Who is safest candidate for preserving online poker?

Indiana · #1 11-30-2005, 05:10 PM

I'm a republican, voted for Bush (don't like him that much, but really, J. Kerry/Al Gore???). Have been reassessing who I might vote for in 2008. With respect to my individual freedom to continue making piles of money playing online poker, which party is safest? I am concerned about John McCain because he has said that he wants to outlaw it, but at the same time the liberals on 60 minutes last week acted too squemish.

Where do I turn? Ralph Nader?

Indy

Stu Pidasso · #2 11-30-2005, 05:34 PM

I think there all pretty safe. Think about it. There isn't a huge public outcry against internet gambling. Further, Vegas is beginning to lobby for the right to offer internet gambling(in the past they were against it). Its not hard to read the tea leaves here.

Stu

Indiana · #3 11-30-2005, 05:36 PM

But if Las Vegas gets into online gaming won't it get regulated? That aint good right? Oh, by the way, in appreciation to the responses here is some nice and good old american gun porn:

Indy

hmkpoker · #4 11-30-2005, 05:41 PM

NADER!?!?!?!??

mackthefork · #5 11-30-2005, 05:48 PM

Lol, you are funny, I think you have little to worry about at the moment.

Mack

DVaut1 · #6 11-30-2005, 05:50 PM

I think I think elect-ability has to be a concern here (hence why I wouldn't turn to Nader).

I frankly don't trust either party on this issue. Certainly, Sen. Kyl is certainly Enemy #1 in regards to online gaming; every other federal politician is under suspicion as being possibly opposed if politically convenient, and Rep. John Conyers gets my vote as the most (and only) internet gaming-friendly member of Congress (at least to my knowledge, he's the only member of Congress who's ever proposed legislation to legalize & regulate internet gaming).

Since neither Kyl nor Conyers will be running for President, I don't know of anyone in either party rumored to be running whom I have any kind of faith or trust in protecting the interests of online poker players.

But as others have said, I'm not particularly concerned about it, either.

Kurn, son of Mogh · #7 11-30-2005, 05:53 PM

Any candidate from th Libertarian Party

Where do I turn? Ralph Nader?

Surely you jest. The main reason politicians oppose gambling is to protect us from ourselves. What logic would suggest that Mr. Protect the Consumer would not be just as eager to make *all* gambling illegal?

The best way to prevent the various and sundry US Governments (State and Federal) from overtly interfering with online poker is to convince the sites themselves to invest money in very good lobbyists.

Kurn, son of Mogh · #8 11-30-2005, 05:56 PM

Why would someone who claims to be a Republican even think of supporting a candidate whose presidential platform included the concept of taxing all personal income over $100,000 at 100%????

#9 11-30-2005, 05:58 PM

[ QUOTE ]
...convince the sites themselves to invest money in very good lobbyists.

[/ QUOTE ]
Gosh, what an idea! Quick, somebody alert the online sites! How could they not possibly have thought of that? Jeeze, what a bunch of dumbazzes!

Indiana · #10 12-01-2005, 11:10 AM

Of course the Nader thing was a joke, but apparently not a good one as many thought I was serious. I think we have to be careful as republicans with people like McCain, Swartzenegger, Colin Powell, et al...lest our party become too liberal. McCain is a nice guy but he's scaring me with his anti-gaming attitude. The real question is whether online gaming should be regulated and if that is really good for us poker masters. Im in big pharma, and having the FDA breathing down your neck every day is counterproductive. Should we wish the same for poker companies? Oh, by the way, here's some ammo porn for your efforts:

Indy