Two Plus Two Newer Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Newer Archives > General Poker Discussion > Poker Legislation

View Poll Results: xorbie
Exactly what I expected 5 20.00%
Pretty much what I expected 2 8.00%
Kinda what I expected 5 20.00%
Not really what I expected 6 24.00%
Definitely not what I expected 7 28.00%
Voters: 25. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 09-10-2007, 01:29 AM
fightingcoward fightingcoward is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 292
Default Re: 2008 Presidential Primaries

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
His campaign has a lot of other negatives.

[/ QUOTE ]

It does? I can't find any.

I'm 40 years old and he's the closest I've ever seen to the "perfect" candidate.

[/ QUOTE ]

He wants to abolish the federal reserve. Enough said.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 09-10-2007, 01:30 AM
DeadMoneyDad DeadMoneyDad is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 814
Default Re: 2008 Presidential Primaries

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
His campaign has a lot of other negatives.

[/ QUOTE ]

It does? I can't find any.

I'm 40 years old and he's the closest I've ever seen to the "perfect" candidate.

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem realistically is he has no support in in the Republican "machinery" the state parties nor in established "circles." How do you think Thompson shows up in the polls at all other than name recognition?

Numbers matter when it comes to elections, even primaries, dollars convince people to run. Word is the Thompson campaign has the backing of a number of old time GOP faithful. A lot of Bush 41 old timers as well as a number of people not so happy with 43.

D$D
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 09-10-2007, 01:56 AM
Coy_Roy Coy_Roy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: DC/AC
Posts: 727
Default Re: 2008 Presidential Primaries

[ QUOTE ]
The problem realistically is he has no support in in the Republican "machinery" the state parties nor in established "circles."

[/ QUOTE ]

What you describe is an "obstacle", not a "negative", there is a difference.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 09-10-2007, 02:00 AM
Coy_Roy Coy_Roy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: DC/AC
Posts: 727
Default Re: 2008 Presidential Primaries

[ QUOTE ]
He wants to abolish the federal reserve. Enough said.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm still waiting for the negative.

Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 09-10-2007, 02:02 AM
schwza schwza is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: get more chips than chips ahoy
Posts: 10,485
Default Re: 2008 Presidential Primaries

[ QUOTE ]

Mitt Romney, 11%
Former MA governor. I found no record on his stand on Internet gaming. While Mormons don’t personally gamble, they don’t necessarily have issues with non-Mormons gambling. In fact, many Mormons work in Vegas casinos.

Pros: can’t think of one

Cons: Same as Thompson and Gingrich. He’s not on our side and he’s trying to win the support of our opponents.

Republican Summary:

...

Fred Thompson and Newt Gingrich: Open questions at this point.

John McCain, Mitt Romney, Sam Brownback, Mike Huckabee, Tom Tancredo, and Duncan Hunter: Opponents of our freedoms. Avoid at all costs.



[/ QUOTE ]

the summary seems a lot more negative on the romney than the main part of the post.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 09-10-2007, 02:55 AM
Legislurker Legislurker is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 728
Default Re: 2008 Presidential Primaries

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Don't run away with RP enthusiasm please. His campaign has a lot of other negatives. We need a higher profile mainstream candidate to endorse if we ever get to that place in the primaries. We should consistently lobby every major canddidate, even Romney. The last thing we need is to be lumped into the RP camp as just another band of whackjobs with the abolish the government and legalize pot crowd. Somewhere, somehow, a candidate will get desperate for a slice of the electorate. The Republicans more than Dems since single digit swings can mean the nomination on Feb 5th. Sit tight and try to be noticed.

[/ QUOTE ]

I try to do these ratings the same way as the NRA does, which is evaluating where the candidates appear to be on Internet gaming. I hope we can read this and gain more insight into where the candidates currently stand. Hopefully we can get more folks on our side.

Of "top tier" Republicans, hopefully we can pick one off. Giuliani or Thompson seem most likely. As for Romney, his state seems to strongly support our position, so maybe there's some hope there as well. He's one of the "open question" Republicans.

Still, it's something how six of the ten declared Republican candidates are clearly against us, three are question marks, and the one certainly with us is seen as outside the mainstream of the party (and is still polling in the low single digits). I hope we can start getting more Republicans with us, but it's sure been tough. The KY election should be where we at least start to change this, as we'll have data on how people really vote. It won't swing everything overnight, of course, but it will start things off. A thrashing of Republican in '08 should get them to reconsider their allegiance to big government nanny-staters.

Likewise, it's something that only one Democratic candidate is strongly against us. Our solution has to be bipartisan, but I think Internet poker will be far better off for now with Democrats chairing Congressional committees.

[/ QUOTE ]


Im not bashing your summary of him, just the gushing of love from other people who think he would be a poker hero. Maybe. But is poker the only issue? You can't see the negatives?

1. He wants to go back to the gold standard. Uhm, hello, we don't have a trillion in gold to hand to the Chinese who own almost that in paper. Put that together with leaving the WTO a 2nd Great Depression sounds fine and dandy.

2. He wants to run as a freedom candidate but he is anti-gay and has anti-gay elements in his campaign. The full on pro life stance is a bit hypocritical as well.

3. The last candidate who wanted to abolish all the federal institutions was Andy Jackson and his white trash ass almost totally [censored] the country up.

4. He has no foreign policy experience. Leave the war or don't leave the war, but I want to feel like youre not going to do something stupid to start WWIII. I don't trust RP on China, or to stand up for Taiwan. I don't trust him to watch Iran or North Korea.

