OT: Vote !! Senate and House Races

sirio11 · #1 10-27-2006, 12:39 AM

Don't forget to vote this coming November. Some of the races are really close. For example the Tennessee Senate race, could decide which Party holds the majority, and if the Reps win, one of the possible candidates for leader of the senate is Jon Kyl (R-AZ), a huge supporter of banning internet gambling; while if the Dems win, it could be Harry Reid (D-NV), who's already tried to get a study on regulation and taxing online gaming.

I think our best hope as players, it's for the government to pass some kind of law regulating internet poker; and I think this would be easier if the Dems win the Senate and the house.

So, don't forget to vote !!!

Neuge · #2 10-27-2006, 12:43 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Jon Kyl (R-AZ)

[/ QUOTE ]
Can't quite vote in the TN race, but I'm sure not voting for this [censored]. I've tried to get everyone I know to vote for Pederson, albeit that's not many people.

cking · #3 10-27-2006, 01:33 AM

I'll eat my hat if TN elects a dem... to win as a dem in the south now adays is a very very difficult task, after all where do you think that 30% that supports Bush all lives?

Werty83 · #4 10-27-2006, 03:27 AM

CKing, I'll take a bet on that.

cking · #5 10-27-2006, 04:55 AM

ok but if/when i win, you cant eat my hat you have to use your own

kevstreet · #6 10-27-2006, 07:59 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Jon Kyl (R-AZ)

[/ QUOTE ]

In the Legislation forum there is a thread dedicated to contributing funds for Pederson. A few bucks from each of us may help. Poker Players are listed as his biggest contributors [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Jeff76 · #7 10-27-2006, 08:06 AM

I'm not certain that Dem's are going to be more poker friendly than Reps (though obviously Kyle is bad for poker). I do believe it was Dems who made online poker a felony in Washington. Regardless, I'm certainly not going to be voting based on the single issue of poker legislationa which may or may not be effective anyway.

Though if given the chance to vote against Kyle and/or Frist I'd certainly do it on a larger principle than anything having to do with poker.

kevstreet · #8 10-27-2006, 09:21 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I'm certainly not going to be voting based on the single issue of poker legislation...

[/ QUOTE ]

There are a lot of narrow minded people in this country who's vote will be based solely on a single issues (i.e. abortion), which is very unfortunate.

mlagoo · #9 10-27-2006, 09:28 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm certainly not going to be voting based on the single issue of poker legislation...

[/ QUOTE ]

There are a lot of narrow minded people in this country who's vote will be based solely on a single issues (i.e. abortion), which is very unfortunate.

[/ QUOTE ]

to be honest, for people who's livelihood is poker, in this case being a single issue voter makes absolute sense

and given that, if you were watching the house floor that night, the only people who spoke against the internet gambling bill were democrats, if i were a pro, id take my chances with the dems*

* - im a lifelong dem so take this with a grain of salt or whatever.

im also a rational poli sci major, and as such avoid all political discussions like the plague because 99% of people who engage in political discussions never had any intention of changing or even evaluating their own position, they just like to argue.

Jeff76 · #10 10-27-2006, 10:06 AM

[ QUOTE ]
99% of people who engage in political discussions never had any intention of changing or even evaluating their own position, they just like to argue.

[/ QUOTE ]LOL. So true.

FWIW, I've been a life long Republican voter, but I don't like the way things have gone recently, both in this specific case and in a broader sense of what the current administration has done. So I am pretty open at this point, though I am guessing I'll end up finding someone independent to vote for rather than one of the two main parties.

Just because I feel like ranting on this subject: as an evangelical Christian, the notion that Frist is appealing to my faith as the reason for the poker ban is very offensive to me, as not only does it not represent my faith, but I feel he is attempting to leverage my personal beliefs for his own personal gain. In fact, even if I DID believe gambling was immoral I'd be angry because the carveout for horce racing and lottories reveals how disengenuous the lip service he gives to my faith is. This move of his is enough to turn me off from voting for his party ever again, not because I play poker, but because my personal beliefs are not for sale to either political party.