Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Betting on Osborne’s next Cabinet job
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Betting on Osborne’s next Cabinet job
After a sub-optimal fortnight for George Osborne, William Hill have a market up on George Osborne’s next Cabinet job. I think backing the 5/2 on him as next Foreign Secretary might be the best option. I suspect after the referendum (assuming a Remain victory) David Cameron will have a reconciliation reshuffle and move Osborne out of Number 11.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
I don't think Foreign Sec. Whether in or out he would be the wrong person to lead our EU Hokey Cokey. Not enough power of influence over other depts too. He will stay put and try to restore his reputation for competence.
Does this cover both him staying put and being defenestrated to the backbenches? The latter could easily happen if Leave won.
Not a market that I find tempting.
I think the FCO would be a perfect fit for him. Lots of activity, lots of meaningless talking, no requirement to have the least clue what you're doing, and plenty of time to spend cultivating the backbenchers for a leadership bid.
Moreover, the dire state of the Treasury means the new Chancellor would have no chance of further promotion, thus narrowing the field by one heavyweight, be that Hammond or Javid.
What last nights match did show was that we were much better showing some fight going forwards than defending. Brazil was a very poor performance as we hardly ever made a goal threat. We don't have the defenders to not concede.
I also thought the body language of the players at Vardys goal and at the end interesting. The other players seemed to congratulating each other but snubbing him. Too chavvy for them I suppose, and upsetting the status quo.
I meant that I hoped that GO would lose his current job and be out of the cabinet (along with DC) post 23/6.
Don't say "Churchill" when you mean "Thatcher".
For me, the only options are PM or out so this market is not attractive.
Churchill fought for British independence when most of the establishment would have done a deal with the dominating continental power, which would have left the UK as a mere vassal state. On 23/6, it is important to remember where and when the original idea for a European superstate was conceived, i.e. where the English football team was victorious last night.
His reason for leaving in 1903 was that he feared the Tarriff Reform movement would leave the Unionists in hock to various vested interests, particularly steel and coal.
The cricket "highlights" didntr even show the ball (or if they did ) the commentary that sealed the win, BBC Doh.... it wasn't the last ball.. Epic fail.
Churchill as almost everything you can think of at one point in his career or other. But I expect your mother got you to promise that you only remember him as he was in the summer of 1940.
However, they were all ousted within twelve months of doing it.
Happy Easter everyone!
And on topic: I doubt GO will want another cabinet job, and I'm not convinced he ever wanted the top job. He'll have been shadow chancellor or chancellor for over ten years. As with Cameron, it must be tempting to think that it's time for a rest.
Personally, and I'm probably wrong with this, I see GO as Kingmaker rather than King. He could easily step down and take more of a Mandelson-type role.
(As an aside, GO has been chancellor for nearly six years now. Leaving aside Brown, he must be approaching Lawson's time in that role, and therefore be one of the longest-serving chancellors in recent times).
http://thaddeuswhite.weebly.com/writing-blog/sir-edric-and-the-vampire-lord
I do wonder what will happen with Osborne and, more widely, the Conservative leadership. Osborne seems busted. Boris is unlikely to get PCP support and isn't substantial enough. Gove's got the brains but lots of people dislike him. Hunt is a lightweight and his NHS moves will not endear him to people, one suspects.
I'm not a fan of May, but by virtue of not being the others she's in a strong position.
Javid's the most lightweight lightweight since Andy Burnham. Priti Patel would be super, but apparently she's rubbish at interviews and can't think on her feet.
Monza, historic circuit, fastest on the calendar, the home race of Ferrari, the biggest team in the sport.
....
Beginning to wonder if a break-away series is the best way to go.
Well done to England in both cricket and football yesterday.
On topic, would Osborne not see any move sideways as a demotion, as he is the de facto DPM at the moment and seems to have responsibilities for most of the domestic agenda? Not betting in this market, on what is the whim of the PM.
The recent survey of F1 fan was a good idea, and from memory the findings were reasonable. That should be used as a bible that the F1 authorities try to stick to.
He was against fascism and dictatorships neither of which is an issue in this debate.
http://abcnews.com.co/donald-trump-tweets-penis/
Paddy Power might be able to settle.
Lol seems it is a hoax. Amusing nonetheless.
Sponsors will soon see UK audiences slashed by around 75% due to the move to pay TV. Interest in Germany is severely down (at the race, at least), and now the Italian Grand Prix's at serious risk.
Losing great, older circuits means on-track action becomes tedious (ironic, given Monaco pays no fee and has a guaranteed spot) and will further erode the audience.
I don't mind a business interest, so long as it's not stupid.
