? The 6N closed shop is a disgrace to sporting competition. It needs to end ASAP and promotion from and relegation to the European Championship is the key first step.
"Whoever ends up winning Iowa the WH2020 Dem nomination battle is now framed as between Bernie and Buttigieg"
What an extraordinary thread heading from OGH, seemingly totally ignoring the chances of Michael Bloomberg until he suddenly remembers him as an after thought, answering his own question as regards whether his huge financial investment into his campaign will make any difference ... "I don't know" is his equivocal reply. Well the betting market certainly has a much more positive view of Bloomberg's prospects where he is the second favourite with the Betfair Exchange to win the Democratic nomination with odds of 5.12, compared with Sanders on 2.65. Meanwhile Biden and Buttigieg languish in 3rd an 4th places both on odds of 7.5.
Wait till New Hampshire
Sorry, but since Bloomberg will be taking no part in the New Hampshire Primary and his rating in the popularity stakes will not be known until the "Super Tuesday" results are in, I really don't understand the point you are making.
If Buttigieg wins New Hampshire, and that is far from certain, then I'm not sure whether Bloomberg stands a chance.
Bloomberg needs a situation where no moderate has separated from the pack, and they are all seen as failing. If Buttigieg wins New Hampshire, Klobuchar leaves the race, and Biden continues to bleed support and money, then what's Bloomberg's pitch?
I spy with my little eye something equaly important in this poll. Republicans beat Democrats by 1 point in N.Hampshire, that has moved N.H. to toss up in the polling average for the first time since 2016.
If N.H. is a toss up then Trump will win upper Maine and it's Electoral Vote just like 2016.
Anybody who cares about the future of democracy in America wants Trump to win in 2020.
It would be grossly unfair for a Democrat to be President during the Trump Economic Hangover.
(The US fiscal deficit is going to be larger in 2020 than at any time other than the Global Financial Crisis. Running that deficit late in an economic cycle is insanely irresponsible. What ever happened to fiscal prudence?)
Fiscal Prudence? It turned Japanese.
When President Kennedy asked his economists how high can he increase the deficit the reply was as high as he liked until inflation rises.
That still applies today, look at Japan, 0% inflation and government debt the largest in the world with no negative consequences on interest rates.
Look at America, the deficit explodes yet interest rates fell because inflation fell.
Japan has zero inflation because the Japanese still stuff their savings in JGBs, even when yields are zero or worse.
The US is able to run big deficits without interest rates rising because -so far- the Chinese have been happy to recycle their trade surpluses into US Treasuries.
Chinese Foreign Exchange Reserves are going down since 2014. So have the Arab Reserves.
Instead it's the Fed who is buying or funding the buyers through various ways of American Treasury Bonds, look at the US Money Supply it's exploding.
But monetary inflation isn't rising because those dollars go straight into the global banking system instead of the general public.
He really thinks that he can just buy his way into the highest post in the land.
It is America, so he may well be correct.
Except he isn't just buying himself into politics a la Trump or Steyer or Wang or Perot. He has an impressive track record of being a politician. It is just his route to the Democratic nomination that is different, but he has more than earned his right to be considered for the top job.
Absurd, if the Six nations includes southern hemisphere sides it is no longer the Six nations in my view but a mini world cup, the Rugby Championship is for the southern hemisphere
Absurd, if the Six nations includes southern hemisphere sides it is no longer the Six nations in my view but a mini world cup, the Rugby Championship is for the southern hemisphere
Absurd, if the Six nations includes southern hemisphere sides it is no longer the Six nations in my view but a mini world cup, the Rugby Championship is for the southern hemisphere
Well you are right insofar as it will be the Seven Nations. Bring it on. Better with SA in it.
The message coming from your eyes says leave it alone?
If we're going to expand we should expand it to other European nations.
My ideal is two have a two division six nations tournament with promotion/relegation.
It'll ruin the fan experience if you have to go regularly to South Africa every two years to see your team for a tournament decider.
There is something to be said for resisting the urge to expand successful sporting events/teams.
Italy being successful in what sense exactly? The 6N closed shop is a disgrace to sporting competition. It needs to end ASAP and promotion from and relegation to the European Championship is the key first step.
Well in this case I meant the six nations event being successful rather than any individual team. Thought that was obvious really
He really thinks that he can just buy his way into the highest post in the land.
It is America, so he may well be correct.
Bloomberg has a record as Mayor that drags him down.
For example he messed with America's food when he was Mayor. (A ban on soft drinks) No one messes with the food of Americans without dire consequences.
