vox--2020-02-10--New Hampshire primary 2020

New Hampshire primary 2020

Voters are heading to the polls in New Hampshire for another key early-state contest in the 2020 Democratic primary .
The New Hampshire primary on Tuesday , February 11 , will be the first of the 2020 Democratic presidential race .
Eleven candidates are still in the running , though former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has elected not to contest the state .
Polls will close at either 7 or 8 pm ET depending on the municipality .
After a chaotic Iowa caucuses , Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders maintains a significant polling lead of around 7 points in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recent polls have shown former South Bend , Indiana , Mayor Pete Buttigieg closing in .
Sen. Elizabeth Warren and former Vice President Joe Biden , who finished third and fourth in Iowa , respectively , are within the margin of error from each other in the same FiveThirtyEight polling average , and both trail Sanders and Buttigieg by a sizable margin .
Sen. Amy Klobuchar has also been on the rise in the state , with several recent polls showing her running in third place behind Sanders and Buttigieg .
The New @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this year , for a few reasons .
Not only will independent voters also be going to the polls to weigh in on the Democratic primary , but the state may provide some clarity on the race that the muddled Iowa results lacked , as well as a crucial “ bounce ” for the winner .
While the Associated Press said it was “ unable to declare a winner ” in the Iowa caucuses , Buttigieg and Sanders both declared victory anyway , and will be hoping to amplify their momentum with strong @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
( Buttigieg won the most state delegate equivalents in Iowa , though Sanders won the popular vote . )
Follow along below for Vox ’ s coverage of the 2020 Iowa caucuses , including results , breaking news updates , analysis , and more .

Voters are heading to the polls in New Hampshire for another key early-state contest in the 2020 Democratic primary.
The New Hampshire primary on Tuesday, February 11, will be the first of the 2020 Democratic presidential race. Eleven candidates are still in the running, though former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has elected not to contest the state. Polls will close at either 7 or 8 pm ET depending on the municipality.
After a chaotic Iowa caucuses, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders maintains a significant polling lead of around 7 points in the FiveThirtyEight New Hampshire polling average, but recent polls have shown former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg closing in. Sen. Elizabeth Warren and former Vice President Joe Biden, who finished third and fourth in Iowa, respectively, are within the margin of error from each other in the same FiveThirtyEight polling average, and both trail Sanders and Buttigieg by a sizable margin.
Sen. Amy Klobuchar has also been on the rise in the state, with several recent polls showing her running in third place behind Sanders and Buttigieg.
The New Hampshire primary could matter more than ever this year, for a few reasons. Not only will independent voters also be going to the polls to weigh in on the Democratic primary, but the state may provide some clarity on the race that the muddled Iowa results lacked, as well as a crucial “bounce” for the winner.
While the Associated Press said it was “unable to declare a winner” in the Iowa caucuses, Buttigieg and Sanders both declared victory anyway, and will be hoping to amplify their momentum with strong finishes in the Granite State on Tuesday. (Buttigieg won the most state delegate equivalents in Iowa, though Sanders won the popular vote.)
Follow along below for Vox’s coverage of the 2020 Iowa caucuses, including results, breaking news updates, analysis, and more.


vox--2020-02-10--Netflix’s To All the Boys: P.S. I Still Love You shows its predecessor didn’t need a sequel

There was something about To All the Boys I ’ ve Loved Before , Netflix ’ s surprise hit 2018 teen love story directed by Susan Johnson , that made people want to wrap themselves up in it .
Everywhere I went in the months after it came out , people were talking about it : at parties with friends , at networking coffees with book publicists , with the Vox politics writers who were popping into the culture team ’ s Slack channel to declare To All the Boys the only thing that mattered in the world anymore .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ made sure to tell me how many times they ’ d watched it , which makes sense , because To All the Boys I ’ ve Loved Before has become one of Netflix ’ s most watched and rewatched movies .
“ I never watch teen movies , ” people would tell me , “ but I watched this one twice.
” Or , “ I never rewatch any movies , but I rewatched this one twice.
” I myself watched To All the Boys three times in the first weekend it came @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it on a loop every morning when I went to the gym , dipping in and out of it in half-hour segments .
To All the Boys I ’ ve Loved Before accomplished the impossible task of feeling both cozy and sparkling all at the same time , and watching it was all I wanted to do .
But when I finished the new sequel , To All the Boys : P.S .
I Still Love You , out on Netflix on February 12 and directed by Michael Fimognari ( the director of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ directing his first feature here ) , I had no urge whatsoever to watch it again .
While I ’ d just spent a perfectly enjoyable two hours with this movie , I could easily go quite a long time without ever needing to sit through it a second time .
I ’ m done with it .
P.S .
I Still Love You is fun , but it doesn ’ t have the tender , intimate detail work of its predecessor P.S .
I Still Love You picks up shortly after To @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Jean Covey ( Lana Condor ) and Peter Kavinsky ( Noah Centineo ) have officially become a real couple , after spending most of the previous movie fake dating .
As the movie opens , they are on their first real date , eating out at a fancy restaurant and building paper lanterns together to float into the sky .
But shy Lara Jean can ’ t help waiting for the other shoe to drop .
She thinks of herself as an inexperienced wallflower , and she ’ s well aware that Peter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , has plenty of options outside of her .
“ I don ’ t want us to break each other ’ s hearts , ” she tells him .
Potential heartbreak arrives nonetheless , in the form of John Ambrose McClaren ( Jordan Fisher ) , Lara Jean ’ s middle school crush .
John Ambrose and Lara Jean end up volunteering at the same nursing home together , and when John Ambrose starts flirting with Lara Jean , she finds herself flirting back .
The love triangle here is meant to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s largely pro-forma triangle between Lara Jean , Peter , and poor Josh Sanderson : While Josh never really posed a genuine threat to Peter in To All the Boys , in P.S .
I Still Love You , it ’ s supposed to be easy to go Team John .
And the outlines of a solid triangle are there .
John Ambrose , who likes to announce bingo for old people and thinks throwing a black tie event at a nursing home sounds glamorous , is the same kind of old-fashioned romantic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ meanwhile , is a jock who likes playing flip cup at parties .
It ’ s clear which one Lara Jean has more in common with .
But while Fisher is a born leading man , and he has lovely , understated chemistry with Condor , this relationship isn ’ t filled out with the kind of detail work that made the love story of the first To All the Boys shine .
The first movie worked as well it did because of tiny moments that made its central relationship feel lived-in and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Peter Kavinsky improvs that made everyone swoon ( The Spin , The Popcorn , The Splash ) .
They were also tiny storytelling flourishes , like Peter showing Lara Jean he likes her by buying her yogurt smoothies , and Lara Jean protecting herself from catching feelings by refusing to post about their relationship on Instagram .
Those kinds of moments don ’ t exist in P.S .
I Still Love You .
The closest you get is Peter telling Lara Jean she has really nice handwriting before we coast into a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( Admittedly that is a very sweet moment . )
And while Peter and Lara Jean can largely skate by on the strength of nostalgia for the first movie and Centineo and Condor ’ s chemistry , John Ambrose is starting from scratch .
With the careful craftsmanship of To All the Boys nowhere in evidence , he ’ s working with a handicap .
So instead of feeling specific and tender and lived-in , John Ambrose ’ s scenes have a faint whiff of the generic to them .
When he nurses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a piano to play , the scene doesn ’ t feel rooted in his character .
It feels ported over from Netflix ’ s so-bad-it ’ s-not-quite-good Christmas Prince cinematic universe , which never met a sexy piano playing scene it didn ’ t love .
Also Christmas Prince-reminiscent is Lara Jean and John Ambrose ’ s impromptu frolic through some extremely fake-looking snow , a scene that ’ s working hard to be adorable without much justification .
Right when the movie seemed to want us to be sighing at the romance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ person at my screening was instead hissing urgently about potential snow-induced damage to Lara Jean ’ s vintage evening gown .
The gown logistics were the most compelling part of the scene .
And where the love triangle isn ’ t generic , it ’ s tonally off .
The final scene of To All the Boys I ’ ve Loved Before — in which Lara Jean confesses to Peter that she likes him , “ and not in a fake way ” — landed because it was so underplayed .
The score @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and all we were left with was our two leads in a field at magic hour , as if the world had fallen away from them , leaving them completely exposed and vulnerable .
But the equivalent scene in P.S .
I Still Love You is , if anything , overplayed .
The music swells in the background ; the actors deliver their lines directly to the camera , as if they ’ re planning to smash through the fourth wall like the Kool-Aid Man ; and the whole thing is so dramatic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to take place entirely in slow motion .
( It doesn ’ t actually , I ’ m pretty sure . )
None of this is to say that P.S .
I Still Love You is offensively bad .
Like its predecessor , it takes place in a world that sings with vibrant colors , sometimes literally : As the movie opens , Lara Jean is pirouetting onscreen in bright yellow to belt out some showtunes about her joy at being in love .
And this movie takes care to be both thoughtful @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Lara Jean having it .
“ Don ’ t do anything until you ’ re a thousand percent sure you know what revs your own engine , ” her best friend Chris advises her .
As she was in To All the Boys , Condor is the beating heart of this movie , and her performance as Lara Jean is deceptively complex .
Lara Jean has to be simultaneously a nerdy introvert and badass cool chick , but Condor makes both sides feel equally present and equally real .
Meanwhile , reprising @ @ @ @ @ @ @ yet again that no one in the business is better at gazing longingly at girls than he is .
There are even places where P.S .
I Still Love You improves on its predecessor .
One of the few weaknesses in To All the Boys was that it left Peter ’ s ex-girlfriend Genevieve a flat villain without nuance , which frankly just made it kind of weird that Peter was so hung up on her .
But P.S .
I Still Love You takes a beat to see what ’ s going @ @ @ @ @ @ @ little — and to explore her long-dormant friendship with Lara Jean as well .
So when the credits rolled on P.S .
I Still Love You , I didn ’ t feel that I ’ d wasted my time watching it .
I ’ d had a lovely night hanging out with these likable characters played by likable actors in a likable , colorful world .
But I still don ’ t really feel as though I need to watch P.S .
I Still Love You ever again .
It might be time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Boys I ’ ve Loved Before , though .