I started watching F1 in the late 70's when the BBC started regularly showing it. I was five or so. If it goes to Pay TV, then my son will not become an early F1 fan.
Still, there's far better motorsport anyway on free-to-view. BTCC is always fun.
Yeah, someone else told me the BTCC is on ITV4 on 3 April. I may see about giving that a look.
Hard to remember the last time F1 got something right when it comes to coverage or regulations.
And the move to a single try supplier has made things more even.
But it's hard to think of anything else recently ...
To take a view on GO is a third order decision after deciding about the leadership. If Leave win I think he may well decide to let the new leader pick his own Chancellor and call it a day in the Cabinet fort now. It's not as though he has a clear prospect of a wonderful economic position in 2-3 years if he stsys on.
If Remain wins and say May becomes PM (to my mind the most likely now), then she might want him to stay for continuity, or she might want an acolyte there. A straight swap with Home Office might work - combines change and continuity. But the HO is hard work and soul-destroying - he might prefer the quieter but prestigious FO role. I can't see him accepting anything else.
Most people think they abandoned the new qualifying farce after Melbourne, will be in for a shock in Bahrain next weekend as the same stupid system is repeated.
Sanders will have picked up some momentum last night from his wins in Alaska, Washington and Hawaii and it will help him in Wisconsin but difficult to see it having much impact on Hillary's overall lead
The argument that they'd use is the popular vote. So far, Sanders has won the caucuses, excluding territories, by 10-2 (what a different campaign it would have been had Sanders taken Iowa and Nevada too!) but Hillary has won the primaries by 16-4. That undoubtedly gives her a big lead in the actual number of votes cast, though we can't know the exact figures because not all caucuses release them.
The next up for the Democrats is the Wisconsin primary (also the GOP on the same day), on April 5. There, the polls put Hillary marginally ahead. The result there for both sides will determine how much either she or Trump can focus on each other and how much on their own primaries battle.
For example I think Maggies obvious Euro-enthusiasm in the seventies was in part down to her leadership ambitions and in part that the saw the EU as a way of cementing the European countries together in the Cold War. Once the Iron Curtain fell she became much more anti-EU. She was also going a bit senile and so it is hard to know how much was generalised grumpiness at being evicted like Ted.
What this all means in the modern world is very different, where the economic and military threats are very different. Winston Churchill even more so. We may as well ask what Simon de Montfort would think about internet security.
...And another one......read all about it! "He's got no friends" says Petronella.....
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3510868/My-amiti-amoureuse-Boris-Tory-darling-s-female-friend-breaks-silence-four-year-affair.html
Some value at 10/1 Bernie?
Next up is Wisconsin April 5 (86 elected delegates). That's a primary, not a caucus (good for Clinton) but has lots of white left-wingers (good for Sanders) and it's open to independents, also good for Sanders. The last poll on Wednesday had Clinton ahead just 50-44. I think he has a good shot at it. Then we have Wyoming caucuses Apr 9 (14 delegates), which Sanders should take, meh for delegate count but nice for momentum. At that point, the gap in elected delegates will be down to 200-odd. Clinton will hope to nail it on April 19 with the New York primary (247), Connecicut (55) and Delaware (21). All three are closed primaries, and she's represented NY in the Senate. If she doesn't win easily, she's in real trouble, as Bernie should win California (475 delegates) in June if he still has the current momentum.
I think Hillary will win, but she's one blunder away from a real risk.
FWIW I agree with you, as do my books on next Tory leader and next PM.
unlike F1...
I didn't think Vardy was snubbed. I think he may be slightly awkward and perhaps someone who keeps himself to himself. That's perfectly understandable given where he has come from and it will change as he becomes a regular member of the squad, which he will do now without doubt.
Delle Alli is nineteen. If he is still a Spurs player in five years time I will be shocked and absolutely delighted.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-35906568
Lots of people very into the sport are on the verge of just not bothering any more.
Yes, we could very easily end up with a technically brokered convention where Hillary's lead in pledged delegates is smaller than the number of superdelegates - at the moment, her lead is about 250 and there are over 700 superdelegates.
No, there isn't value in Bernie at 10/1 unless you think the FBI is going to do something in the next four months. Bernie is now clear heir apparent in the 2016 what-happens-if-Hillary-falls stakes. After becoming stronger these last few weeks rather than fading away as might have been expected, it'd be very damaging to parachute in a White Knight, even Biden, should Hillary fall: Bernie will have too many delegates. However, assuming that doesn't happen, then he not only needs to overcome Hillary's lead in pledged delegates but overcome her lead in superdelegates too. Sure, some might switch to him if he finishes very strongly but you can be sure that if the pledged delegates finished level-pegging, Hillary would still hold a comfortable advantage on the supers.