"Whoever ends up winning Iowa the WH2020 Dem nomination battle is now framed as between Bernie and Buttigieg"
What an extraordinary thread heading from OGH, seemingly totally ignoring the chances of Michael Bloomberg until he suddenly remembers him as an after thought, answering his own question as regards whether his huge financial investment into his campaign will make any difference ... "I don't know" is his equivocal reply. Well the betting market certainly has a much more positive view of Bloomberg's prospects where he is the second favourite with the Betfair Exchange to win the Democratic nomination with odds of 5.12, compared with Sanders on 2.65. Meanwhile Biden and Buttigieg languish in 3rd an 4th places both on odds of 7.5.
Wait till New Hampshire
Sorry, but since Bloomberg will be taking no part in the New Hampshire Primary and his rating in the popularity stakes will not be known until the "Super Tuesday" results are in, I really don't understand the point you are making.
If Buttigieg wins New Hampshire, and that is far from certain, then I'm not sure whether Bloomberg stands a chance.
Bloomberg needs a situation where no moderate has separated from the pack, and they are all seen as failing. If Buttigieg wins New Hampshire, Klobuchar leaves the race, and Biden continues to bleed support and money, then what's Bloomberg's pitch?
"I'm a self-made mega-billionaire and former New York mayor, and he's well-known in South Bend Indiana."
"Whoever ends up winning Iowa the WH2020 Dem nomination battle is now framed as between Bernie and Buttigieg"
What an extraordinary thread heading from OGH, seemingly totally ignoring the chances of Michael Bloomberg until he suddenly remembers him as an after thought, answering his own question as regards whether his huge financial investment into his campaign will make any difference ... "I don't know" is his equivocal reply. Well the betting market certainly has a much more positive view of Bloomberg's prospects where he is the second favourite with the Betfair Exchange to win the Democratic nomination with odds of 5.12, compared with Sanders on 2.65. Meanwhile Biden and Buttigieg languish in 3rd an 4th places both on odds of 7.5.
Wait till New Hampshire
Sorry, but since Bloomberg will be taking no part in the New Hampshire Primary and his rating in the popularity stakes will not be known until the "Super Tuesday" results are in, I really don't understand the point you are making.
Bloomberg's TV ads are frequent, varied and good. And most of them are designed to needle Trump.
They have won over my wife, who otherwise would be a Buttigieg or Klobuchar supporter (as a disaffected former GOP-voter, who will now vote Dem down the entire Federal ticket as her way of telling the GOP to get a spine and face up re Trump and Trumpism).
The message coming from your eyes says leave it alone?
If we're going to expand we should expand it to other European nations.
My ideal is two have a two division six nations tournament with promotion/relegation.
It'll ruin the fan experience if you have to go regularly to South Africa every two years to see your team for a tournament decider.
There is something to be said for resisting the urge to expand successful sporting events/teams.
Italy being successful in what sense exactly? The 6N closed shop is a disgrace to sporting competition. It needs to end ASAP and promotion from and relegation to the European Championship is the key first step.
Well in this case I meant the six nations event being successful rather than any individual team. Thought that was obvious really
Not at all obvious.
There’s a problem with the tournament: it’s a cosy closed shop, and teams like Georgia can’t advance because they only get to play the major countries every four years.
So no, it’s not obviously a successful competition insofar as it’s anticompetitive in a certain sense.
"Whoever ends up winning Iowa the WH2020 Dem nomination battle is now framed as between Bernie and Buttigieg"
What an extraordinary thread heading from OGH, seemingly totally ignoring the chances of Michael Bloomberg until he suddenly remembers him as an after thought, answering his own question as regards whether his huge financial investment into his campaign will make any difference ... "I don't know" is his equivocal reply. Well the betting market certainly has a much more positive view of Bloomberg's prospects where he is the second favourite with the Betfair Exchange to win the Democratic nomination with odds of 5.12, compared with Sanders on 2.65. Meanwhile Biden and Buttigieg languish in 3rd an 4th places both on odds of 7.5.
Wait till New Hampshire
Sorry, but since Bloomberg will be taking no part in the New Hampshire Primary and his rating in the popularity stakes will not be known until the "Super Tuesday" results are in, I really don't understand the point you are making.
If Buttigieg wins New Hampshire, and that is far from certain, then I'm not sure whether Bloomberg stands a chance.
Bloomberg needs a situation where no moderate has separated from the pack, and they are all seen as failing. If Buttigieg wins New Hampshire, Klobuchar leaves the race, and Biden continues to bleed support and money, then what's Bloomberg's pitch?
"I'm a self-made mega-billionaire and former New York mayor, and he's well-known in South Bend Indiana."
"The 'woke' country may be ready for a gay Prez, but those Rust Belt voters you need to win over aren't"? Although, I doubt Bloomberg could or would want to say that so directly. It would have to be very carefully insinuated by others at a deniable distance.