There was something about To All the Boys I’ve Loved Before, Netflix’s surprise hit 2018 teen love story directed by Susan Johnson, that made people want to wrap themselves up in it.
Everywhere I went in the months after it came out, people were talking about it: at parties with friends, at networking coffees with book publicists, with the Vox politics writers who were popping into the culture team’s Slack channel to declare To All the Boys the only thing that mattered in the world anymore. Usually, the people I talked to made sure to tell me how many times they’d watched it, which makes sense, because To All the Boys I’ve Loved Before has become one of Netflix’s most watched and rewatched movies.
“I never watch teen movies,” people would tell me, “but I watched this one twice.” Or, “I never rewatch any movies, but I rewatched this one twice.”
I myself watched To All the Boys three times in the first weekend it came out, and then just started watching it on a loop every morning when I went to the gym, dipping in and out of it in half-hour segments. To All the Boys I’ve Loved Before accomplished the impossible task of feeling both cozy and sparkling all at the same time, and watching it was all I wanted to do.
But when I finished the new sequel, To All the Boys: P.S. I Still Love You, out on Netflix on February 12 and directed by Michael Fimognari (the director of photography for To All the Boys, directing his first feature here), I had no urge whatsoever to watch it again. While I’d just spent a perfectly enjoyable two hours with this movie, I could easily go quite a long time without ever needing to sit through it a second time. I’m done with it.
P.S. I Still Love You is fun, but it doesn’t have the tender, intimate detail work of its predecessor
P.S. I Still Love You picks up shortly after To All the Boys ends. 16-year-olds Lara Jean Covey (Lana Condor) and Peter Kavinsky (Noah Centineo) have officially become a real couple, after spending most of the previous movie fake dating. As the movie opens, they are on their first real date, eating out at a fancy restaurant and building paper lanterns together to float into the sky.
But shy Lara Jean can’t help waiting for the other shoe to drop. She thinks of herself as an inexperienced wallflower, and she’s well aware that Peter, the most popular boy in school, has plenty of options outside of her. “I don’t want us to break each other’s hearts,” she tells him.
Potential heartbreak arrives nonetheless, in the form of John Ambrose McClaren (Jordan Fisher), Lara Jean’s middle school crush. John Ambrose and Lara Jean end up volunteering at the same nursing home together, and when John Ambrose starts flirting with Lara Jean, she finds herself flirting back.
Rating: 3 out of 5 vox-mark vox-mark vox-mark vox-mark vox-mark
The love triangle here is meant to be more compelling than the first movie’s largely pro-forma triangle between Lara Jean, Peter, and poor Josh Sanderson: While Josh never really posed a genuine threat to Peter in To All the Boys, in P.S. I Still Love You, it’s supposed to be easy to go Team John.
And the outlines of a solid triangle are there. John Ambrose, who likes to announce bingo for old people and thinks throwing a black tie event at a nursing home sounds glamorous, is the same kind of old-fashioned romantic that Lara Jean is. Peter, meanwhile, is a jock who likes playing flip cup at parties. It’s clear which one Lara Jean has more in common with.
But while Fisher is a born leading man, and he has lovely, understated chemistry with Condor, this relationship isn’t filled out with the kind of detail work that made the love story of the first To All the Boys shine.
The first movie worked as well it did because of tiny moments that made its central relationship feel lived-in and genuine. Those weren’t just the Peter Kavinsky improvs that made everyone swoon (The Spin, The Popcorn, The Splash). They were also tiny storytelling flourishes, like Peter showing Lara Jean he likes her by buying her yogurt smoothies, and Lara Jean protecting herself from catching feelings by refusing to post about their relationship on Instagram.
Those kinds of moments don’t exist in P.S. I Still Love You. The closest you get is Peter telling Lara Jean she has really nice handwriting before we coast into a wordless montage of paper lanterns floating. (Admittedly that is a very sweet moment.) And while Peter and Lara Jean can largely skate by on the strength of nostalgia for the first movie and Centineo and Condor’s chemistry, John Ambrose is starting from scratch. With the careful craftsmanship of To All the Boys nowhere in evidence, he’s working with a handicap.
So instead of feeling specific and tender and lived-in, John Ambrose’s scenes have a faint whiff of the generic to them. When he nurses a broken heart by sitting down at a piano to play, the scene doesn’t feel rooted in his character. It feels ported over from Netflix’s so-bad-it’s-not-quite-good Christmas Prince cinematic universe, which never met a sexy piano playing scene it didn’t love.
Also Christmas Prince-reminiscent is Lara Jean and John Ambrose’s impromptu frolic through some extremely fake-looking snow, a scene that’s working hard to be adorable without much justification. Right when the movie seemed to want us to be sighing at the romance of it all, more than one person at my screening was instead hissing urgently about potential snow-induced damage to Lara Jean’s vintage evening gown. The gown logistics were the most compelling part of the scene.
And where the love triangle isn’t generic, it’s tonally off. The final scene of To All the Boys I’ve Loved Before — in which Lara Jean confesses to Peter that she likes him, “and not in a fake way” — landed because it was so underplayed. The score dropped out, the extras disappeared, and all we were left with was our two leads in a field at magic hour, as if the world had fallen away from them, leaving them completely exposed and vulnerable.
But the equivalent scene in P.S. I Still Love You is, if anything, overplayed. The music swells in the background; the actors deliver their lines directly to the camera, as if they’re planning to smash through the fourth wall like the Kool-Aid Man; and the whole thing is so dramatic that in my memory, it seems to take place entirely in slow motion. (It doesn’t actually, I’m pretty sure.)
None of this is to say that P.S. I Still Love You is offensively bad. Like its predecessor, it takes place in a world that sings with vibrant colors, sometimes literally: As the movie opens, Lara Jean is pirouetting onscreen in bright yellow to belt out some showtunes about her joy at being in love. And this movie takes care to be both thoughtful and realistic about sex and the possibility of Lara Jean having it. “Don’t do anything until you’re a thousand percent sure you know what revs your own engine,” her best friend Chris advises her.
As she was in To All the Boys, Condor is the beating heart of this movie, and her performance as Lara Jean is deceptively complex. Lara Jean has to be simultaneously a nerdy introvert and badass cool chick, but Condor makes both sides feel equally present and equally real. Meanwhile, reprising his role as Peter, Centineo proves yet again that no one in the business is better at gazing longingly at girls than he is.
There are even places where P.S. I Still Love You improves on its predecessor. One of the few weaknesses in To All the Boys was that it left Peter’s ex-girlfriend Genevieve a flat villain without nuance, which frankly just made it kind of weird that Peter was so hung up on her. But P.S. I Still Love You takes a beat to see what’s going on in Genevieve’s world a little — and to explore her long-dormant friendship with Lara Jean as well.
So when the credits rolled on P.S. I Still Love You, I didn’t feel that I’d wasted my time watching it. I’d had a lovely night hanging out with these likable characters played by likable actors in a likable, colorful world. But I still don’t really feel as though I need to watch P.S. I Still Love You ever again.
It might be time to take another spin through To All the Boys I’ve Loved Before, though.


vox--2020-02-11--How 1-800-Flowers.com became one of the biggest, clunkiest names in Valentine’s Day gifts

