George Osborne MP

George Osborne as a poker player is a rather wicked thing to write about. Clearly he is out of his depth in the game of politics and as we know politics is poker for megalomaniacs, but the megalomaniacs need to be clever and he certainly is not. 

Why did he string his whole career to the machinations of the ratings agencies is beyond even the most delusional optimist. The same ratings agencies said that the housing bubble prior to 2007 was in very good shape, the banks that fiddled around the casinos called investment banking, were beyond reproach all this prior to Lehman’s Day 2008, which caused the almighty collapse of the World economy that we are still feeling today and probably for the nest 10 – 15 years!

The problem with George Osborne is that he has no experience of real life. He never had to do a depressing job, day in and day out. In fact it is not clear that he has even had a job, not even a paper round. So what would he know of a life in which saving £10 on food so as to spend it on electricity is a regular occurrence?

In politics as in poker it is good to know what the value of the pot is. In other words if you are going to organise people to do things you want them to do, then you should at least know what they are thinking. Yes you can get an idea from the media but the people who organise and present the media also have an agenda so it is good to get into the world and see for yourself.

In poker once you know what the value of the pot you can work out how much it will cost you to get involved and change the dynamics of the game dependent on how strong your hand is. It can be a bluff or it can be a form of slow playing the nuts. But in the end if you are over playing your hand or not getting at least true value then you will get stuffed over time. This is what Moody’s did to George Osborne when they downgraded the triple A rating.

Does this mean the UK economy is about to collapse in a heap? Probably not, but it does mean that with a triple dip recession on the cards it certainly signifies that George Osborne has failed and failed badly by his own measure. In the world of the titans of the right wing view of life, the economy would run better if failed workers were got rid of quickly. In fact the UK government has proposed that it should be simple to sack unproductive workers. Well, Mr Osborne is a unproductive worker by his own standard and therefore should be sacked to set an example of how this paradigm of Ayn Rand capitalist nirvana actually works. Some how I think these theories only applies to the lower classes….

Hillary Clinton As A Poker Player

To define Hillary Clinton as a poker player would be equivalent of describing Barbara Streisand as a singer of songs. Yes Hillary Clinton knows how to make moves and play her cards correctly, but she is a bit more than that. In fact she would be more like a chess Grand Master, rocket scientist and a poker player all wrapped in one.

Her power partnership with Bill Clinton shaped the politics of the USA and probably the World in the same way that F.D and Eleanor  Roosevelt and shaped the World in the 1940′s. Partly in the opposition they illicit and partly from the policies they pursued they managed to dominate the political scene for the last 20 years.

The first real sense that Hillary Clinton had a great poker face was when she was required to support Bill Clinton when the opposition tried to impeach him for the Monica Lewinsky affair. If she had stuck the knife into Bill Clinton by basically being angry with Bill Clinton in public he was finished. However, she turned it around by saying it ”….was a vast right wing conspiracy….” that Bill Clinton was facing and the impeachment was a scam. 

Clearly this was not the play that the opposition was wanting. She already stated that she was not a Tammy Wynette type of figure and here she was standing by her man. The opposition never realised that she had ambitions herself and she needed a knave by her side to do the dirty work when it was needed and there was no one better that ”…the great communicator….” Bill Clinton to be that man. Hillary Clinton was playing the long game.

She did get blindsided when Barack Obama came on the scene and took away the Presidency that she would have truly won because after Lehman’s Day, any Democrat would have been President since the Republicans, party of low government expenses and anti-socialist policy, effectively ripped up their mission statement and raised spending massively and nationalised the financial industry in the US. Not only did they nationalise the industry but the brought in a policy which privatised profits but socialised losses, a new and incredibly stupid policy.

Now that Obama has won a second term. Hillary Clinton has been hailed as a brilliant Secretary of State and is in pole position to be President. The Republican Party is in disarray  the Democrats are in the mood to elect the first woman President of the USA and only ”….fate of god….” can stop her becoming President in 2016.

In poker terms she would have been chip leader 1996, almost down and out extremely short stacked in 1998, chip leader 2004, short stacked in 2008 and now once again chip leader 2012. Will she once again be short stacked? Based on her track record yes she will, However, this time she has some really big favours to call in Bill Clinton and Barack Obama! Bill Clinton obviously as she saved his presidency and Barack Obama for Bill Clinton destroying the Republicans after they continuously called him a great President and saying Obama could not match up to Bill Clinton’s brilliance. When Bill Clinton went to the Democratic convention of 2012 and spent several minutes tearing down the Republican fiscal and world view it was a master class of how to explain a political argument which everyone can understand. Barack Obama did not have to do much except get out the vote, which he did in buckets.