"Whoever ends up winning Iowa the WH2020 Dem nomination battle is now framed as between Bernie and Buttigieg"
What an extraordinary thread heading from OGH, seemingly totally ignoring the chances of Michael Bloomberg until he suddenly remembers him as an after thought, answering his own question as regards whether his huge financial investment into his campaign will make any difference ... "I don't know" is his equivocal reply. Well the betting market certainly has a much more positive view of Bloomberg's prospects where he is the second favourite with the Betfair Exchange to win the Democratic nomination with odds of 5.12, compared with Sanders on 2.65. Meanwhile Biden and Buttigieg languish in 3rd an 4th places both on odds of 7.5.
Wait till New Hampshire
Sorry, but since Bloomberg will be taking no part in the New Hampshire Primary and his rating in the popularity stakes will not be known until the "Super Tuesday" results are in, I really don't understand the point you are making.
If Buttigieg wins New Hampshire, and that is far from certain, then I'm not sure whether Bloomberg stands a chance.
Bloomberg needs a situation where no moderate has separated from the pack, and they are all seen as failing. If Buttigieg wins New Hampshire, Klobuchar leaves the race, and Biden continues to bleed support and money, then what's Bloomberg's pitch?
"I'm a self-made mega-billionaire and former New York mayor, and he's well-known in South Bend Indiana."
It's a fair point.
But I wonder... If Bloomberg is at 10-12% in the polls on the verge of Super Tuesday, while Buttigieg is on 20% and Sanders in 30%...
Then does he swap his support for the role of Treasury Secretary? Or does he chose to be the man who gave the nomination to Sanders?
"Whoever ends up winning Iowa the WH2020 Dem nomination battle is now framed as between Bernie and Buttigieg"
What an extraordinary thread heading from OGH, seemingly totally ignoring the chances of Michael Bloomberg until he suddenly remembers him as an after thought, answering his own question as regards whether his huge financial investment into his campaign will make any difference ... "I don't know" is his equivocal reply. Well the betting market certainly has a much more positive view of Bloomberg's prospects where he is the second favourite with the Betfair Exchange to win the Democratic nomination with odds of 5.12, compared with Sanders on 2.65. Meanwhile Biden and Buttigieg languish in 3rd an 4th places both on odds of 7.5.
Wait till New Hampshire
Sorry, but since Bloomberg will be taking no part in the New Hampshire Primary and his rating in the popularity stakes will not be known until the "Super Tuesday" results are in, I really don't understand the point you are making.
If Buttigieg wins New Hampshire, and that is far from certain, then I'm not sure whether Bloomberg stands a chance.
Bloomberg needs a situation where no moderate has separated from the pack, and they are all seen as failing. If Buttigieg wins New Hampshire, Klobuchar leaves the race, and Biden continues to bleed support and money, then what's Bloomberg's pitch?
"I'm a self-made mega-billionaire and former New York mayor, and he's well-known in South Bend Indiana."
"The 'woke' country may be ready for a gay Prez, but those Rust Belt voters you need to win over aren't"? Although, I doubt Bloomberg could or would want to say that so directly. It would have to be very carefully insinuated by others at a deniable distance.
Are they ready for a charisma free elderly Jew who pretty much epitomises the elites that Trump rails against?
"Whoever ends up winning Iowa the WH2020 Dem nomination battle is now framed as between Bernie and Buttigieg"
What an extraordinary thread heading from OGH, seemingly totally ignoring the chances of Michael Bloomberg until he suddenly remembers him as an after thought, answering his own question as regards whether his huge financial investment into his campaign will make any difference ... "I don't know" is his equivocal reply. Well the betting market certainly has a much more positive view of Bloomberg's prospects where he is the second favourite with the Betfair Exchange to win the Democratic nomination with odds of 5.12, compared with Sanders on 2.65. Meanwhile Biden and Buttigieg languish in 3rd an 4th places both on odds of 7.5.
Wait till New Hampshire
Sorry, but since Bloomberg will be taking no part in the New Hampshire Primary and his rating in the popularity stakes will not be known until the "Super Tuesday" results are in, I really don't understand the point you are making.
If Buttigieg wins New Hampshire, and that is far from certain, then I'm not sure whether Bloomberg stands a chance.
Bloomberg needs a situation where no moderate has separated from the pack, and they are all seen as failing. If Buttigieg wins New Hampshire, Klobuchar leaves the race, and Biden continues to bleed support and money, then what's Bloomberg's pitch?
"I'm a self-made mega-billionaire and former New York mayor, and he's well-known in South Bend Indiana."
"The 'woke' country may be ready for a gay Prez, but those Rust Belt voters you need to win over aren't"? Although, I doubt Bloomberg could or would want to say that so directly. It would have to be very carefully insinuated by others at a deniable distance.
Yes, although an American Jewish friend of mine is adamant that the rust belt isn't ready for a New York Jew either.