This Valentine ’ s Day , gift givers will spend $ 2.3 billion on flowers .
As vibrant arrangements of red , pink , purple , and white make their way to doorsteps across the country , millions will be coming from a single company : 1-800-Flowers.com , Inc .
The uniquely named company — few businesses are simultaneously a phone number and a website — urges customers to “ capture her heart , ” and the choices to do so are endless .
There are the mixed bouquets of lilies , orchids , and tulips , with sappy names @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Love Song.
” You can purchase a classic arrangement of “ Two Dozen Romantic Roses ” for anywhere between $ 59.99 and $ 101.99 .
Throw in some chocolates and spring for the nicer “ prism vase ” and the price goes up .
If that feels a little too pedestrian , don ’ t worry — three dozen preserved “ Magnificent Roses ” in a Instagram-ready black box will run you about $ 300 .
The story of 1-800-Flowers.com began 10 years before it even became a phone number , let alone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ McCann paid $ 10,000 for a floral shop in Manhattan , on First Avenue and East 62nd Street .
Gradually , he purchased a few more with the goal of becoming a chain .
“ I looked around and there was no McDonald ’ s of the flower business , ” McCann told Forbes in 2017 .
“ Once I opened , I immediately started looking for a second shop .
Six months later I bought a second shop and then opened another 30.
” Today the company is run by his brother @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 125 retail locations in 31 states and makes a whopping $ 1.25 billion in annual sales .
Gifts are a huge business .
Between all of the holidays and obligations we encounter in our lives , it ’ s not surprising that the gifting industry generates so much revenue — about $ 131.3 billion a year .
According to a 2018 Gallup survey , American adults estimated they would spend $ 900 on Christmas gifts alone that year .
1-800-Flowers.com has become a gifting-industry giant , selling around 20 million gifts every year @ @ @ @ @ @ @ teddy bear , personalized keepsakes , and even jewelry .
In fact , flowers aren ’ t even the real cash cow of 1-800-Flowers.com : While 40 % of the company ’ s 2019 revenue came from consumer floral , 52 % came from gourmet food and gift baskets , and 8 % came from BloomNet , an in-house network of 5,000 to 6,000 florists who help with design and local sourcing .
Seventy-five percent of their flowers come through florists , but the rest originate from farms in places like Colombia , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we realized was that customers were coming to us to buy flowers because they really need to send an expression and connect with someone and build a relationship with someone , ” Chris McCann said in a phone interview .
“ We realized flowers satisfied some of those needs , but what else do people use ?
That ’ s what moved us down the road of becoming a gourmet food company.
” 1-800-Flowers.com is an odd nesting doll of a corporation , as evidenced by its name .
What was first an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ online storefront in 1995 , at the height of the internet boom .
Investing in accessible , modern methods of commerce has become a key factor in the company ’ s success , especially online .
In 1992 , 1-800-Flowers became the first partner of CompuServe , the first big commercial online service provider in America .
Two years later , 1-800-Flowers became AOL ’ s first merchant partner , anchoring itself as an omnipresent American corporation .
The brand was so strong that giving up the 800 number has been impossible , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
McCann described the changes the company has gone through in four waves .
The first wave was its original 12 brick-and-mortar stores ; the second , its iconic phone number ; the third , its online presence .
“ By 1997 , consumers had kind of voted that the World Wide Web was a winning technology platform , and we were well-positioned there , ” he said .
The fourth wave has been mobile commerce , which is rapidly expanding .
Slowly but surely , 1-800-Flowers.com has created a small kingdom of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ umbrella , with straightforward domain names such as Berries.com ( it acquired Shari ’ s Berries , a chocolate-covered strawberry brand , last year ) , 1-800-Baskets.com , fruitbouquets.com ( an obvious Edible Arrangements competitor ) , among others .
You can send foods like popcorn , baked goods , steaks , and more .
In 2014 , the company acquired Harry & David , known for their luxurious gold-wrapped pears .
Through Personalization Universe , customers can buy assorted goods like monogrammed wine glasses and custom wall art .
Goodsey , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a random grab bag of gifts for any occasion .
Need to gift something for “ National Bikini Day ” on July 5 ?
The website suggests items like a “ deluxe emoji gift box ” ( $ 99 ) or a “ commuter ” cooler backpack ( $ 65 , though I recently saw a much cheaper version on Amazon ) .
“ The world has moved into this disconnected world .
And technology is so pervasive in our lives .
Some are saying it ’ s really knocking down the human @ @ @ @ @ @ @ positioned to really combat that , ” McCann said .
“ When the world is going through a loneliness epidemic , our mission is to really combat that and bring back the human connection.
” Sales dropped during the 2008 financial crisis , but that same year , the company launched a “ mobile gift center ” on Blackberry smartphones .
The company made its first transaction on Facebook in 2009 ; two years later , around the time we reached “ peak app , ” 1-800-Flowers invested in its own mobile app @ @ @ @ @ @ @ advancements further , focusing now on “ conversational commerce , ” meaning chatbots and voice-operated purchasing .
In the past two years , 1-800-Flowers has become available on Alexa , Apple Business Chat , Google Assistant , and Bixby , which is Samsung ’ s virtual assistant .
The investment in AI has extended in house as well .
As of this writing , the company has integrated an intelligent virtual assistant into its website , with natural language-processing abilities and a “ 3D and augmented reality ” feature so that customers can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Venmo has been integrated as a payment option , too .
When it comes to innovation , McCann says he wants a team who is willing to “ get speeding tickets , not parking tickets.
” A constant digital presence makes it hard to ignore the brand ’ s convenience and allows forgetful gift-givers to quickly cover their bases , with the help of various delivery methods , including FedEx , to help gifts make it to their destinations in time for occasions .
What many consumers might disregard as “ Hallmark holidays @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , are inescapable under the power of the gifting industry .
But it ’ s hard to deny the sweet feeling of receiving flowers from a loved one .
This Valentine ’ s Day , 1-800-Flowers.com anticipates it will sell 18.5 million flowers , 11 million of which will be roses .
“ Planning for a holiday like Valentine ’ s Day starts right after the Valentine ’ s Day this year , ” McCann said .
“ The good news is that we ’ ve been doing this for over 40 years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re never perfect , but I think we get better every single holiday.
” Sign up for The Goods newsletter .
Twice a week , we ’ ll send you the best Goods stories exploring what we buy , why we buy it , and why it matters .

This Valentine’s Day, gift givers will spend $2.3 billion on flowers. With delivery more popular than ever in the pandemic, vibrant arrangements of red, pink, purple, and white will make their way to doorsteps across the country, and millions will be coming from a single company: 1-800-Flowers.com, Inc.
The uniquely named company — few businesses are simultaneously a phone number and a website — urges customers to “capture her heart,” and the choices to do so are endless. There are the mixed bouquets of lilies, orchids, and tulips, with sappy names like “Sweetheart Medley” and “Love Song.” You can purchase a classic arrangement of “Two Dozen Romantic Roses” for anywhere between $59.99 and $101.99. Throw in some chocolates and spring for the nicer “prism vase” and the price goes up. If that feels a little too pedestrian, don’t worry — three dozen preserved “Magnificent Roses” in a Instagram-ready black box will run you about $300.
The story of 1-800-Flowers.com began 10 years before it even became a phone number, let alone a website. In 1976, Jim McCann paid $10,000 for a floral shop in Manhattan, on First Avenue and East 62nd Street. Gradually, he purchased a few more with the goal of becoming a chain. “I looked around and there was no McDonald’s of the flower business,” McCann told Forbes in 2017. “Once I opened, I immediately started looking for a second shop. Six months later I bought a second shop and then opened another 30.”
Today the company is run by his brother, Chris McCann. It has over 125 retail locations in 31 states and makes $1.25 billion in annual sales.
Gifts are a huge business. Between all of the holidays and obligations we encounter in our lives, it’s not surprising that the gifting industry generates so much revenue — about $131.3 billion a year. According to a 2018 Gallup survey, American adults estimated they would spend $900 on Christmas gifts alone that year.
1-800-Flowers.com has become a gifting-industry giant, selling around 20 million gifts every year. You can send someone a massive teddy bear, personalized keepsakes, and even jewelry. In fact, flowers aren’t even the real cash cow of 1-800-Flowers.com: While 40 percent of the company’s 2019 revenue came from consumer floral, 52 percent came from gourmet food and gift baskets, and 8 percent from BloomNet, an in-house network of 5,000 to 6,000 florists who help with design and local sourcing. Seventy-five percent of their flowers come through florists, but the rest originate from farms in places like Colombia, Ecuador, and California.
“What we realized was that customers were coming to us to buy flowers because they really need to send an expression and connect with someone and build a relationship with someone,” Chris McCann said in a phone interview. “We realized flowers satisfied some of those needs, but what else do people use? That’s what moved us down the road of becoming a gourmet food company.”
1-800-Flowers.com is an odd nesting doll of a corporation, as evidenced by its name. What was first an 800 number acquired in 1986 became an online storefront in 1995, at the height of the internet boom. Investing in accessible, modern methods of commerce has become a key factor in the company’s success, especially online. In 1992, 1-800-Flowers became the first partner of CompuServe, the first big commercial online service provider in America. Two years later, 1-800-Flowers became AOL’s first merchant partner, anchoring itself as an omnipresent American corporation. The brand was so strong that giving up the 800 number has been impossible, even in the age of online sales.
McCann described the changes the company has gone through in four waves. The first wave was its original 12 brick-and-mortar stores; the second, its iconic phone number; the third, its online presence. “By 1997, consumers had kind of voted that the World Wide Web was a winning technology platform, and we were well-positioned there,” he said. The fourth wave has been mobile commerce, which is rapidly expanding.
Slowly but surely, 1-800-Flowers.com has created a small kingdom of over a dozen brands under the family umbrella, with straightforward domain names such as Berries.com (it acquired Shari’s Berries, a chocolate-covered strawberry brand, in 2019,) 1-800-Baskets.com, fruitbouquets.com (an obvious Edible Arrangements competitor), among others. You can send foods like popcorn, baked goods, steaks, and more. In 2014, the company acquired Harry & David, known for their luxurious gold-wrapped pears. Through Personalization Universe, customers can buy assorted goods like monogrammed wine glasses and custom wall art. Goodsey, which launched in 2018, seems to be a random grab bag of gifts for any occasion. Need to gift something for “National Bikini Day” on July 5? The website suggests items like a “deluxe emoji gift box” ($99) or a “commuter” cooler backpack ($65, though I recently saw a much cheaper version on Amazon). They are no longer a part of the company, but were a big part of its monopoly.
“The world has moved into this disconnected world. And technology is so pervasive in our lives. Some are saying it’s really knocking down the human connection, and we’re well positioned to really combat that,” McCann said. “When the world is going through a loneliness epidemic, our mission is to really combat that and bring back the human connection.”
Sales dropped during the 2008 financial crisis, but that same year, the company launched a “mobile gift center” on Blackberry smartphones. The company made its first transaction on Facebook in 2009; two years later, around the time we reached “peak app,” 1-800-Flowers invested in its own mobile app.
The company intends to take its advancements further, focusing now on “conversational commerce,” meaning chatbots and voice-operated purchasing. In the past two years, 1-800-Flowers has become available on Alexa, Apple Business Chat, Google Assistant, and Bixby, which is Samsung’s virtual assistant. The investment in AI has extended in house as well. The company has integrated a virtual assistant consumers can call and a “3D and augmented reality” feature on the website, so that customers can see bouquets in detail before purchasing. Venmo has been integrated as a payment option, too.
When it comes to innovation, McCann says he wants a team who is willing to “get speeding tickets, not parking tickets.” A constant digital presence makes it hard to ignore the brand’s convenience and allows forgetful gift-givers to quickly cover their bases, with the help of various delivery methods, including FedEx, to help gifts make it to their destinations in time for occasions.
Consumer interests have shifted slightly due to the pandemic. According to the company, they’ve seen an increased demand for personalized items. Between October and December of 2020, PersonalizationMall.com grew by 50 percent. “We’ve seen that as consumers are staying home more, they are ‘nesting’ — focusing on their homes with new décor and furnishings,” McCann said. Additionally, during the 2020 holiday season, 1-800-Flowers.com saw their highest quarterly revenue and profit in company history.
What many consumers might disregard as “Hallmark holidays,” like Valentine’s Day, are inescapable under the power of the gifting industry. But it’s hard to deny the sweet feeling of receiving flowers from a loved one. The pandemic doesn’t seem to be slowing down sales, either. For Valentine’s Day 2021, the company says they anticipate delivering 14 million roses, as well as an increased demand for gift baskets, due to couples spending their holiday at home. That’s 3 million roses more than they expected to ship last year.
“Planning for a holiday like Valentine’s Day starts right after the Valentine’s Day this year,” McCann said. “The good news is that we’ve been doing this for over 40 years now. I would say we’re never perfect, but I think we get better every single holiday.”
Sign up for The Goods newsletter. Twice a week, we’ll send you the best Goods stories exploring what we buy, why we buy it, and why it matters.


