Here we go....

[jrz1972]

[ QUOTE ]
It's probobly been posted, but when can we expect the senate to vote on this issue?

[/ QUOTE ]

Hopefully never.

It would be nice to have the legislative clock run out on this bill before it ever gets to the floor.

[top6]

Again, i can't help LOLing at the obvious Republicans on this thread who are suddenly surprised and outraged. Yes, a lot of Democrats supported this bill, but the Republicans have become the party of religious nutcases, bent on forcing the rest of the country to acknowledge the superiority of their Christian way of life. The Republicans basically won in 2004 because they got a whole bunch of people outraged at the thought that somewhere, two guys might be having sex and getting married. Again, if you voted Republican, you deserve this. At the very least, you should be voting Libertarian as a protest vote.

[bobbyi]

[ QUOTE ]
if the amendment passes, the bill fails

so go amendment!

[/ QUOTE ]
Going back to this, can someone explain how it is possible for an amendment to kill a bill? I don't really understand. Both the amendment and the bill require a simple majority, right? So passage of an amendment can only kill the bill if there are people who support the bill without the amendment and do not support it with the amendment, but vote for the amendment anyway. I don't really get it. It seems that anyone who votes for the amendment either supports the bill with the amendment (and will vote for it) or wasn't voting for the bill in the first place, so how can the amendment pass and cause the bill to lose votes?

[MicroBob]

[ QUOTE ]

If you took a vote of the general population, we wouldn't have a prayer, and it's not even close.

[/ QUOTE ]


I really think you are grossly overestimating the sentiments of the majority of Americans who really couldn't give two-hoots about such stuff and think it's silly to ban it.

Many of my relatives (including both of my parents) are Republicans and pretty conservative.
None of them think online-gambling should be against the law.

Same goes for my Dad's conservative buddies.

FWIW - a NYTimes poll about internet-gambling had I believe about 75% opposed to making it illegal.
But the NYT is often viewed ad a more liberally slanted publication so perhaps that doesn't mean much.


Maybe I just don't have my finger on the pulse of the U.S. (wouldn't be the first time) but most Americans either think it's kind of silly or they just don't care I believe.

there just aren't THAT many people who think it's even remotely important that we need to ban online-gambling.
Personally, I don't know a single one.

[top6]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not the one who said it would be struck down as unconstitutional. I don't know enough to say one way or the other.

But my personal opinion is that there is no way this thing will fly in the long term.

[/ QUOTE ]Again, what are you basing this on? The types of arguments you are making now are the exact types of arguments that just got totally repudiated in the House. If the law passes, internet gambling as we know it is going away. Maybe in 10 years or something they would find a way to bring it back, but that is really a best case scenario. I don't see how anyone can seriously dispute this.

[McBusto]

Your average southern conservative does not give a [censored] if you ban online gambling or not.

[disjunction]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if the amendment passes, the bill fails

so go amendment!

[/ QUOTE ]
Going back to this, can someone explain how it is possible for an amendment to kill a bill? I don't really understand. Both the amendment and the bill require a simple majority, right? So passage of an amendment can only kill the bill if there are people who support the bill without the amendment and do not support it with the amendment, but vote for the amendment anyway. I don't really get it. It seems that anyone who votes for the amendment either supports the bill with the amendment (and will vote for it) or wasn't voting for the bill in the first place, so how can the amendment pass and cause the bill to lose votes?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's a gimmick for people against a bill to get the hardcore people who are really really for it to overreach, and come up with a bill that is too extreme for the people who would have been on their side but aren't so radical about it.

Because of the gimmick nature, and these people aren't legislative idiots, a lot of people wind up voting backwards.

[sublime]

[ QUOTE ]
It's probobly been posted, but when can we expect the senate to vote on this issue?

[/ QUOTE ]

[DING-DONG YO]

The WSJ had a similar poll a while back. the majority of that poll were against making it illegal as well. The WSJ is very conservative.

[Nate tha\\\' Great]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

If you took a vote of the general population, we wouldn't have a prayer, and it's not even close.

[/ QUOTE ]


I really think you are grossly overestimating the sentiments of the majority of Americans who really couldn't give two-hoots about such stuff and think it's silly to ban it.

Many of my relatives (including both of my parents) are Republicans and pretty conservative.
None of them think online-gambling should be against the law.

Same goes for my Dad's conservative buddies.

FWIW - a NYTimes poll about internet-gambling had I believe about 75% opposed to making it illegal.
But the NYT is often viewed ad a more liberally slanted publication so perhaps that doesn't mean much.


Maybe I just don't have my finger on the pulse of the U.S. (wouldn't be the first time) but most Americans either think it's kind of silly or they just don't care I believe.

there just aren't THAT many people who think it's even remotely important that we need to ban online-gambling.
Personally, I don't know a single one.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is correct. Various polls have had between 70-85% of Americans AGAINST a ban on Internet gambling.