"Whoever ends up winning Iowa the WH2020 Dem nomination battle is now framed as between Bernie and Buttigieg"
What an extraordinary thread heading from OGH, seemingly totally ignoring the chances of Michael Bloomberg until he suddenly remembers him as an after thought, answering his own question as regards whether his huge financial investment into his campaign will make any difference ... "I don't know" is his equivocal reply. Well the betting market certainly has a much more positive view of Bloomberg's prospects where he is the second favourite with the Betfair Exchange to win the Democratic nomination with odds of 5.12, compared with Sanders on 2.65. Meanwhile Biden and Buttigieg languish in 3rd an 4th places both on odds of 7.5.
Wait till New Hampshire
Sorry, but since Bloomberg will be taking no part in the New Hampshire Primary and his rating in the popularity stakes will not be known until the "Super Tuesday" results are in, I really don't understand the point you are making.
If Buttigieg wins New Hampshire, and that is far from certain, then I'm not sure whether Bloomberg stands a chance.
Bloomberg needs a situation where no moderate has separated from the pack, and they are all seen as failing. If Buttigieg wins New Hampshire, Klobuchar leaves the race, and Biden continues to bleed support and money, then what's Bloomberg's pitch?
"I'm a self-made mega-billionaire and former New York mayor, and he's well-known in South Bend Indiana."
"The 'woke' country may be ready for a gay Prez, but those Rust Belt voters you need to win over aren't"? Although, I doubt Bloomberg could or would want to say that so directly. It would have to be very carefully insinuated by others at a deniable distance.
I would point out that Buttigieg won the counties in Iowa that went Obama-Trump...
"Whoever ends up winning Iowa the WH2020 Dem nomination battle is now framed as between Bernie and Buttigieg"
What an extraordinary thread heading from OGH, seemingly totally ignoring the chances of Michael Bloomberg until he suddenly remembers him as an after thought, answering his own question as regards whether his huge financial investment into his campaign will make any difference ... "I don't know" is his equivocal reply. Well the betting market certainly has a much more positive view of Bloomberg's prospects where he is the second favourite with the Betfair Exchange to win the Democratic nomination with odds of 5.12, compared with Sanders on 2.65. Meanwhile Biden and Buttigieg languish in 3rd an 4th places both on odds of 7.5.
Wait till New Hampshire
Sorry, but since Bloomberg will be taking no part in the New Hampshire Primary and his rating in the popularity stakes will not be known until the "Super Tuesday" results are in, I really don't understand the point you are making.
If Buttigieg wins New Hampshire, and that is far from certain, then I'm not sure whether Bloomberg stands a chance.
Bloomberg needs a situation where no moderate has separated from the pack, and they are all seen as failing. If Buttigieg wins New Hampshire, Klobuchar leaves the race, and Biden continues to bleed support and money, then what's Bloomberg's pitch?
"I'm a self-made mega-billionaire and former New York mayor, and he's well-known in South Bend Indiana."
"The 'woke' country may be ready for a gay Prez, but those Rust Belt voters you need to win over aren't"? Although, I doubt Bloomberg could or would want to say that so directly. It would have to be very carefully insinuated by others at a deniable distance.
I would point out that Buttigieg won the counties in Iowa that went Obama-Trump...
Of the Democratic selectorate, not the general electorate
The message coming from your eyes says leave it alone?
If we're going to expand we should expand it to other European nations.
My ideal is two have a two division six nations tournament with promotion/relegation.
It'll ruin the fan experience if you have to go regularly to South Africa every two years to see your team for a tournament decider.
There is something to be said for resisting the urge to expand successful sporting events/teams.
Italy being successful in what sense exactly? The 6N closed shop is a disgrace to sporting competition. It needs to end ASAP and promotion from and relegation to the European Championship is the key first step.
Well in this case I meant the six nations event being successful rather than any individual team. Thought that was obvious really
Yeah the Six Nations is great, despite Italy's lack of competitiveness. I have that same feeling about not messing with it, and also that it should be the Northern Hemisphere competition.
Still, from South Africa's point of view, it's further to New Zealand than to Europe. I can see why they would want it (not just the money), and they're the world champions. It's all a bit strange.
He really thinks that he can just buy his way into the highest post in the land.
It is America, so he may well be correct.
Bloomberg has a record as Mayor that drags him down.
For example he messed with America's food when he was Mayor. (A ban on soft drinks) No one messes with the food of Americans without dire consequences.
"Whoever ends up winning Iowa the WH2020 Dem nomination battle is now framed as between Bernie and Buttigieg"
What an extraordinary thread heading from OGH, seemingly totally ignoring the chances of Michael Bloomberg until he suddenly remembers him as an after thought, answering his own question as regards whether his huge financial investment into his campaign will make any difference ... "I don't know" is his equivocal reply. Well the betting market certainly has a much more positive view of Bloomberg's prospects where he is the second favourite with the Betfair Exchange to win the Democratic nomination with odds of 5.12, compared with Sanders on 2.65. Meanwhile Biden and Buttigieg languish in 3rd an 4th places both on odds of 7.5.