vox--2020-02-11--When New Hampshire polls close — and when we might get results

The 2020 Democratic presidential race heads to New Hampshire on Tuesday for the state ’ s first-in-the-nation primary , where voters will decide among the 11 remaining Democratic candidates ( minus former New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg , who ’ s not on the ballot in New Hampshire ) .
In most cases , the polls will open at either 7 or 8 am Eastern time and will close at 7 or 8 pm ET .
New Hampshire elections are administered municipally , so polling times are set on a city-by-city basis .
Unlike in Iowa ’ s impossibly muddled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ difficulty last week , voters in New Hampshire will go to their polling places and cast ballots in a straightforward primary .
In 2016 , the Associated Press called the race for Sen. Bernie Sanders at 8 pm ET after Sanders opened a commanding lead over the eventual Democratic nominee , former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton , with more than half of precincts reporting .
A substantially larger and still-in-flux 2020 field could mean it will take longer for a clear winner to emerge this year , but it ’ s a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ far earlier than in Iowa .
Sanders , who represents neighboring Vermont in the Senate , currently leads the field by more than 6 points in the RealClearPolitics New Hampshire polling average .
Former South Bend , Indiana , Mayor Pete Buttigieg — who won the most delegates in Iowa , though Sanders won the most votes and the AP has said it is unable to declare a winner — is running in second in New Hampshire , well clear of the rest of the field .
Behind Sanders and Buttigieg , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hampshire polling averages from RealClearPolitics show Sen. Elizabeth Warren about a point ahead of her closest rivals — former Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Amy Klobuchar , who are tied with 11.3 percent support — but nearly 10 points behind Buttigieg .
However , Klobuchar has registered strong performances in several recent polls : Over the weekend , she jumped to third in two different New Hampshire tracking polls , ahead of Warren and Biden , and she could be poised to turn in a surprisingly strong performance Tuesday .
An additional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ still-undecided voters ; a recent Monmouth University poll found that 51 percent of voters were open to supporting a different candidate .
The New Hampshire Democratic primary also includes independent voters , another difference from last week ’ s contest in Iowa that has the potential to shake up the race .
Despite the uncertainty , New Hampshire could be a do-or-die moment for several candidates in the race .
Vox ’ s Ella Nilsen writes that Warren , from neighboring Massachusetts , “ needs a win or a strong second-place finish ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — for whom a devastating fifth-place finish is a real possibility , according to a recent Emerson poll — “ can ’ t afford to come limping out of New Hampshire after suffering a self-described ‘ gut punch ’ in Iowa.
” In any case , New Hampshire will likely provide a major bounce — in polling , media coverage , and fundraising — for whichever candidate pulls out a win or overperforms in the “ expectations game.
” The race heads to Nevada and South Carolina next , the last two early @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tempo of the primary will only accelerate from there .

Here are Vox’s live results in the New Hampshire primary race.
The 2020 Democratic presidential race heads to New Hampshire on Tuesday for the state’s first-in-the-nation primary, where voters will decide among the 11 remaining Democratic candidates (minus former New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg, who’s not on the ballot in New Hampshire).
In most cases, the polls will open at either 7 or 8 am Eastern time and will close at 7 or 8 pm ET. New Hampshire elections are administered municipally, so polling times are set on a city-by-city basis.
Unlike in Iowa’s impossibly muddled caucus system, which caused so much difficulty last week, voters in New Hampshire will go to their polling places and cast ballots in a straightforward primary.
In 2016, the Associated Press called the race for Sen. Bernie Sanders at 8 pm ET after Sanders opened a commanding lead over the eventual Democratic nominee, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, with more than half of precincts reporting. A substantially larger and still-in-flux 2020 field could mean it will take longer for a clear winner to emerge this year, but it’s a safe bet that results will be reported far earlier than in Iowa.
Related Live results for the New Hampshire Democratic primary
Sanders, who represents neighboring Vermont in the Senate, currently leads the field by more than 6 points in the RealClearPolitics New Hampshire polling average. Former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg — who won the most delegates in Iowa, though Sanders won the most votes and the AP has said it is unable to declare a winner — is running in second in New Hampshire, well clear of the rest of the field.
Behind Sanders and Buttigieg, the polling picture is less clear: New Hampshire polling averages from RealClearPolitics show Sen. Elizabeth Warren about a point ahead of her closest rivals — former Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Amy Klobuchar, who are tied with 11.3 percent support — but nearly 10 points behind Buttigieg.
However, Klobuchar has registered strong performances in several recent polls: Over the weekend, she jumped to third in two different New Hampshire tracking polls, ahead of Warren and Biden, and she could be poised to turn in a surprisingly strong performance Tuesday.
An additional complicating factor is the sheer number of still-undecided voters; a recent Monmouth University poll found that 51 percent of voters were open to supporting a different candidate.
The New Hampshire Democratic primary also includes independent voters, another difference from last week’s contest in Iowa that has the potential to shake up the race.
Despite the uncertainty, New Hampshire could be a do-or-die moment for several candidates in the race. Vox’s Ella Nilsen writes that Warren, from neighboring Massachusetts, “needs a win or a strong second-place finish” in New Hampshire, and that Biden — for whom a devastating fifth-place finish is a real possibility, according to a recent Emerson poll — “can’t afford to come limping out of New Hampshire after suffering a self-described ‘gut punch’ in Iowa.”
In any case, New Hampshire will likely provide a major bounce — in polling, media coverage, and fundraising — for whichever candidate pulls out a win or overperforms in the “expectations game.” The race heads to Nevada and South Carolina next, the last two early states before Super Tuesday, and the tempo of the primary will only accelerate from there.


vox--2020-02-11--Live results for the New Hampshire Democratic primary

The New Hampshire primary could finally bring clarity to a crowded Democratic race .
No candidate dropped out after the days-long mess of the Iowa caucuses , so New Hampshire voters could be the first to winnow a candidate field that is still in the double digits .
And unlike the confusing three sets of numbers that determined a winner in Iowa , New Hampshire ’ s results will be cleaner .
It ’ s a traditional primary with a secret ballot .
All polls close in New Hampshire by 8 pm on February 11 , and results will come @ @ @ @ @ @ @ results , powered by our friends at Decision Desk .
Candidates will be fighting for a portion of New Hampshire ’ s mere 24 delegates — less than 1 percent of the pledged delegates in the Democratic nominating contest .
But if history tells us anything , there ’ s a lot more on the line than delegates .
New Hampshire bestows momentum ; winning here increases a candidate ’ s expected share of the primary vote by 27 percentage points , political scientist William Mayer wrote in 2004 .
With Sen. Bernie @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Mayor Pete Buttigieg the apparent winners of the Iowa caucuses ( Sanders won the popular vote while Buttigieg won the most state delegate equivalents ) , New Hampshire could be a make-or-break moment for both candidates , as well as for Sen. Elizabeth Warren ( D-MA ) and former Vice President Joe Biden .
Warren and Biden came in third and fourth in Iowa , respectively .
While both of their campaigns have expressed confidence that they can continue after a New Hampshire loss , two losses in a row could be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ New Hampshire voters are very engaged ; the primary had the highest turnout percentage of any state in both 2008 and 2016 .
And independent voters — also known as undeclared voters — make up 42 percent of the electorate .
Political experts here are watching whether those voters back a more moderate candidate , or if Sanders , who won independents handily in 2016 , retains his hold on the group .

Sen. Bernie Sanders has won the New Hampshire primary, according to projections from Decision Desk HQ.
Votes are still being counted, but it looks like Sanders and former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg will come out of the night with equal numbers of delegates. Preliminary estimates from Decision Desk HQ show that Sanders and Buttigieg will both get 9 delegates; Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar is estimated to get 6.
Sanders has a long way to go before securing the nomination. But he’s off to a strong start, getting more votes than Buttigieg in last week’s chaotic Iowa caucuses and now winning the New Hampshire primary. Buttigieg won Iowa by getting more delegates than Sanders, and he seems likely to maintain that lead in the delegate count after Tuesday night.
Here are more detailed live results from Decision Desk HQ:
If history tells us anything, there’s a lot more on the line than delegates. New Hampshire bestows momentum; winning here increases a candidate’s expected share of the primary vote by 27 percentage points, political scientist William Mayer wrote in 2004.
With Sen. Bernie Sanders and former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg the apparent winners of the Iowa caucuses (Sanders won the popular vote while Buttigieg won the most state delegate equivalents), New Hampshire was a make-or-break moment for both candidates — as well as for Sen. Elizabeth Warren and former Vice President Joe Biden.
New Hampshire voters are very engaged; the primary had the highest turnout percentage of any state in both 2008 and 2016. And independent voters — also known as undeclared voters — make up 42 percent of the electorate. Political experts were watching whether those voters back a more moderate candidate, or if Sanders, who won independents handily in 2016, retained his hold on the group.


vox--2020-02-10--Mike Bloomberg doesn’t want Silicon Valley’s money. He does want its employees.

