[Skipbidder]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
After Rep. Jim Leach, the Iowa Republican who wrote the Internet gambling bill, lost his re-election bid in November, the association conducted a poll in his district that it says showed that his opposition to online gambling could have cost him the election.

[/ QUOTE ]
Hope So, but probably just wishful thinking...

[ QUOTE ]
Leach's former spokesman, Gregory Wierzynski, called the poll "silly" and expressed doubts that the poker players could build such a potent lobby.


[/ QUOTE ]Probably, but I hope we prove this dufus wrong... At least his boss is out of power....

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd much rather have seen Kyl go. I like Jim Leach. He is literally the only Republican I ever voted for in a race for representative or higher. If I still lived in Iowa, I wouldn't have voted for him last election, but that is more because I really liked his opponent (Dave Loebsack...who was a poly sci professor of mine). Leach isn't someone who was pandering to the religious right. He had a heartfelt belief in his position. I see it as similar to the folks in the Democratic party that I vote for despite having views on gun control that I disagree with. I don't care for single-issue voting. If I were a single issue voter, poker wouldn't be it. This is despite the fact that I've made a fair chunk of money playing poker and am in a money crunch right now because I've ordered a car with money that is currently in limbo in neteller EFT-land.

I still strongly disagree that poker players put Loebsack over the top. The race was close. Lots of different groups of voters could have claimed to put him over the top. It's pretty egocentric to claim it was "your" group that did it. If anything put him over the top, it was the sleazy attack ads orchestrated from the central repub party. Leach eventually managed to get the ads stopped, but they probably did him more harm than good. They didn't play well with the voters in what was probably one of the most civil races in the country.