Archive for June, 2012


NightHawks – as we go into extra time

Sunday, June 24th, 2012

The tension continues

follow url Posted in Coalition Tramadol For Sale Cheap | 515 Comments »


Dave re-takes the lead in the YouGov leader ratings

Sunday, June 24th, 2012

Does he do better when he’s out of the country?


Tramadol Drug Buyers

Order Tramadol Overnight Mastercard

follow Posted in Coalition, Cuts, David Cameron, Ed Miliband, Nick Clegg | 428 Comments »


V-P Betting: PB’s exclusive money-saving guide

Sunday, June 24th, 2012

It’s a mugs game – DON’T BET With the Republican nomination settled and the White House election not taking place until November one of the big stories at the moment is who will Romney pick as his running mate.

get link Betting’s been quite lively with one new name coming into the frame after another. It all seems so logical – Mitt, it is said, might have problems with Hispanic voters hence the “obvious” choice becomes Mario Rubio. Another day and all the attention is on Tim Pawlenty, or Paul Ryan or Mitch Daniels or whoever.

Best Site For Tramadol Online Generally this is prompted by reports that someone is “being vetted” by the Romney campaign – the latest being the charismatic GOP budget specialist, Paul Ryan.

    Order Tramadol Online Prescription Every four years at this stage I vow not to get involved and every cycle I’ve found it irresistible. This time I’ve been pretty firm in my resolve.

Order Cheap Tramadol Online Cod I’ve got just one VP bet – 50/1 against Rand Paul, son of Ron, which I put on in February when suspicions were raised about there being a deal between the Romney and Paul camps. It might still be a winner – who knows? But if you do feel tempted then take a look at the Real Clear Politics article by Scott Conroy featured above. He makes this acute observation:-

    “While every eventual GOP nominee in the last five non-incumbent presidential cycles began the race as a favorite, the same cannot be said of their VP picks, all of whom were initially regarded inside the Beltway echo chamber either as blips on the political radar or not on the screen at all..”

Overnight Tramadol Visa It’s a good read and just reinforces my view – this is a market to keep well away from.

Mike Smithson @MSmithsonPB A Posted in Betting, US Politics Order Tramadol Online Mastercard | 400 Comments »


How long can the coalition survive?

Saturday, June 23rd, 2012

What’s your view – will they stick it out? How long has the coalition got left?

Surprisingly I couldn’t find a betting market.

Mike Smithson @MSmithsonPB


David Herdson on how Londoners used their 2nds prefs

Saturday, June 23rd, 2012

What are the electoral lessons to be learned?

The vote for London mayor is unusual in many ways, one of which is that because of the electronic counting system, all second preferences are identified and recorded. Last week, the full second preference breakdown for May’s vote was released, and is well worth analysing.

Interestingly, most people who voted for Boris or Ken also cast a second preference despite the almost certain knowledge that their first choice would be in the second stage too.

We perhaps shouldn’t take these second preferences too seriously for that reason but it does stand out that while Paddick of the Lib Dems received almost twice as many Boris second preferences as any other candidate (with the Greens marginally ahead in third of UKIP-in-disguise, Independent Benita and then Ken), Ken’s backers went strongly for the Green as next best, with the Paddick, Boris and Benita trailing some way back.

Of more interest is how those who voted for the candidates knocked out in the first round cast their second preferences. Considering how close the race was, and how critical these votes were to the final outcome, it’s surprising how few transferred.

    Order Tramadol Online Cheap Only 57% of those who voted for a minor party (which in this context includes the Lib Dems) gave their second preference to Boris or Ken. Comfortably more votes ‘dropped out’ than accounted for Boris’ majority.

    Perhaps predictably, Ken did best out of the third-placed Greens, but even then he only won 46.7% of her transfers to Boris’ 13.5%. In reverse, Boris took 33.8% of UKIP’s vote to Ken’s 10.3% – but more than half didn’t go to either.

With so many ‘wasted’ second preferences, the obvious conclusion is that far from SV encouraging voters to cast a protest vote first and then transfer to a candidate in with a chance of winning, voters susceptible to squeeze tactics applied it on their first choice – something reinforced by the sheer scale of the combined Boris/Ken first votes.

If that’s right, it does make the analysis far more difficult and less reliable as many votes for what are actually the voter’s second choice (or lower) were nonetheless cast as first preferences. In addition, we know the candidates themselves played a far greater role in determining how people voted than is the case at a general election.

Even so, we can still glean much from what we have. One thing of particular interest is how the Lib Dem vote split, which was marginally for Boris over Ken though we’re talking less than a thousand votes here out of more than two million cast in total. Almost half of Lib Dems refused to transfer it to either man, with the Greens taking the lion’s share of what went begging.