Mike Bloomberg is not asking Silicon Valley leaders for their money as he ramps up his presidential campaign , but he is asking them for a different kind of precious possession — their employees .
On Monday , Bloomberg ’ s campaign gathered hundreds of tech leaders on a conference call and asked them to refer their most talented technical colleagues and friends to Bloomberg ’ s gargantuan election operation in New York .
Recode obtained access to the private call and registered for it .
The request made plain Bloomberg ’ s comfort with — and , in some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Valley companies that have been persistently criticized during the 2020 Democratic primary .
Bloomberg ’ s rivals are going on the offensive against tech industry or downplaying their ties to it .
But rather than minimizing his ties to Big Tech , Bloomberg is actively soliciting the industry ’ s help .
The call came at a time when the Democratic Party is assessing how far behind it is in the digital war it is waging with Republicans following a major technical setback in Iowa .
Bloomberg is offering a new path — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ advertising campaign .
Familiar faces within Bloomberg ’ s campaign made the pitch , including Gary Briggs , the former chief marketing officer of Facebook , and Jeff Glueck , the former CEO of Foursquare .
Together , Briggs and Glueck oversee Bloomberg ’ s digital advertising agency , called Hawkfish .
Another key player in the Bloomberg ’ s Silicon Valley pitch : Rusty Rueff , a top fundraiser for the Obama campaign in Silicon Valley , whose new commitment to the Bloomberg campaign hasn ’ t previously been reported .
On @ @ @ @ @ @ @ needed the tech leaders to pitch jobs on the Bloomberg campaign to “ your most talented friends ” and “ send them our way , ” especially those with expertise in data science , internet marketing , advertising buying and analytics .
“ Just to make a plea : We need the very best people — but it doesn ’ t help to send us lots of people who want to drift in and out for a briefing and give advice , to be honest , ” said Glueck .
“ If I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ want to come in for a couple hours and give us advice , I think I ’ m going to lose my mind , ” said Briggs .
“ I used to appreciate the advice — but now there ’ s just a lot of work to be done.
” Bloomberg has many fans among Silicon Valley ’ s power elite .
The former New York mayor held a reception at an art gallery last month that was well attended by many of its most influential leaders , such as Ron Conway and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ according to an invitation seen by Recode , a group of two dozen New York tech leaders will host an event to organize their community behind Bloomberg , who was instrumental in setting up New York ’ s burgeoning tech industry .
And on that same day in San Francisco , a group with strong tech representation is set to huddle and hear from campaign leadership at an event organized by Roy Bahat , the head of a Bloomberg-backed venture capital firm .
All of this outreach isn ’ t usually unusual — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Other leading candidates , Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders , have animated their campaigns with strong denunciations of Silicon Valley companies and their leaders .
And those who are more friendly with the tech community , like Pete Buttigieg , are more circumspect in seeking their explicit support , or at least are more quiet about it .
What is clear by this point in the primary , though , is that Bloomberg is approaching Silicon Valley differently .
His campaign called upon the hundreds of tech leaders to not only send their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to proudly share their support for Bloomberg .
At one point in the call , they celebrated a recent pro-Bloomberg Facebook post by Raj Kapoor , a top executive at Lyft , and said that it made him “ Tech Leader of the Week.
” The Democratic Party ’ s need to harness the help of tech is , in some ways , never more urgent .
The party was badly embarrassed last week by major technical delays in the Iowa caucuses , which has cast a stench over existing data and digital @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that ’ s something that Glueck and Briggs — who are pitching a wildly expensive new project at Hawkfish — had to confront on the call with tech leaders on Monday , who were asked to distinguish themselves from that app , Shadow .
“ This is a tens of millions of dollars investment in doing it right , ” Glueck said .
“ Democracy should not be sacrificed to a coupon deal .
”

Mike Bloomberg is not asking Silicon Valley leaders for their money as he ramps up his presidential campaign; he is asking them for a different kind of precious possession — their employees.
On Monday, Bloomberg’s campaign gathered hundreds of tech leaders on a conference call and asked them to refer their most talented technical colleagues and friends to Bloomberg’s gargantuan election operation in New York. Recode obtained access to the private call and registered for it.
The request made plain Bloomberg’s comfort with — and, in some ways, dependence on — the Silicon Valley companies that have been persistently criticized during the 2020 Democratic primary. Bloomberg’s rivals are going on the offensive against tech industry or downplaying their ties to it. But rather than minimizing his ties to Big Tech, Bloomberg is actively soliciting the industry’s help.
The call came at a time when the Democratic Party is assessing how far behind it is in the digital war it is waging with Republicans following a major technical setback in Iowa. Bloomberg is offering a new path — and is executing an unprecedentedly expensive political advertising campaign.
Familiar faces within Bloomberg’s campaign made the pitch, including Gary Briggs, the former chief marketing officer of Facebook, and Jeff Glueck, the former CEO of Foursquare. Together, Briggs and Glueck oversee Bloomberg’s digital advertising agency, called Hawkfish. Another key player in Bloomberg’s Silicon Valley pitch: Rusty Rueff, a top fundraiser for the Obama campaign in Silicon Valley, whose new commitment to the Bloomberg campaign hasn’t previously been reported.
On the Monday call, Glueck said he needed the tech leaders to pitch jobs on the Bloomberg campaign to “your most talented friends” and “send them our way,” especially those with expertise in data science, internet marketing, advertising buying, and analytics.
“Just to make a plea: We need the very best people — but it doesn’t help to send us lots of people who want to drift in and out for a briefing and give advice, to be honest,” said Glueck.
“If I have one more person who decides they want to come in for a couple hours and give us advice, I think I’m going to lose my mind,” said Briggs. “I used to appreciate the advice — but now there’s just a lot of work to be done.”
Bloomberg has many fans among Silicon Valley’s power elite. The former New York mayor held a reception at an art gallery last month that was well attended by many of its most influential leaders, such as Ron Conway and Mary Meeker. Later this week, according to an invitation seen by Recode, a group of two dozen New York tech leaders will host an event to organize their community behind Bloomberg, who was instrumental in setting up New York’s burgeoning tech industry. And on that same day in San Francisco, a group with strong tech representation is set to huddle and hear from campaign leadership at an event organized by Roy Bahat, the head of a Bloomberg-backed venture capital firm.
All of this outreach isn’t typically unusual — but it definitely is in 2020. Other leading candidates like Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders have animated their campaigns with strong denunciations of Silicon Valley companies and their leaders. And those who are more friendly with the tech community, like former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg, are more circumspect in seeking their explicit support, or at least are more quiet about it.
(That being said, other moderate candidates are headed to Silicon Valley to raise money later this week: Buttigieg will have four fundraisers in the Bay Area on Thursday and Friday, and Sen. Amy Klobuchar, another moderate, has at least one high-dollar event scheduled for San Francisco on Friday, according to invitations seen by Recode.)
What is clear by this point in the primary, though, is that Bloomberg is approaching Silicon Valley differently. His campaign called upon the hundreds of tech leaders to not only send their employees, but also to make sure to proudly share their support for Bloomberg. At one point in the call, they celebrated a recent pro-Bloomberg Facebook post by Raj Kapoor, a top executive at Lyft, and said that it made him “Tech Leader of the Week.”
The Democratic Party’s need to harness the help of tech is, in some ways, never more urgent. The party was badly embarrassed last week by major technical delays in the Iowa caucuses, which has cast a stench over existing data and digital tools used by the left. And that’s something that Glueck and Briggs — who are pitching a wildly expensive new project at Hawkfish — had to confront on the call with tech leaders on Monday, who were asked to distinguish themselves from the app, Shadow.
“This is a tens of millions of dollars investment in doing it right,” Glueck said. “Democracy should not be sacrificed to a coupon deal.”


vox--2020-02-10--Wuhan coronavirus outbreak: News and updates

Tens of of people have been sickened by a new coronavirus , called 2019-nCoV , in at least 25 countries , including the US .
Coronaviruses attack the respiratory system , sometimes targeting the cells deep within the lungs .
Only seven , including 2019-nCoV , SARS , and MERS , have evolved to infect humans .
The outbreak was first reported to the World Health Organization by Chinese officials on December 31 in Wuhan , a city of 11 million in Hubei province .
By mid-January , it had begun spreading rapidly .
On January 23 , quarantine measures @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about 50 miles east of Wuhan — Huanggang and Ezhou — effectively stifling the movement of nearly 20 million people .
It later expanded further to cover over 50 million people .
The World Health Organization has ruled that the outbreak is a global health emergency , a rare designation the agency gives outbreaks that pose an international risk .
There are still many unknowns about this outbreak .
Experts still aren ’ t sure which animal carries this virus and transmitted it to humans , how easily it spreads among people , @ @ @ @ @ @

Cookie banner
We use cookies and other tracking technologies to improve your browsing experience on our site, show personalized content and targeted ads, analyze site traffic, and understand where our audiences come from. To learn more or opt-out, read our Cookie Policy. Please also read our Privacy Notice and Terms of Use, which became effective December 20, 2019.
By choosing I Accept, you consent to our use of cookies and other tracking technologies.


vox--2020-02-11--Sudan’s former dictator may finally face justice for the Darfur genocide