Wait till New Hampshire
Sorry, but since Bloomberg will be taking no part in the New Hampshire Primary and his rating in the popularity stakes will not be known until the "Super Tuesday" results are in, I really don't understand the point you are making.
If Buttigieg wins New Hampshire, and that is far from certain, then I'm not sure whether Bloomberg stands a chance.
Bloomberg needs a situation where no moderate has separated from the pack, and they are all seen as failing. If Buttigieg wins New Hampshire, Klobuchar leaves the race, and Biden continues to bleed support and money, then what's Bloomberg's pitch?
"I'm a self-made mega-billionaire and former New York mayor, and he's well-known in South Bend Indiana."
"The 'woke' country may be ready for a gay Prez, but those Rust Belt voters you need to win over aren't"? Although, I doubt Bloomberg could or would want to say that so directly. It would have to be very carefully insinuated by others at a deniable distance.
I would point out that Buttigieg won the counties in Iowa that went Obama-Trump...
deleted. I misread your post. In fact that is very positive for Pete
The message coming from your eyes says leave it alone?
If we're going to expand we should expand it to other European nations.
My ideal is two have a two division six nations tournament with promotion/relegation.
It'll ruin the fan experience if you have to go regularly to South Africa every two years to see your team for a tournament decider.
There is something to be said for resisting the urge to expand successful sporting events/teams.
Italy being successful in what sense exactly? The 6N closed shop is a disgrace to sporting competition. It needs to end ASAP and promotion from and relegation to the European Championship is the key first step.
Well in this case I meant the six nations event being successful rather than any individual team. Thought that was obvious really
Not at all obvious.
There’s a problem with the tournament: it’s a cosy closed shop, and teams like Georgia can’t advance because they only get to play the major countries every four years.
So no, it’s not obviously a successful competition insofar as it’s anticompetitive in a certain sense.
Seems successful to me. Then again I have no interest in Rugby whatsoever and was making a general point about sporting events and or teams spreading themselves too thinly chasing money to their detriment
"Whoever ends up winning Iowa the WH2020 Dem nomination battle is now framed as between Bernie and Buttigieg"
What an extraordinary thread heading from OGH, seemingly totally ignoring the chances of Michael Bloomberg until he suddenly remembers him as an after thought, answering his own question as regards whether his huge financial investment into his campaign will make any difference ... "I don't know" is his equivocal reply. Well the betting market certainly has a much more positive view of Bloomberg's prospects where he is the second favourite with the Betfair Exchange to win the Democratic nomination with odds of 5.12, compared with Sanders on 2.65. Meanwhile Biden and Buttigieg languish in 3rd an 4th places both on odds of 7.5.
Wait till New Hampshire
Sorry, but since Bloomberg will be taking no part in the New Hampshire Primary and his rating in the popularity stakes will not be known until the "Super Tuesday" results are in, I really don't understand the point you are making.
If Buttigieg wins New Hampshire, and that is far from certain, then I'm not sure whether Bloomberg stands a chance.
Bloomberg needs a situation where no moderate has separated from the pack, and they are all seen as failing. If Buttigieg wins New Hampshire, Klobuchar leaves the race, and Biden continues to bleed support and money, then what's Bloomberg's pitch?
"I'm a self-made mega-billionaire and former New York mayor, and he's well-known in South Bend Indiana."
"The 'woke' country may be ready for a gay Prez, but those Rust Belt voters you need to win over aren't"? Although, I doubt Bloomberg could or would want to say that so directly. It would have to be very carefully insinuated by others at a deniable distance.
Yes, although an American Jewish friend of mine is adamant that the rust belt isn't ready for a New York Jew either.
LOL And he's probably right, although Mike does not wear his Jewishness quite so on his sleeve as Pete does his husband.
"Whoever ends up winning Iowa the WH2020 Dem nomination battle is now framed as between Bernie and Buttigieg"
What an extraordinary thread heading from OGH, seemingly totally ignoring the chances of Michael Bloomberg until he suddenly remembers him as an after thought, answering his own question as regards whether his huge financial investment into his campaign will make any difference ... "I don't know" is his equivocal reply. Well the betting market certainly has a much more positive view of Bloomberg's prospects where he is the second favourite with the Betfair Exchange to win the Democratic nomination with odds of 5.12, compared with Sanders on 2.65. Meanwhile Biden and Buttigieg languish in 3rd an 4th places both on odds of 7.5.
Wait till New Hampshire
Sorry, but since Bloomberg will be taking no part in the New Hampshire Primary and his rating in the popularity stakes will not be known until the "Super Tuesday" results are in, I really don't understand the point you are making.
