EasilyConfused
11-07-2006, 05:13 AM
I’m new to this forum, but I’ve worked on campaigns & Congressional staffs since the late-‘90s. I want to make a few observations:
Republicans are likely to suffer serious losses in Congress tonight. As poker players, we need to do what we can to make the chattering class believe that those losses were at least in some small part due to the passage of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act.
After the Election Day dust has cleared, pundits are going to start writing post-election wrap-up stories. Poker players, and libertarian-minded voters generally, need to find ways to make the case that Republicans lost because the libertarian, small-government wing of the GOP has been pushed aside and ignored. UIGEA needs to be a part of the small-government case, and this forum should figure out ways to help that happen.
A couple points –
1. Two of the main architects of UIGEA, Sen. Jon Kyl & Rep. Jim Leach, are in unexpectedly tough races. Both had been viewed as relatively well-entrenched incumbents until about six weeks ago (coincidentally right after UIGEA’s passage). If either of them loses, someone out there needs to make reporters believe that UIGEA was a big part of the loss.
2. When an earlier, tougher version of UIGEA came to the House floor for a vote, 93 Reps. voted “nay.” Only 3 now appear to be in any danger of losing their re-election bids:
Richard Pombo (CA-11)
Jon Porter (NV-03)
Pat Tiberi (OH-12)
All 3 are at least slightly favored to win. If all 93 “nays” are re-elected in a year when a large number of incumbents are fired by their constituents, we have another opportunity to make our point. It would be tough to say that the 93 won their races simply because of UIGEA, but we could certainly say that the 93 were more in tune with the non-intrusive small-government wishes of their voters.
So how do we get these messages out? And how else do we bolster our case? I don’t know, but we should be thinking about it right now. I know there are people on this forum who have press & political connections. Let’s figure out how to use them.
We have an opportunity to throw a big scare into the political class in this country. After an election, political types are beset by piles of contradictory and confusing numbers, and consultants, pollsters & reporters purporting to explain what just happened. Often the loudest voice in the room ends up shaping the conventional wisdom.
Let’s get loud.
Republicans are likely to suffer serious losses in Congress tonight. As poker players, we need to do what we can to make the chattering class believe that those losses were at least in some small part due to the passage of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act.
After the Election Day dust has cleared, pundits are going to start writing post-election wrap-up stories. Poker players, and libertarian-minded voters generally, need to find ways to make the case that Republicans lost because the libertarian, small-government wing of the GOP has been pushed aside and ignored. UIGEA needs to be a part of the small-government case, and this forum should figure out ways to help that happen.
A couple points –
1. Two of the main architects of UIGEA, Sen. Jon Kyl & Rep. Jim Leach, are in unexpectedly tough races. Both had been viewed as relatively well-entrenched incumbents until about six weeks ago (coincidentally right after UIGEA’s passage). If either of them loses, someone out there needs to make reporters believe that UIGEA was a big part of the loss.
2. When an earlier, tougher version of UIGEA came to the House floor for a vote, 93 Reps. voted “nay.” Only 3 now appear to be in any danger of losing their re-election bids:
Richard Pombo (CA-11)
Jon Porter (NV-03)
Pat Tiberi (OH-12)
All 3 are at least slightly favored to win. If all 93 “nays” are re-elected in a year when a large number of incumbents are fired by their constituents, we have another opportunity to make our point. It would be tough to say that the 93 won their races simply because of UIGEA, but we could certainly say that the 93 were more in tune with the non-intrusive small-government wishes of their voters.
So how do we get these messages out? And how else do we bolster our case? I don’t know, but we should be thinking about it right now. I know there are people on this forum who have press & political connections. Let’s figure out how to use them.
We have an opportunity to throw a big scare into the political class in this country. After an election, political types are beset by piles of contradictory and confusing numbers, and consultants, pollsters & reporters purporting to explain what just happened. Often the loudest voice in the room ends up shaping the conventional wisdom.
Let’s get loud.