Omar al-Bashir , the ousted dictator of Sudan , may finally face international justice .
This is still a very , very big maybe .
But on Tuesday , Sudan ’ s new joint military-civilian council offered the first real signals that the former leader could finally appear before the International Criminal Court ( ICC ) to charges of genocide , crimes against humanity , and war crimes for his role in the genocide in the Darfur region that began in 2003 .
Mohammed Hassan al-Taishi , a civilian member of Sudan ’ s ruling sovereign council , said Tuesday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ everyone who had arrest warrants issued against them will appear before the ICC .
I ’ m saying it very clearly.
” The announcement came during peace talks in Juba , South Sudan , between the council and rebel groups in Darfur .
“ We can only achieve justice if we heal the wounds with justice itself , ” al-Taishi said .
“ We can not escape from confronting that.
” Al-Taishi did not mention al-Bashir directly , but his is the name everyone had in mind .
In April 2019 , al-Bashir @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of intense protests .
The military took over , but protests continued until July , when the civilian leadership and the military came to a power-sharing deal that vested power in an 11-person sovereign council , which would first be led by a military official , then a civilian leader , until elections could be held in 2022 .
But what would happen to al-Bashir as Sudan tries to remake itself after a 30-year dictatorship has always been a central question in the country ’ s transition .
The Sudanese government has now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be held accountable for his campaign of terror in Darfur .
But , well , there are a lot of buts .
The most important might be that , so far , if this has been agreed to in principle as part of peace talks , it is not a final agreement , Rebecca Hamilton , an associate professor at American University ’ s Washington College of Law who ’ s studied Darfur , told me .
Until a text is finalized , and al-Bashir ’ s turnover to the ICC is explicit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tell if it will actually happen .
Yousra Elbagir , a reporter for Channel 4 news , said a Sudanese senior official told her they ’ re trying to work out a way that al-Bashir and others can “ appear ” before the ICC without actually being extradited to The Hague .
Fadi El Abdallah , the ICC spokesperson , told Vox in an email that the court is following the news regarding al-Bashir , but that “ we have no official confirmation on our side at this moment.
” Sudan ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ peace to restive regions of Sudan , including Blue Nile and South Kordofan and Darfur , where sporadic conflict has continued , if not on the scale it did during the early 2000s .
Darfuri victims have long said that al-Bashir facing justice before the ICC should be a condition of any legitimate peace deal .
“ Bashir and his aides who committed the crimes in Darfur must be handed over to the ICC if peace is to be established in the region , ” Jamal Ibrahim , who was displaced by the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The announcement offers real hope that this might happen , but it ’ s far too premature to say with any certainty that it will happen .
“ Cautious optimism is the name of the game , ” Hamilton said .
“ It ’ s nowhere near a done deal , but I think the fact that the conversation is happening — that ’ s pretty extraordinary.
” Even talking about sending al-Bashir to the ICC is a really , really big deal The prospect that al-Bashir could potentially appear before The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all but impossible .
“ Putting it in the context of Sudan for the last 30 years , it ’ s an extraordinary development , ” Hamilton said .
“ To even hear this discussion happening in public is something that I think many people could not have imagined — literally could not have imagined — even a couple of years ago.
” The conflict in Darfur , in the western part of Sudan , began around 2003 , when al-Bashir moved in to violently put down an insurgency .
He relied on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ collectively as the “ janjaweed ” — who are accused of carrying out heinous atrocities , including scorching villages that left potentially millions displaced and systematic rape and murder against mostly non-Arabs in the region .
The United Nations estimates about 300,000 people were killed .
The ICC issued a warrant for al-Bashir ’ s arrest in 2009 ( genocide charges were added later , in 2010 ) .
Through it all al-Bashir defied justice — sometimes blatantly flouting the ICC by traveling to countries that should have been forced to detain him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ICC and the reach of international justice .
Even after al-Bashir ’ s ouster , powerful figures in the military retained control , both in the transitional military council that first deposed al-Bashir and even now in the joint military-civilian council , leading to skepticism about whether al-Bashir would face international justice .
For example , a sovereign council member , General Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo , sometimes called “ Hemedti , ” is in charge of the powerful Rapid Security Forces ( RSF ) , which brutally cracked down and massacred protesters in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a militia in Darfur that violently tried to put down Darfuri rebels .
The ICC continued to push for al-Bashir ’ s extradition after Sudan ’ s new government took control , but without success .
Within Sudan , al-Bashir was convicted on charges of corruption and money laundering in Sudan .
He has been sentenced to two years in a reform facility .
He also faces legal scrutiny for his role in cracking down on the protests that led to his downfall , and has been questioned for his role in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But some pro-democracy advocates and victims in Darfur saw the corruption trial as just offering the illusion of justice .
“ There is no justice , it is not enough to just try Bashir for corruption , ” Sadiq Abdalla Mokhtar , an official in Darfur , told the Independent in December .
“ As his victims we should have the right to say how and where he is tried , and to us that is only the ICC.
” Experts I spoke to said that bringing al-Bashir to the ICC — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ huge deal , both for Sudan and for the International Criminal Court , which faces frequent criticism for failing to be effectual .
Al-Bashir in a lot of ways was the perfect example of this failing .
Sudan isn ’ t party to the Rome Statute that governs the jurisdiction of the ICC , but al-Bashir ’ s case was initiated by the United Nations Security Council in 2005 ( the US abstained , so it did not block the move ) , and Sudan is a party of the UN Charter .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ warrant and , despite the ICC ’ s pleas , was never detained or extradited .
Now that the possibility exists that al-Bashir could appear before the ICC , it could help redeem the court , despite the delay in justice .
“ This will be an important signal that even if the ICC has trouble getting hold of people initially if , down the road , people will end up at the court , that ’ s an important signal , ” David Bosco , professor at the Hamilton Lugar School of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , told me .
This would also be a hugely high-profile case , one of the biggest the ICC has taken on and a true test for the court .
Genocide , in particular , is hard to prove — prosecutors will have to show that al-Bashir himself , not just the Sudanese government , deliberately targeted a certain group .
Ten years on , there are questions about witnesses and documents and how the case would play out .
But Michael Newton , a professor of the practice of law at Vanderbilt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disgrace if the prosecution isn ’ t prepared , as the ICC has been insisting to the world to turn al-Bashir over to The Hague for years .
Either way , he said , this case would be a watershed for the ICC .
“ It ’ s a watershed — to say we really can function effectively.
” And , as Hamilton initially said , it really is extraordinary , this potential turn of events .
In less than a year , massive protests brought down a 30-year dictatorial reign , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an agreement with the military to establish a transitional government .
This is a shaky , imperfect process — but so far , the sovereign council is trying to steer Sudan into an entirely new chapter .
Under al-Bashir , Sudan was something of an international outcast — for the genocide in Darfur , but also for al-Bashir ’ s support for terrorism .
Sudan , under this new government , is trying to rehabilitate its relationship with the international community , particularly beyond Africa and the Gulf States , where it ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The US and Sudan , for example , in December agreed to exchange ambassadors for the first time in more than 20 years , though the US has yet to drop Sudan from its state-sponsor of terror list .
If Sudan cooperates with the ICC , it would be a significant commitment to human rights and international law on the world stage .
As Newton put it , it would mark a break with the past and show that Sudan is serious about grappling with questions of human rights and democracy .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ that al-Bashir ’ s extradition can ’ t immediately fix .
But such a move would be more than symbolic — especially to the victims of Darfur .
“ There ’ s real chance to put an exclamation point on the past , ” Newton said , “ and move to a future that ’ s aligned with the interest of victims .
”