Therefore Hillary Clinton is a grinder. A grinder that ran into a few ”all in” merchants and survived. Now that she is well in the lead with the American public can their truly be a challenger with a greater vision than having the first female President of the USA? I am 80% sure she will be President and the only thing that could get in her way would be ill health and or a stupid move such as Mitt Romney ’47% ‘video. Somehow I see Hillary Clinton being too focused for such a mistake.

Ed Milliband as a poker player

Ed Miliband is a political figure and poker is a game of card. So these two are not same but in a scene these two are very much related. In poker no one can the card of opposite player and also in politics no one can see or read the mentality of their opposite political person or the mentality of people.

ED Miliband is a politician and he doesn’t have to play poker but we can say that if he plays poker than he can win the pot without any hesitation. He is a politician of U K and pretty much famous for famed the leadership of his brother.

Little about Edward Miliband: the full name of ED Miliband is Edward Samuel Miliband. Presently the leader of opposition and the leader of labor party in United Kingdom. He was born on December 24 1969 in St Pancreas, London. His spouse name is Justin Thornton. His father’s name is Marion Kozak, and mother’s name is Ralph Miliband. He was educated at Corpus Christi College and then from London school of Economics.

The way of playing poker: poker is a game card which gives a person more mental strength and the game is played with money. One has to give money on board for playing poker. In this game no one can see the card of opposite player and being blind give more money on board. So the game is totally based on luck. The person who got the highest card on the board wins all money on board.

Ed MIliband as a poker player: politicians are also a poker player though they don’t play the game taking the card in their hand but they play the game with their votes. They just want to earn vote not money. They also play the game in the field of politics. Edward Miliband has the enough courage to play poker. That’s why he moved over Murdock. He wants to in the place of Blair and the post labor party.

Edward Miliband hopes to be the president of the United Kingdom and this is a symbol of courage and which is very much important for playing poker. Edward can be the president after the coalition party and he takes the risk of his own. So that we can say that Edward has a real personality of playing poker. So if he becomes a poker player then he can be a very good poker player.

Paul Ryan

It is further evidence that Mitt Romney is a lousy poker player when he picked Paul Ryan as his Vice-President. By all accounts Paul Ryan is a Ayn Rand worshipping, policy wonky head. He eats breathe and sleeps politics! Yes, he looks like that nice guy down the road who runs the sub post office, but in his heart he is a rock hard extreme objectivist, who believes that society does not really exist and certainly there should not be any government social programs that would help for the poor.

Previously, I gave what I thought valid reason on why Romney is not cut out for politics. Politics is poker for sociopaths and althouth he maybe a sociopath he is not that deluded to want to believe everything he says. In this respect he is a bit like Obama but without the natural charm of someone who had to be charming to get ahead. So Romney tried to co-opt some charm and got Paul Ryan onboard to give him that charm. However, this then begs the question who’s policy will get to be on the table if Romney becomes President.

We have enough evidence of what Paul Ryan thinks. He would want to:  

1) Remodel Medicare to change it to a voucher system,

2) Gut the social safety net,

3) Give big tax cuts to the wealthy,

4) Have a balanced budget by 2040.

On the face of it no one sensible would want to vote for this as it looks like austerity for austerity sake. It is clear that it does nothing for the middle class and the poor, it certainly does nothing for the nation and it is ideology for ideology sake. Clearly a person who has no empathy for his fellow countryman  has drawn this up. 

So why is it been taken seriously? Well it is all to do with Paul Ryan as a person. He has puppy dog eyes and an easy smile. Basically he is the sort of person people feel comfortable having a drink with, unlike Mitt Romney who appears to be created in some robotic lab. He also has a back ground story which helps him with the sympathy vote in that his dad died when he was young and he had to grow up quickly. The fact that he used social security to help him grow up quickly does not help Ryan to realise that what was good for him maybe good for other people. Just like Ayn Rand his hero, who used social security and Medicare to help herself out when things got bad.

Objectivism or extreme selfishness, is OK when your health and strength is great but when things go wrong or your luck runs out for you, it has about as much use as a rabid dog in a school yard full of kids. The Paul Ryan Plan allied with Mitt Romney’s dodgyness when it comes to tax clearly cannot be the choice of the US this November. Why would the vast majority of the nation (95% of the population) go out of there way to make themselves more poor for the sake of making themselves poor? It absolutely makes no sense whatsoever!

The only way Romney and Ryan can win this is if the left and progressives go mad and start to demonstrate in a nasty way to Paul Ryan. He is a consummate campaigner and knows how to charm people by making them believe that he has their interest at heart with soft soap selling and diversion from the real agenda. The guy is dangerous! If Newt Gingrich of all people can call his ideas ”right wing social engineering” you know there is something fundamentally wrong with his idea.