If Buttigieg wins New Hampshire, and that is far from certain, then I'm not sure whether Bloomberg stands a chance.
Bloomberg needs a situation where no moderate has separated from the pack, and they are all seen as failing. If Buttigieg wins New Hampshire, Klobuchar leaves the race, and Biden continues to bleed support and money, then what's Bloomberg's pitch?
"I'm a self-made mega-billionaire and former New York mayor, and he's well-known in South Bend Indiana."
"The 'woke' country may be ready for a gay Prez, but those Rust Belt voters you need to win over aren't"? Although, I doubt Bloomberg could or would want to say that so directly. It would have to be very carefully insinuated by others at a deniable distance.
Are they ready for a charisma free elderly Jew who pretty much epitomises the elites that Trump rails against?
After the flamboyance of Trump, perhaps the country is more than ready for a charisma free pair of safe hands.
"Whoever ends up winning Iowa the WH2020 Dem nomination battle is now framed as between Bernie and Buttigieg"
What an extraordinary thread heading from OGH, seemingly totally ignoring the chances of Michael Bloomberg until he suddenly remembers him as an after thought, answering his own question as regards whether his huge financial investment into his campaign will make any difference ... "I don't know" is his equivocal reply. Well the betting market certainly has a much more positive view of Bloomberg's prospects where he is the second favourite with the Betfair Exchange to win the Democratic nomination with odds of 5.12, compared with Sanders on 2.65. Meanwhile Biden and Buttigieg languish in 3rd an 4th places both on odds of 7.5.
Wait till New Hampshire
Sorry, but since Bloomberg will be taking no part in the New Hampshire Primary and his rating in the popularity stakes will not be known until the "Super Tuesday" results are in, I really don't understand the point you are making.
If Buttigieg wins New Hampshire, and that is far from certain, then I'm not sure whether Bloomberg stands a chance.
Bloomberg needs a situation where no moderate has separated from the pack, and they are all seen as failing. If Buttigieg wins New Hampshire, Klobuchar leaves the race, and Biden continues to bleed support and money, then what's Bloomberg's pitch?
"I'm a self-made mega-billionaire and former New York mayor, and he's well-known in South Bend Indiana."
"The 'woke' country may be ready for a gay Prez, but those Rust Belt voters you need to win over aren't"? Although, I doubt Bloomberg could or would want to say that so directly. It would have to be very carefully insinuated by others at a deniable distance.
Are they ready for a charisma free elderly Jew who pretty much epitomises the elites that Trump rails against?
After the flamboyance of Trump, perhaps the country is more than ready for a charisma free pair of safe hands.
"Whoever ends up winning Iowa the WH2020 Dem nomination battle is now framed as between Bernie and Buttigieg"
What an extraordinary thread heading from OGH, seemingly totally ignoring the chances of Michael Bloomberg until he suddenly remembers him as an after thought, answering his own question as regards whether his huge financial investment into his campaign will make any difference ... "I don't know" is his equivocal reply. Well the betting market certainly has a much more positive view of Bloomberg's prospects where he is the second favourite with the Betfair Exchange to win the Democratic nomination with odds of 5.12, compared with Sanders on 2.65. Meanwhile Biden and Buttigieg languish in 3rd an 4th places both on odds of 7.5.
Wait till New Hampshire
Sorry, but since Bloomberg will be taking no part in the New Hampshire Primary and his rating in the popularity stakes will not be known until the "Super Tuesday" results are in, I really don't understand the point you are making.
If Buttigieg wins New Hampshire, and that is far from certain, then I'm not sure whether Bloomberg stands a chance.
Bloomberg needs a situation where no moderate has separated from the pack, and they are all seen as failing. If Buttigieg wins New Hampshire, Klobuchar leaves the race, and Biden continues to bleed support and money, then what's Bloomberg's pitch?
"I'm a self-made mega-billionaire and former New York mayor, and he's well-known in South Bend Indiana."
"The 'woke' country may be ready for a gay Prez, but those Rust Belt voters you need to win over aren't"? Although, I doubt Bloomberg could or would want to say that so directly. It would have to be very carefully insinuated by others at a deniable distance.
I would point out that Buttigieg won the counties in Iowa that went Obama-Trump...
He won white Democrat caucus-goers (who skew even more liberal than Democrats generally) in counties that went Obama-Trump, on a relatively low turnout.
"Whoever ends up winning Iowa the WH2020 Dem nomination battle is now framed as between Bernie and Buttigieg"
What an extraordinary thread heading from OGH, seemingly totally ignoring the chances of Michael Bloomberg until he suddenly remembers him as an after thought, answering his own question as regards whether his huge financial investment into his campaign will make any difference ... "I don't know" is his equivocal reply. Well the betting market certainly has a much more positive view of Bloomberg's prospects where he is the second favourite with the Betfair Exchange to win the Democratic nomination with odds of 5.12, compared with Sanders on 2.65. Meanwhile Biden and Buttigieg languish in 3rd an 4th places both on odds of 7.5.