Omar al-Bashir, the ousted dictator of Sudan, may finally face international justice.
This is still a very, very big maybe. But on Tuesday, Sudan’s new joint military-civilian council offered the first real signals that the former leader could finally appear before the International Criminal Court (ICC) to charges of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes for his role in the genocide in the Darfur region that began in 2003.
Mohammed Hassan al-Taishi, a civilian member of Sudan’s ruling sovereign council, said Tuesday that the council had “agreed that everyone who had arrest warrants issued against them will appear before the ICC. I’m saying it very clearly.”
The announcement came during peace talks in Juba, South Sudan, between the council and rebel groups in Darfur.
“We can only achieve justice if we heal the wounds with justice itself,” al-Taishi said. “We cannot escape from confronting that.”
Al-Taishi did not mention al-Bashir directly, but his is the name everyone had in mind.
In April 2019, al-Bashir was ousted in a coup after months of intense protests. The military took over, but protests continued until July, when the civilian leadership and the military came to a power-sharing deal that vested power in an 11-person sovereign council, which would first be led by a military official, then a civilian leader, until elections could be held in 2022.
But what would happen to al-Bashir as Sudan tries to remake itself after a 30-year dictatorship has always been a central question in the country’s transition.
The Sudanese government has now offered the possibility that al-Bashir could finally be held accountable for his campaign of terror in Darfur.
But, well, there are a lot of buts.
The most important might be that, so far, if this has been agreed to in principle as part of peace talks, it is not a final agreement, Rebecca Hamilton, an associate professor at American University’s Washington College of Law who’s studied Darfur, told me. Until a text is finalized, and al-Bashir’s turnover to the ICC is explicit, it’s too soon to tell if it will actually happen.
Yousra Elbagir, a reporter for Channel 4 news, said a Sudanese senior official told her they’re trying to work out a way that al-Bashir and others can “appear” before the ICC without actually being extradited to The Hague.
1) Al-Bashir and other indicted individuals to appear in front of an ICC delegation that is flown in.
2) Al-Bashir and other indicted individuals to appear in front of a hybrid ICC/local courtroom.
Other options were discussed but all within Sudan's infrastructure. — Yousra Elbagir (@YousraElbagir) February 11, 2020
Fadi El Abdallah, the ICC spokesperson, told Vox in an email that the court is following the news regarding al-Bashir, but that “we have no official confirmation on our side at this moment.”
Sudan’s sovereign council has been working to bring peace to restive regions of Sudan, including Blue Nile and South Kordofan and Darfur, where sporadic conflict has continued, if not on the scale it did during the early 2000s.
Darfuri victims have long said that al-Bashir facing justice before the ICC should be a condition of any legitimate peace deal. “Bashir and his aides who committed the crimes in Darfur must be handed over to the ICC if peace is to be established in the region,” Jamal Ibrahim, who was displaced by the conflict, told the AFP in October.
The announcement offers real hope that this might happen, but it’s far too premature to say with any certainty that it will happen.
“Cautious optimism is the name of the game,” Hamilton said. “It’s nowhere near a done deal, but I think the fact that the conversation is happening — that’s pretty extraordinary.”
Even talking about sending al-Bashir to the ICC is a really, really big deal
The prospect that al-Bashir could potentially appear before The Hague is extraordinary because this once seemed all but impossible.
“Putting it in the context of Sudan for the last 30 years, it’s an extraordinary development,” Hamilton said. “To even hear this discussion happening in public is something that I think many people could not have imagined — literally could not have imagined — even a couple of years ago.”
The conflict in Darfur, in the western part of Sudan, began around 2003, when al-Bashir moved in to violently put down an insurgency. He relied on pro-government, mostly Arab militias — known collectively as the “janjaweed” — who are accused of carrying out heinous atrocities, including scorching villages that left potentially millions displaced and systematic rape and murder against mostly non-Arabs in the region. The United Nations estimates about 300,000 people were killed.
The ICC issued a warrant for al-Bashir’s arrest in 2009 (genocide charges were added later, in 2010). Through it all al-Bashir defied justice — sometimes blatantly flouting the ICC by traveling to countries that should have been forced to detain him. It revealed the limitations of the ICC and the reach of international justice.
Even after al-Bashir’s ouster, powerful figures in the military retained control, both in the transitional military council that first deposed al-Bashir and even now in the joint military-civilian council, leading to skepticism about whether al-Bashir would face international justice.
For example, a sovereign council member, General Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, sometimes called “Hemedti,” is in charge of the powerful Rapid Security Forces (RSF), which brutally cracked down and massacred protesters in June. Hemedti rose to prominence commanding a militia in Darfur that violently tried to put down Darfuri rebels.
The ICC continued to push for al-Bashir’s extradition after Sudan’s new government took control, but without success.
Within Sudan, al-Bashir was convicted on charges of corruption and money laundering in Sudan. He has been sentenced to two years in a reform facility. He also faces legal scrutiny for his role in cracking down on the protests that led to his downfall, and has been questioned for his role in the 1989 coup that brought him to power.
But some pro-democracy advocates and victims in Darfur saw the corruption trial as just offering the illusion of justice.
“There is no justice, it is not enough to just try Bashir for corruption,” Sadiq Abdalla Mokhtar, an official in Darfur, told the Independent in December. “As his victims we should have the right to say how and where he is tried, and to us that is only the ICC.”
Experts I spoke to said that bringing al-Bashir to the ICC — if it happens — would be a huge deal, both for Sudan and for the International Criminal Court, which faces frequent criticism for failing to be effectual.
Al-Bashir in a lot of ways was the perfect example of this failing. Sudan isn’t party to the Rome Statute that governs the jurisdiction of the ICC, but al-Bashir’s case was initiated by the United Nations Security Council in 2005 (the US abstained, so it did not block the move), and Sudan is a party of the UN Charter. But al-Bashir traveled abroad even after the warrant and, despite the ICC’s pleas, was never detained or extradited.
Now that the possibility exists that al-Bashir could appear before the ICC, it could help redeem the court, despite the delay in justice. “This will be an important signal that even if the ICC has trouble getting hold of people initially if, down the road, people will end up at the court, that’s an important signal,” David Bosco, professor at the Hamilton Lugar School of Global and International Studies at Indiana University, told me.
This would also be a hugely high-profile case, one of the biggest the ICC has taken on and a true test for the court. Genocide, in particular, is hard to prove — prosecutors will have to show that al-Bashir himself, not just the Sudanese government, deliberately targeted a certain group. Ten years on, there are questions about witnesses and documents and how the case would play out.
But Michael Newton, a professor of the practice of law at Vanderbilt University, said it would be a disgrace if the prosecution isn’t prepared, as the ICC has been insisting to the world to turn al-Bashir over to The Hague for years. Either way, he said, this case would be a watershed for the ICC. “It’s a watershed — to say we really can function effectively.”
And, as Hamilton initially said, it really is extraordinary, this potential turn of events. In less than a year, massive protests brought down a 30-year dictatorial reign, and soon after, those civilian protesters reached an agreement with the military to establish a transitional government. This is a shaky, imperfect process — but so far, the sovereign council is trying to steer Sudan into an entirely new chapter.
Under al-Bashir, Sudan was something of an international outcast — for the genocide in Darfur, but also for al-Bashir’s support for terrorism. Sudan, under this new government, is trying to rehabilitate its relationship with the international community, particularly beyond Africa and the Gulf States, where it’s always had some influence or ties. The US and Sudan, for example, in December agreed to exchange ambassadors for the first time in more than 20 years, though the US has yet to drop Sudan from its state-sponsor of terror list.
If Sudan cooperates with the ICC, it would be a significant commitment to human rights and international law on the world stage. As Newton put it, it would mark a break with the past and show that Sudan is serious about grappling with questions of human rights and democracy.
Sudan still has many, many challenges that al-Bashir’s extradition can’t immediately fix. But such a move would be more than symbolic — especially to the victims of Darfur. “There’s real chance to put an exclamation point on the past,” Newton said, “and move to a future that’s aligned with the interest of victims.”


vox--2020-02-11--Prosecutors resign from Roger Stone’s case after DOJ interference in sentencing

The entire prosecution team for Roger Stone ’ s case abruptly withdrew from that proceeding Tuesday afternoon , just over a week before Stone ’ s sentencing — in an apparent protest of interference from Justice Department higher-ups over a sentencing recommendation for the longtime Trump adviser .
First , Aaron Zelinsky , who worked on special counsel Robert Mueller ’ s team and then aided the US Attorney ’ s Office for the District of Columbia in Stone ’ s trial , told a judge in a filing Tuesday that he was withdrawing from the case and had “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in that office , where he was on temporary assignment .
Now , it does not appear that Zelinsky is resigning from the Justice Department entirely — his regular post is in the US Attorney ’ s Office for Maryland , and he does not mention resigning from that .
Yet shortly afterward , a second Stone prosecutor , Jonathan Kravis , told the court he was also leaving the case because he “ has resigned as an Assistant United States Attorney.
” And then the other two prosecutors on the team , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that they were withdrawing as well ( though not resigning ) .
Taken together , the moves are an unmistakable protest against Justice Department leadership .
Stone was indicted by Mueller ’ s team in January 2019 and charged with making false statements , obstruction , and witness tampering .
The charges focused on Stone ’ s alleged lies to the House Intelligence Committee in 2017 about his statements on and efforts to get in touch with WikiLeaks during the 2016 campaign .
He was convicted on all seven counts at trial in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ date of February 20 approaching , prosecutors had to submit their sentencing memo for him on Monday .
In it , the prosecutors said that a sentence for Stone of between 87 and 108 months ( about seven to nine years ) — a range calculated by the probation office , in accordance with standard sentencing guidelines — would be “ appropriate.
” President Trump responded to this with outrage in a set of late-night tweets and retweets .
“ This is a horrible and very unfair situation , ” he tweeted at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crimes were on the other side , as nothing happens to them .
Can not allow this miscarriage of justice !
” This immediately stoked speculation about whether Trump planned to pardon Stone or commute his sentence .
Then later Tuesday morning , reporters started to hear that the Justice Department was in fact going to change its position .
A senior Justice Department source told the Washington Post Tuesday that “ the Department finds seven to nine years extreme , excessive and grossly disproportionate ” — and that they ’ d “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” That source claimed they made this decision to do so before Trump posted his tweet ( a claim that ’ s been greeted with much skepticism ) .
Such interference in a sentencing recommendation made by career prosecutors is highly unusual .
And what happened next was even more unusual — Zelinsky informed the court he was withdrawing from Stone ’ s case just days before sentencing and resigning his special posting with the DC US Attorney ’ s Office .
Kravis then said he was resigning from DOJ entirely , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from the case as well .
Then , a new prosecutor on the case , John Crabb , then submitted a filing to the court saying that the previous sentencing memo for Stone “ does not accurately reflect the Department of Justice ’ s position on what would be a reasonable sentence in this matter.
” Crabb wrote that the government believes “ a sentence of incarceration far less than 87 to 108 months ’ imprisonment would be reasonable under the circumstances ” — but that they ’ ll defer to Judge Amy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that would be .
Yet it is not the first example of a curious change in a sentencing recommendation for a close Trump ally .
Former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn is also awaiting sentencing for his guilty plea in connection with the Mueller probe — and , after agreeing to cooperate with the government , apparently reneged on that commitment .
So prosecutors recommended in January that Flynn be sentenced “ within ” the range of zero to six months of incarceration — but , a few weeks later , added that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ sentence of probation ” instead .
All of this raises yet more questions about what , exactly , is going on at the Justice Department under Attorney General Bill Barr — and whether friends ( or enemies ) of the president now get different rules applied to them .

The entire prosecution team for Roger Stone’s case abruptly withdrew from that proceeding Tuesday afternoon, just over a week before Stone’s sentencing — in an apparent protest of interference from Justice Department higher-ups over a sentencing recommendation for the longtime Trump adviser.
First, Aaron Zelinsky, who worked on special counsel Robert Mueller’s team and then aided the US Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia in Stone’s trial, told a judge in a filing Tuesday that he was withdrawing from the case and had “resigned effective immediately” from his role in that office, where he was on temporary assignment.
Now, it does not appear that Zelinsky is resigning from the Justice Department entirely — his regular post is in the US Attorney’s Office for Maryland, and he does not mention resigning from that.
Yet shortly afterward, a second Stone prosecutor, Jonathan Kravis, told the court he was also leaving the case because he “has resigned as an Assistant United States Attorney.” And then the other two prosecutors on the team, Adam Jed and Michael Marando, announced that they were withdrawing as well (though not resigning). Taken together, the moves are an unmistakable protest against Justice Department leadership.
Stone was indicted by Mueller’s team in January 2019 and charged with making false statements, obstruction, and witness tampering. The charges focused on Stone’s alleged lies to the House Intelligence Committee in 2017 about his statements on and efforts to get in touch with WikiLeaks during the 2016 campaign. He was convicted on all seven counts at trial in November.
With Stone’s sentencing date of February 20 approaching, prosecutors had to submit their sentencing memo for him on Monday. In it, the prosecutors said that a sentence for Stone of between 87 and 108 months (about seven to nine years) — a range calculated by the probation office, in accordance with standard sentencing guidelines — would be “appropriate.”
President Trump responded to this with outrage in a set of late-night tweets and retweets. “This is a horrible and very unfair situation,” he tweeted at 1:48 am Tuesday. “The real crimes were on the other side, as nothing happens to them. Cannot allow this miscarriage of justice!”
This immediately stoked speculation about whether Trump planned to pardon Stone or commute his sentence. Then later Tuesday morning, reporters started to hear that the Justice Department was in fact going to change its position.
A senior Justice Department source told the Washington Post Tuesday that “the Department finds seven to nine years extreme, excessive and grossly disproportionate” — and that they’d “clarify” their position “later today.” That source claimed they made this decision to do so before Trump posted his tweet (a claim that’s been greeted with much skepticism).
Such interference in a sentencing recommendation made by career prosecutors is highly unusual. And what happened next was even more unusual — Zelinsky informed the court he was withdrawing from Stone’s case just days before sentencing and resigning his special posting with the DC US Attorney’s Office. Kravis then said he was resigning from DOJ entirely, which was followed by Jed and Marando withdrawing from the case as well.
Then, a new prosecutor on the case, John Crabb, then submitted a filing to the court saying that the previous sentencing memo for Stone “does not accurately reflect the Department of Justice’s position on what would be a reasonable sentence in this matter.” Crabb wrote that the government believes “a sentence of incarceration far less than 87 to 108 months’ imprisonment would be reasonable under the circumstances” — but that they’ll defer to Judge Amy Berman Jackson on what, exactly, that would be.
Yet it is not the first example of a curious change in a sentencing recommendation for a close Trump ally. Former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn is also awaiting sentencing for his guilty plea in connection with the Mueller probe — and, after agreeing to cooperate with the government, apparently reneged on that commitment.
So prosecutors recommended in January that Flynn be sentenced “within” the range of zero to six months of incarceration — but, a few weeks later, added that they “do not oppose” a “sentence of probation” instead.
All of this raises yet more questions about what, exactly, is going on at the Justice Department under Attorney General Bill Barr — and whether friends (or enemies) of the president now get different rules applied to them.