Poker isn't the only issue. Im sure you all would like my poker stance in the White House, but you wouldn't vote for me. Why vote for a crazy loon from Texas just because he has a poker friendly plank. Im very Libertarian and yearn for the day we have a real, pragmatic Lib run for office with cred and standing. But RP isnt that candidate.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 09-10-2007, 03:09 AM
fnurt fnurt is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 2,929
Default Re: 2008 Presidential Primaries

You offer all these reasons like Ron Paul has a legitimate chance to become President. In reality, he has no more chance than I do, sorry to say.

In terms of "sending a message" to the Republican Party, there is probably nothing that would be as effective as Ron Paul getting a shockingly high level of support in the primaries. They understand why people support him and that he represents a break from the nanny-state turn the party has taken in recent years. If you want a sane Republican Party again, this is definitely the message you want to send.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 09-10-2007, 07:23 AM
TheEngineer TheEngineer is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 2,730
Default Re: 2008 Presidential Primaries

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Mitt Romney, 11%
Former MA governor. I found no record on his stand on Internet gaming. While Mormons don’t personally gamble, they don’t necessarily have issues with non-Mormons gambling. In fact, many Mormons work in Vegas casinos.

Pros: can’t think of one

Cons: Same as Thompson and Gingrich. He’s not on our side and he’s trying to win the support of our opponents.

Republican Summary:

...

Fred Thompson and Newt Gingrich: Open questions at this point.

John McCain, Mitt Romney, Sam Brownback, Mike Huckabee, Tom Tancredo, and Duncan Hunter: Opponents of our freedoms. Avoid at all costs.



[/ QUOTE ]

the summary seems a lot more negative on the romney than the main part of the post.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're correct. Thanks. I had Romney in the wrong category. I mentioned in my reply to Legislurker that I meant to have him as "open question".

I'll have to request mod access someday just so I can edit my own posts after 30 minutes. Here's the correction:

Correction #3:

[ QUOTE ]

Republican Summary:

Fred Thompson, Newt Gingrich, and Mitt Romney: Open questions at this point.


[/ QUOTE ]
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 09-10-2007, 07:47 AM
TheEngineer TheEngineer is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 2,730
Default Re: 2008 Presidential Primaries

[ QUOTE ]
TE, I think you dare doing a great job on all of this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks! [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]
As for Republicans, ALL the Republican talking heads (Rush, Hannity, etc..) were very adamant about what kind of Republican was needed to win the election.

They all described a candidate who is:

1. Pro Smaller government
2. Pro Lower Taxes
3. Strong on National DEFENSE....

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm a big Ron Paul fan, as everyone here probably knows. I post at sites like Townhall to remind them of what Republicans are SUPPOSED to believe, and then remind them that Ron Paul is that guy. I hope he wins the nomination, of course.

Regardless, it seems the political calculus is straightforward. Unless Barack Obama comes out for Internet poker, it seems like our votes will count the most in the Republican primary. We can vote for Ron Paul to make a statement (and with the hope that many others will as well). We can vote for Giuliani to keep the FoF-types at home on Election Day. Or, we can vote for Thompson or Romney if they come out for Internet gaming.

With regards to the Barack Obama exception I mentioned earlier, if he sponsors any of our legislation in the Senate we may wish to vote for him in the Democratic primaries. We'll have plenty of lead time.

Just something to think about. We can always switch back to our "real" parties after the primary.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 09-10-2007, 08:05 AM
TheEngineer TheEngineer is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 2,730
Default Re: 2008 Presidential Primaries

[ QUOTE ]

Im not bashing your summary of him, just the gushing of love from other people who think he would be a poker hero. Maybe. But is poker the only issue? You can't see the negatives?

1. He wants to go back to the gold standard. Uhm, hello, we don't have a trillion in gold to hand to the Chinese who own almost that in paper. Put that together with leaving the WTO a 2nd Great Depression sounds fine and dandy.

2. He wants to run as a freedom candidate but he is anti-gay and has anti-gay elements in his campaign. The full on pro life stance is a bit hypocritical as well.

3. The last candidate who wanted to abolish all the federal institutions was Andy Jackson and his white trash ass almost totally [censored] the country up.

4. He has no foreign policy experience. Leave the war or don't leave the war, but I want to feel like youre not going to do something stupid to start WWIII. I don't trust RP on China, or to stand up for Taiwan. I don't trust him to watch Iran or North Korea.

Poker isn't the only issue. Im sure you all would like my poker stance in the White House, but you wouldn't vote for me. Why vote for a crazy loon from Texas just because he has a poker friendly plank. Im very Libertarian and yearn for the day we have a real, pragmatic Lib run for office with cred and standing. But RP isnt that candidate.

[/ QUOTE ]

Like everything in politics, what one person sees as a negative someone else sees as a positive. My ratings, much as the NRA's legislator ratings, only concern our issue -- poker. (Likewise, Rep. Ron Paul is A rated by the NRA.) None of the issues you brought up negatively affect poker. If I were doing this while biasing the results with my own personal beliefs, it wouldn't be I guide for poker players...it would be a guide for me.

The NRA is also pragmatic. For example, they won't endorse a Libertarian presidential candidate over an even nominally pro-gun rights Republican no matter how much more favorable the Libertarian's beliefs on gun rights are to the NRA. Likewise, we'll want our strategy to be the one that benefits us the most. If the primaries were held today (assume we have a national primary for this exercise), we'd have two equally valid choices...vote for Ron Paul to make a statement, or vote for Rudy Giuliani to keep our opponents at home on Election Day. There will be changes between now and then, of course, including the fact that the results from Iowa and New Hampshire be available, helping those of us not residing in those states to refine our decision.

Finally, I hope Thompson and/or Obama come out in support of our position before the primaries.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:04 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.