Nadine Dorries

Why would you have a person who is just a back bencher, has not done anything to change the world and has no potential for advancement to higher position in the governance of the UK as being worthy of a poker profile? Well she maybe the lowest of the low in terms of parliamentary power structure, but she has done what Gordon Brown, David Davis, Ed Milliband and Ed Balls could not do, she has begun the end of David Cameron’s tenure as Prime Minister.

When she said that David Cameron were out of touch (which most leaders are by their elevated position), she could have left it at that, but she went further and said ”….unfortunately, I think that not only are Cameron and Osborne two posh boys who don’t know the price of milk, but they are two arrogant posh boys who show no remorse, no contrition, and no passion to want to understand the lives of others – and that is their real crime.” 

To a party that once tried to position it’s self as a party of meritocracy (Ted Heath, Margaret Thatcher and John Major), to be seen as a party of ‘arrogant posh boys’ by one of their own members will hurt and hurt bad.  

Nadine Dorris as a  poker player would the type of person who was humiliated, but noticed a weakness within the player that humiliated them and decided that if they are going to be knocked out of a tournament or the game, they are going to do as much damage as they can to that one particular person. They also reason that by knocking them out they may scare other players not to take them on and therefore secure her position so that her table profile raises and people avoid her like the plague unless they have a devastatingly serious hand.

It seems that Nadine Dorris is a dab hand at turning the tables on political foes. She managed to get political advisers sacked for implying that she was having an affair with another MP. She managed to maintain a position of being a Christian, anti-abortion warrior yet flexible enough to have had an affair with a married man! It was stated that the man was married but separated and the relationship only started when he left the marital home. 

The first time it came to notice that there was problems between Nadine Dorries and David Cameron was during a Prime Minister Question Time  in which she called on David Cameron to resist Liberal Democrats within the coalition government. David Cameron not wishing to upset his coalition partners turned it into a joke that Nadine Dorries was post-menopausal. By saying she was ”frustrated” was code word that ‘Mad Nad’ needed a good ”seeing to” to correct her unwomanly behaviour. In a male dominated parliament such sexual innuendos and put downs are de rigueur. This episode was never going to be forgotten and after a couple of months in which the two most powerful men in the UK began (David Cameron and George Osborne) began to look like the Laurel and Hardy of politics, it was an open goal that Nadine Dorries could not resist.

The reason why the ‘price of milk’ quote was a devastating slur is that it comes from a person who is not posh and had to work to earn her money and position, while Cameron and Osborne were basically given the job without ever having to work for it or even having to go to work of any sort. The slur reinforces the image that they are playing at being Prime Minister and Finance Minister. This maybe unfair, but there is no evidence that it is not true.

Nadine Dorries poker skills in the political theatre maybe be rough, tough and unforgiving but so was growing up in a council estate and breaking into a political party not entirely receptive to working class women on the make. David Cameron has got to nullify Nadine Dorries and the best way he can do this is by making her a cabinet minister. She has broken the taboo of Tory Party class warfare by attacking Cameron and Osborne class. If the public believe that his upbringing is the reason why they are suffering he is finished. That impression is beginning to take hold and the funny thing about it is that Cameron has not got a clue that it is happening. 

Staking Players Is Almost Like Pimping

Staking poker players is a subtle form of pimping. Basically you earn if your player earns and if he or she dosen’t perform then you will soon be in Poor Street. Most people treat the players as horses, hence the phrases ‘stable’, ‘horse’ etc, but, I tend to look at my players as business partner, since we are looking to make money together.

But there there are some people who look at staked players as ‘bitches’ and ‘hoes’. They have a very low opinion of staked players since they are effectively begging to borrow money so that they can enter a game. I have a theory why some stables have this approach and it is due to players running off with the money earned and basically stealing from the stable owners. Luckily I have never experience this but who is to say that it will never happen?

Buying and selling players can be a bit grubby as the player’s net worth is summed up in a price which on the whole is an expression of opinion of future earning power. I sold one player who went on to lose over £3,000! Lucky for me he lost most of that to another player which we managed to sign up, so in effect we gained double as we sold him for £1,200. A nice little earner!

In the end staking players is a art form. You c an try and minimise risk and sort out the wheat from the chaff, but it is down to subjective opinion whether a player will turn out to be a gold mine or a cash drain. The one thing that can be said is that one day a player you finance will make it big, but how much it will cost you is the big question. It reminds me of the joke -’how do you make a million at poker? Start off with two million’.

For all those who want to show that they can grind out a win in any scenario, here is your chance? Our friends at A-Winning-Hand have given us another freeroll. It may not be loads, but free money is good money.

The great thing about AWHpoker is that the place is full of fish and where there is fish there is trim. So let us see how you go fishing in a online tournament.

Hey, I should know about fish as I am probably the biggest fish around these parts. So if you want to get staked lets see how you play when the chips are down – and it aint gonna cost you a cent, penny, drachma or yen!

If you want more details on becoming a staked online poker player send us a message.