vox--2020-02-11--New poll finds most voters believe Trump will win reelection — even many who don’t want him to

As President Donald Trump puts his impeachment trial behind him and begins his transition into election mode , a new poll found most voters believe he will win even if they don ’ t want him to have a second term .
The latest Monmouth University 2020 election poll , released Tuesday , indicates that about two-thirds of voters believe Trump will be reelected , with 27 percent saying the president will definitely win and 39 percent saying he probably will .
Only 22 percent said he would probably lose to the Democratic nominee , while just 9 percent think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The national telephone poll , which surveyed 872 registered voters , has a margin of error of 3.2 percentage points .
Individual voters ’ confidence in the president ’ s chances were starkly divided along partisan lines : Republicans were highly confident in a Trump victory come November , with 59 percent telling pollsters a second term is a sure thing and 34 percent saying winning is probable .
Conversely , only 38 percent of Democrats said Trump is likely to win another term in office .
Overall , pollsters found a disparity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ believe Trump will win and those who feel he should win .
Most — 55 percent — said they would like to see someone new occupying the Oval Office , while 42 percent said they feel Trump deserves reelection .
It isn ’ t clear how many Republicans would like to see Trump replaced based on this polling , as it did not break these values down by party affiliation .
However , other polling shows the president with record approval ratings among GOP voters .
The polling comes as Trump begins his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ took to the road Monday , holding a campaign rally in Manchester , New Hampshire .
He faces a Tuesday primary challenge in that state from former Massachusetts Gov .
Bill Weld , a contest the president is expected to win by an overwhelming margin .
New Hampshire Democratic voters have their primary Tuesday as well , a contest expected to provide some clarity on the presidential race following Iowa caucuses marred by human and technological failings that ultimately led to a very delayed release of results — and dissatisfaction among candidates , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how the caucuses were handled .
And that disappointment was keenly reflected in Monmouth ’ s poll .
Voters think it ’ s time to let other states besides Iowa and New Hampshire go first The Iowa Democratic Party struggled to report complete results for much of the past week after the state caucused last Monday .
Precinct chairs reported having difficulties with an app they were supposed to use to report results and struggled to call in the caucus totals as well .
Also , confusion over new rules may have led @ @ @ @ @ @ @ results .
This led to delays in reporting vote totals that weren ’ t officially finalized until Sunday .
Though Buttigieg was ultimately awarded the most delegates from Iowa , Sanders won the most support from caucusgoers and his campaign officially asked for a recanvass in many precincts earlier this week .
Iowa ’ s issues renewed calls for reforming the entire early caucus and primary system , which currently sees Iowa and New Hampshire going first , nationally .
The Monmouth poll showed that voters are relatively split when it comes to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1 in 4 voters think the current system results in the best candidate being chosen for the nomination , while 52 percent say it makes little difference which state goes first .
However , there was a drop in support from last month among Democrats about whether Iowa and New Hampshire should continue to go first , with 7 percent saying the two states should vote first , down from 11 percent .
Critics of the current system argue that Iowa and New Hampshire should not be the first to caucus and vote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as explained by Vox ’ s Dylan Matthews : By putting Iowa and New Hampshire first , the Democratic and Republican parties are effectively saying that disproportionate power and influence should go to a small group of overwhelmingly white people in rural areas and small cities .
That influence shouldn ’ t go to a state or region with a large Hispanic population .
It shouldn ’ t go to a state or region with a large black population .
It shouldn ’ t go to a state with large cities and a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should go to these people instead .
That does a profound disservice to the millions of Americans living in diverse , densely populated areas .
Or , to put it more bluntly , it gives white people outsize power in determining nominees and disenfranchises black , Hispanic , Asian Americans , and Native Americans relatively speaking .
The size of the bias is truly staggering .
Economists Brian Knight and Nathan Schiff estimated in 2011 that an Iowa or New Hampshire voter carried the same influence in determining her party ’ s ultimate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ states put together .
Monmouth ’ s pollsters also asked about possible changes to the state order : 56 percent of Democrats said that no one state should go first , instead saying there should be a single , one-day primary to choose their party ’ s nominee .
Regardless , New Hampshire still has its vote Tuesday .
Then there will be a sprint through a primary in South Carolina and a caucus in Nevada before diving into Super Tuesday .
By then , voters will have a firmer grasp on how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shake out .

As President Donald Trump puts his impeachment trial behind him and begins his transition into election mode, a new poll found most voters believe he will win even if they don’t want him to have a second term.
The latest Monmouth University 2020 election poll, released Tuesday, indicates that about two-thirds of voters believe Trump will be reelected, with 27 percent saying the president will definitely win and 39 percent saying he probably will. Only 22 percent said he would probably lose to the Democratic nominee, while just 9 percent think Trump will definitely lose this fall. The national telephone poll, which surveyed 872 registered voters, has a margin of error of 3.2 percentage points.
Individual voters’ confidence in the president’s chances were starkly divided along partisan lines: Republicans were highly confident in a Trump victory come November, with 59 percent telling pollsters a second term is a sure thing and 34 percent saying winning is probable. Conversely, only 38 percent of Democrats said Trump is likely to win another term in office.
Overall, pollsters found a disparity between the number of register voters who believe Trump will win and those who feel he should win. Most — 55 percent — said they would like to see someone new occupying the Oval Office, while 42 percent said they feel Trump deserves reelection. It isn’t clear how many Republicans would like to see Trump replaced based on this polling, as it did not break these values down by party affiliation. However, other polling shows the president with record approval ratings among GOP voters.
The polling comes as Trump begins his reelection campaign in earnest: The president took to the road Monday, holding a campaign rally in Manchester, New Hampshire. He faces a Tuesday primary challenge in that state from former Massachusetts Gov. Bill Weld, a contest the president is expected to win by an overwhelming margin.
New Hampshire Democratic voters have their primary Tuesday as well, a contest expected to provide some clarity on the presidential race following Iowa caucuses marred by human and technological failings that ultimately led to a very delayed release of results — and dissatisfaction among candidates, party officials, and the public about how the caucuses were handled. And that disappointment was keenly reflected in Monmouth’s poll.
Voters think it’s time to let other states besides Iowa and New Hampshire go first
The Iowa Democratic Party struggled to report complete results for much of the past week after the state caucused last Monday. Precinct chairs reported having difficulties with an app they were supposed to use to report results and struggled to call in the caucus totals as well. Also, confusion over new rules may have led some errors to be introduced into the results. This led to delays in reporting vote totals that weren’t officially finalized until Sunday.
Though Buttigieg was ultimately awarded the most delegates from Iowa, Sanders won the most support from caucusgoers and his campaign officially asked for a recanvass in many precincts earlier this week.
Iowa’s issues renewed calls for reforming the entire early caucus and primary system, which currently sees Iowa and New Hampshire going first, nationally. The Monmouth poll showed that voters are relatively split when it comes to readjusting the electoral calendar.
Just over 1 in 4 voters think the current system results in the best candidate being chosen for the nomination, while 52 percent say it makes little difference which state goes first. However, there was a drop in support from last month among Democrats about whether Iowa and New Hampshire should continue to go first, with 7 percent saying the two states should vote first, down from 11 percent.
Critics of the current system argue that Iowa and New Hampshire should not be the first to caucus and vote because of the states’ demographics, as explained by Vox’s Dylan Matthews:
By putting Iowa and New Hampshire first, the Democratic and Republican parties are effectively saying that disproportionate power and influence should go to a small group of overwhelmingly white people in rural areas and small cities. That influence shouldn’t go to a state or region with a large Hispanic population. It shouldn’t go to a state or region with a large black population. It shouldn’t go to a state with large cities and a strong interest in urban issues. It should go to these people instead. That does a profound disservice to the millions of Americans living in diverse, densely populated areas. Or, to put it more bluntly, it gives white people outsize power in determining nominees and disenfranchises black, Hispanic, Asian Americans, and Native Americans relatively speaking. The size of the bias is truly staggering. Economists Brian Knight and Nathan Schiff estimated in 2011 that an Iowa or New Hampshire voter carried the same influence in determining her party’s ultimate nominee as five voters from Super Tuesday states put together.
Monmouth’s pollsters also asked about possible changes to the state order: 56 percent of Democrats said that no one state should go first, instead saying there should be a single, one-day primary to choose their party’s nominee.
Regardless, New Hampshire still has its vote Tuesday. Then there will be a sprint through a primary in South Carolina and a caucus in Nevada before diving into Super Tuesday. By then, voters will have a firmer grasp on how this year’s nomination race will shake out.