Wait till New Hampshire
Sorry, but since Bloomberg will be taking no part in the New Hampshire Primary and his rating in the popularity stakes will not be known until the "Super Tuesday" results are in, I really don't understand the point you are making.
If Buttigieg wins New Hampshire, and that is far from certain, then I'm not sure whether Bloomberg stands a chance.
Bloomberg needs a situation where no moderate has separated from the pack, and they are all seen as failing. If Buttigieg wins New Hampshire, Klobuchar leaves the race, and Biden continues to bleed support and money, then what's Bloomberg's pitch?
"I'm a self-made mega-billionaire and former New York mayor, and he's well-known in South Bend Indiana."
"The 'woke' country may be ready for a gay Prez, but those Rust Belt voters you need to win over aren't"? Although, I doubt Bloomberg could or would want to say that so directly. It would have to be very carefully insinuated by others at a deniable distance.
I would point out that Buttigieg won the counties in Iowa that went Obama-Trump...
He won white liberal Democrats in counties that went Obama-Trump, on a relatively low turnout.
Yes, but it's also notable that Obama's success in 2008 was on the back of those same rural counties. I would also point out that Buttigieg does better than any other Democrat in Iowa matchups.
Perhaps the more voters see of him, the more they like him? A sort of anti-Biden...
Comments
Osborne was appointed to edit the daily London newspaper in March 2017 and since then has continued to juggle the job with several other roles, including a £650,000-a-year post advising the investment fund BlackRock, and as chair of the Northern Powerhouse Partnership.
Amid rampant speculation over the editor’s future among staff, the Evening Standard did not respond to multiple requests for comment on Friday afternoon.
Sources at the newspaper said the publication was changing direction under its new chief executive, Mike Soutar – the founder of the free magazine Shortlist who joined the Evening Standard at the end of last year – as he seeks to reduce financial losses of £11m a year.
The newspaper, which distributes 800,000 copies a day across London, has been hit hard by the decline in print advertising revenue. Its free distribution model means that it has high fixed costs, which cannot be offset with price rises. At the same time the outlet is facing the challenge of 4G mobile phone signal coming to the London Underground, giving readers an alternative to reading a print newspaper.
The company has been pushing investment in its website while having to make job cuts and several long-serving staff members have departed.
A key issue facing the Evening Standard is the role of its owner, the Russian businessman Evgeny Lebedev, and his willingness to subsidise the operation. The company’s accounts say the losses mean the outlet “requires continuous financial support from the shareholders”.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/feb/07/george-osborne-evening-standard-editor-talks
You read it here first from me folks!* DYOR.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/07/us/politics/pete-buttigieg-iowa-caucus.html?action=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage
* after a few friday night drinks I thought I would ape @SeanT style posting.
Isn’t it Byronic?
Don’t you think?
Taxing high earners is what Labour does.
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1225909115228237824
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/07/us/politics/pete-buttigieg-iowa-caucus.html?action=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage
'weighing' is one of those journalistic words which, along with 'could', 'may', 'maybe', 'might' is often needed minutes before going to press.
Republicans beat Democrats by 1 point in N.Hampshire, that has moved N.H. to toss up in the polling average for the first time since 2016.
If N.H. is a toss up then Trump will win upper Maine and it's Electoral Vote just like 2016.
If, however, he announces a review into to it, then I shall order a takeaway.
The six nations could be about to become the seven nations.
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1225910195315978241
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_keyboard_layout
I dunno. Let me think. Errrm. None?
https://twitter.com/SophieLethier/status/1225876096786321409
My ideal is two have a two division six nations tournament with promotion/relegation.
It'll ruin the fan experience if you have to go regularly to South Africa every two years to see your team for a tournament decider.
Sportsmail has learned that negotiations have been going on behind the scenes for some time and there is now a sense of inevitability that the Springboks will take their place in Europe’s annual Test tournament in 2024. One source told this newspaper: ‘Things are falling nicely into place.’
It is understood that the plan in principle would involve expanding the championship to a seven-team event — rather than South Africa’s entry coming at the expense of struggling Italy. That would create pressure on an already congested calendar, but the rewards are regarded as too enticing to ignore.
The Boks won the World Cup last November, beating England 32-12 in Yokohama. Adding such a powerful nation to the tournament would be a stunning coup for the northern unions and although the time frame is not finalised, the indications are that the change would take place in 2024.
There will be many profound repercussions. South Africa play in the southern hemisphere’s Rugby Championship, along with Australia, New Zealand and Argentina. Their departure would leave a gaping hole, but it may allow for the integration of Japan, whose exploits at their home World Cup have led to demands for them to be accommodated in one of the two regular international competitions.