To even get back to level-pegging, he'd have to win around 57% of remaining delegates. In a proportional system, that's a bigger ask than it sounds (or than it would be for a GOP candidate). At present, while his national vote share is still rising, he remains about 8% behind Hillary; he'd need to be at least 10% ahead to win his 57% (because he'd do better in caucuses).
And therein lies the problem. Sanders has won the caucuses 10-2 but lost the primaries 16-4. Nearly all the remaining contests are primaries (including New York). Realistically, Sanders should peak either today or after Wyoming and Wisconsin, where he's running Hillary within a couple of points going off recent polls. After that, it should finally be one-way traffic.
Still, at least it isn't grimdark...
So, on-track action becomes worse, and the sport moves behind a paywall. "Hey, everyone! Pay hundreds of pounds for something that used to be better, and free!" Not sure that's a convincing proposition for most people (not to mention housing associations and the like may forbid satellite dishes...).
The heart of F1 audiences is in Europe. Sooner or later, they'll just stop caring. Nobody's heart skipped a beat upon learning there's an Azerbaijan street circuit on the calendar this year.
The super delegates are of course there by design, to avoid the mess that might be the Republican Convention as most of them are party establishment types and not bound to vote for any particular candidate it would make sense for Hillary to win the majority of them.
One had high hopes for the FBI turning up with something on Hillary, but the closer to the Convention we get the less likely that seems - even with the caveat that they do things their own way and on their own timescales.
(I still get confused about Indycar's history, especially the long arguments between IRL / Champ Cars / Cart).
I think. As I say, I find it all very confusing.
Didn't the Mail make much of Livingstone's peccadillos during the mayoral elections?
The pay TV deal seems purely to book future revenues in advance of the sale of the CVC stake in the sport, to the detriment of the teams who see little of the revenue while at the same time struggle to find sponsors as the audience falls by 70-80%.
Could anyone imagine a small independent team such as Williams or McLaren deciding to enter F1 now if they weren't there already? By all accounts Gene Haas is basically putting his badge on Ferrari's B team.
Also accoding to modern trends dystopias fall very easily indeed, it makes the populations seem very lazy for not rising sooner.
Jesus: Table for 26 please.
Maitre'd: There's only 13 of you.
Jesus: But we're all going to sit on the same side. https://t.co/Am5YBxVXxf
"We have an iron grip and dominate our people, crushing all dissent with ruthless tyranny!"
"Sir, we're currently under attack. It's... it's a girl in her late teens, accompanied by some children and young adults!"
"We're dooooomed!"
However, you're completely right about the potential for fans to tune out and that would break the cycle. The fans at the tracks help generate the atmosphere. Who is going to pay to watch cars going round in front of empty grandstands?
I did an analysis of where the championship GPs have been over the decades not long ago. The European fan-base is no doubt a historic legacy of being where the series was run until not all that long ago, and is presumably something that Bernie wants to expand. As recently as 2003, there were ten European GPs and only six outside the continent. By 2006, the balance reached parity (nine in, nine out); the next year saw more outside Europe for the first time; in 2013 - uniquely, so far - there were more in Asia alone than Europe. But there is, as you say, a risk in all this in of cutting the sport off away from its established fan base.
Out of interest, pub quiz question: there are only two countries to have staged races in every championship since 1950. Which are they?
Bernie Sanders targets in upcoming races based off Demographics.
Wisconsin 63
Wyoming 71
I expect Bernie will vastly exceed that in Wyoming. Wisconsin will most likely be closer.
Interestingly Bernie has an efficiency advantage over Hillary now in terms of votes per delegate
HRC: 7211
Sanders: 6482
I'm guessing Wyoming is a caucus, and one of the Dakotas maybe ?
I'd guess Brazil and... the UK.
I love the fact that Bernie drove a car in a support race at the very first championship GP in 1950. He really is F1, and more than anyone else has been responsible for its rise.
He now might be responsible for its fall. But I still wouldn't bet against him.
The Monaco GP was excluded from 1951-4 (it wasn't held in 1951, 1953 and 1954, and was a non-championship race in 1952).
The other countries to have staged races in 60 or more of the 66 seasons up to and including last year are: Germany (62), Monaco (62) and Belgium (60).
https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/health-and-care/nhs/news/73216/jeremy-hunt-warns-brexit-risks-nhs-finances-and-staffing
I think the history of F1 is a big part of it's appeal, more than for most sports. I think it's because of the way the cars have changed, evoking a different era when you see footage of them. Also, there is the casualty rate in the old days which was truly gladiatorial and lent a kind of doomed romance to the drivers.