What can we take from all this? Probably three main points to start with. Firstly, the Lib Dems’ support is no longer quite a bit closer to Labour but far more evenly split, even allowing for Boris’ crossover appeal against that of Ken; Lib Dems who were Labour-light are now Labour voters to start with but the biggest second choice is ‘neither’. Secondly, UKIP are not Tories-on-holiday. They are a good deal more Tory-inclined than Labour-leaning but when pushed are even more likely to duck out of a forced choice altogether.

Finally, and leading on from that, one of the biggest current divisions in voting intention – and one which the parties’ campaigning strategies will have to deal with – is between those who are willing to vote for parties of government and those who aren’t.

David Herdson



Welcome to Friday’s PB NightHawks cafe

Friday, June 22nd, 2012

The best overnight political conversation

Have a good evening.

Mike Smithson @MSmithsonPB


Suddenly Gove is being talked of as leader…

Friday, June 22nd, 2012

Should you be taking the Ladbrokes 16/1?

Anybody who watched BB1’s “The Week” last night will have heard Michael Portillo talk in strong terms about Michael Gove’s chances of becoming next Tory leader.

Portillo described the education secretary as a “serious candidate for the future“. His great strength was that “He knows what he is about, he knows what he wants and these are things that people crave.” Certainly compared with others at the top of the betting Gove must be in with a shout – whenever Dave decides to spend more time with his boxed sets.

One thing’s for sure – Portillo’s comments don’t seem to have moved the markets. Ladbrokes have him at the best price – 16/1. Tramadol For Dogs Order Online William Hill make him an 8/1 shot with Order Tramadol Online Overnight Cod PaddyPower quoting 7/1.

Only problem with this sort of betting is that your stake could be locked up for years even a decade.

The other factor, as Michael Portillo would no doubt confirm, is the the blues have a long history of NOT choosing the favourite – though Gove is some way from that slot yet.

No doubt the EdSec’s appeal with his party will be enhanced by the argument going on with Lib Dems over his statement on exams yesterday.

Mike Smithson @MSmithsonPB


Henry G Manson looks at the PM’s tax avoidance responses?

Friday, June 22nd, 2012

Has he walked into a trap that could have been avoided?

I was surprised to see the Prime Minister wade into smug comic Jimmy Carr’s tax affairs. It was clearly going to be a short-term populist move to speak of “morally wrong” tax affairs, but it seemed strange. He’s not the only one. In his Budget this year George Osborne went further calling tax avoidance “morally repugnant”. These are strong words and no doubt they both believe the public will lap it up. But it seems surprising that the leadership duo of the Conservative Party could open themselves up to charges of hypocrisy or selective outrage.

Lord Ashcroft was Conservative Treasurer under Cameron for five years with repeated questions about his status as a resident of Belize. Sir Philip Green was appointed by the government in 2010 to advise them on ‘public sector efficiency’, despite having similar concerns raised about his wife’s residency in Monaco. The Conservative Party’s third biggest donor has been alleged to have paid no tax at all in the last three years.

    source site Whatever of the rights and wrongs of minimising tax paid while remaining in the law, it seems that Cameron gave the green light for every journalist in the land to ask the Prime Minister or Chancellor to condemn anyone seen to be avoiding paying ‘the right’ share of tax.

I reckon the Tory duo are stung by charges of being out of touch in recent months and have over-compensated on this issue. Perhaps buoyed by their party’s effective attacks on Ken Livingstone’s tax arrangements in the London mayoral election Cameron couldn’t resist speaking out on the Labour voting Carr’s tax devices.

Lo and behold the following day Establishment pin-up and Conservative supporter Gary Barlow is fingered as another celebrity using a similar service. The Prime Minister’s response? He didn’t want to give a ‘running commentary’ on an individual’s tax affairs. I beg your pardon? This seems conveniently inconsistent with the stark judgemental rhetoric the day before.

    Can You Get Tramadol Online Labour could well stay clear of the issue knowing that some of their private donors may not be squeaky clear, but expect the unions to go full throttle. It fits with their charge that cuts to public spending could be avoided if some of the wealthiest people in society paid ‘the correct’ amount of tax. It might event resonate.

In austere times it can really rankle with many people when they see those earning considerably more than them pay less tax while they struggle to make ends meet. It wouldn’t surprise me if MPs with business earnings were in the spotlight soon as well as Conservative donors. David Cameron can’t have it both ways. Will the Prime Minister and Chancellor be able to brazenly pick and mix the moral high ground on tax? I can’t see how.

HenryG Manson