In recent months, there has been speculation linking Japan and Fiji with entry into the Six Nations, but Sportsmail sources claim this is unlikely.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/article-7980061/South-Africa-join-Six-Nations-World-Cup.html
The answer is simple, just like Sanders, Buttigieg is from one extreme end of his Party.
He doesn't offer anything to the other extreme end and the way that he is winning (the Iowa fiasco) angers the other extreme even more.
Just like Trump getting the nomination and the extreme faction on the other side bolted from the Republican party, a Buttigieg or Sanders nomination will also result in a faction on the extremes leaving the Democrats at least for this election.
https://twitter.com/nytpolitics/status/1225917183844376576
It would be grossly unfair for a Democrat to be President during the Trump Economic Hangover.
(The US fiscal deficit is going to be larger in 2020 than at any time other than the Global Financial Crisis. Running that deficit late in an economic cycle is insanely irresponsible. What ever happened to fiscal prudence?)
It is the same crap as Corbyn, who was barely a member of the Lab party for decades and, as leader, surrounded himself with Communists and Stalinist news commentators.
I humbly suggest the electorate will give the same verdict.
It turned Japanese.
When President Kennedy asked his economists how high can he increase the deficit the reply was as high as he liked until inflation rises.
That still applies today, look at Japan, 0% inflation and government debt the largest in the world with no negative consequences on interest rates.
Look at America, the deficit explodes yet interest rates fell because inflation fell.
The US is able to run big deficits without interest rates rising because -so far- the Chinese have been happy to recycle their trade surpluses into US Treasuries.
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.128161111
https://twitter.com/troymprice/status/1225857368250101760
Thank the Lord...
Firstly, many repatriation charter flights to the US from China are being undertaken by Kalitta Air. With a weird name like that, where could it possibly be based? Where else but Ypsilanti!
Secondly, after temperatures of almost 70 degrees at times yesterday, it will be below freezing overnight, and the forecast is for SNOW showers early Saturday for the north metro Atlanta area. God help those in the north Georgia mountains!
Next to this, impeachment, coronavirus and Joe Biden (who continues to prove that he is - as a friend of mine commented 30 years ago - indeed a Putz) can be seen as the trifling issues they are
It is America, so he may well be correct.
In British terms Boris and Stewart were divisive figures that if elected would lead to a split in the party.
In the case of Boris the splinter that left was very small in votes and was a net gain.
Only an idea.
My money is on Pete and we are going all the way to the convention...
Bloomberg needs a situation where no moderate has separated from the pack, and they are all seen as failing. If Buttigieg wins New Hampshire, Klobuchar leaves the race, and Biden continues to bleed support and money, then what's Bloomberg's pitch?
So have the Arab Reserves.
Instead it's the Fed who is buying or funding the buyers through various ways of American Treasury Bonds, look at the US Money Supply it's exploding.
But monetary inflation isn't rising because those dollars go straight into the global banking system instead of the general public.
But do you know how many people actively dislike Buttigieg?
None.
How many actively dislike Bloomberg?
Quite a lot. They remember that he spoke at the RNC.
Daft system.
Night all.
Sanders might go 3rd party if Bloomberg got it
For example he messed with America's food when he was Mayor. (A ban on soft drinks)
No one messes with the food of Americans without dire consequences.
They have won over my wife, who otherwise would be a Buttigieg or Klobuchar supporter (as a disaffected former GOP-voter, who will now vote Dem down the entire Federal ticket as her way of telling the GOP to get a spine and face up re Trump and Trumpism).
There’s a problem with the tournament: it’s a cosy closed shop, and teams like Georgia can’t advance because they only get to play the major countries every four years.
So no, it’s not obviously a successful competition insofar as it’s anticompetitive in a certain sense.
But I wonder... If Bloomberg is at 10-12% in the polls on the verge of Super Tuesday, while Buttigieg is on 20% and Sanders in 30%...
Then does he swap his support for the role of Treasury Secretary? Or does he chose to be the man who gave the nomination to Sanders?
https://www.etymonline.com/word/commonwealth
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/commonwealth
The word predates the birth of Cromwell by several years.
As Brecow is discovering
https://twitter.com/stuartgmcintyre/status/1225454840639369217?s=20
A whole 40p a week.....the “better off” (sic) don’t do so well....
Still, from South Africa's point of view, it's further to New Zealand than to Europe. I can see why they would want it (not just the money), and they're the world champions. It's all a bit strange.
But yes, point taken.
deleted. I misread your post. In fact that is very positive for Pete
Sanders 25%
Buttigieg 21%
Warren 14%
Biden 13%
Klobuchar 8%
Sanders 24%
Buttigieg 23%
Warren 13%
Biden 11%
Perhaps the more voters see of him, the more they like him? A sort of anti-Biden...