Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Guy)   Analysts presume that the 20-50 million estimated online poker players in the U.S. won't bother to vote tomorrow   (pokerpages.com) divider line 96
    More: Asinine  
•       •       •

5954 clicks; posted to Main » on 06 Nov 2006 at 2:26 PM (8 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



96 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2006-11-06 03:25:16 PM  
SoxSweepAgain

RE: "Christianist"

Ok, so is that an actual word somewhere, or just some stupid political flame-bait buzzword like "lieberal"?

The Google results seem to point to the latter, but I'd love to be corrected if I'm wrong.

/not that I don't agree w/ your general arguement
//just believe in intelligent discussion/argument
 
2006-11-06 03:29:04 PM  
If an activity harms no one but the person doing it then there should be no law against it.
 
2006-11-06 03:32:38 PM  
I'm an online poker player, and I'm voting in a swing state against republicans.
 
2006-11-06 03:33:39 PM  
The federal government will have to monitor and approve of your online bank transactions for the new laws to work.

Just something to think about.
 
2006-11-06 03:33:57 PM  
Jektal: Ok, so is that an actual word somewhere, or just some stupid political flame-bait buzzword like "lieberal"?

The Google results seem to point to the latter, but I'd love to be corrected if I'm wrong.


It's a made up term. I'm not sure if it's quite as flame-baity as your suggest... If anything, it's respectful of moderate Christians by not lumping them in with the asstards who make a political agenda out of faith.
 
2006-11-06 03:39:40 PM  
All 435 House seats are on Tuesday's ballot, and 33 of the 100 Senate seats are.

wait..what? I seem to remember learning that we stagger the elections in thirds so that we never end up with a totally new crop of reps. Also, I don't think I'm seeing enough annoying commercials to account for EVERYONE in the house running. (I'm certainly seeing enough of the ones that are running)

The logic is that if everyone was new, no one would know what to do. I find fault with this logic, and would say that the staggering is in place to ensure that voters can't throw one whole party out of office in a single election, they have to stay angry for 6 years.
 
2006-11-06 03:40:47 PM  
jcaustin: Just continue to crack me up. Except for procedural things, ALL law is based on morality. Do the schools really suck so bad at teaching this stuff these days? I also find it funny the evil corporations aren't evil if they're taking people's money with gambling games.

What do they teach in churches these days? Whatever happened to turning the other cheek? Whatever happened to helping the poor & unfortunate? Whatever happened to simply living your life as an example for others?

It's funny how so many Christians ignore the teachings of Christ whenever it suits them. Then with their next breath condemn others who perform the very same acts they did just moments earlier.

Wait, funny isn't the right word. Sad. Yeah, that's the word.
 
2006-11-06 03:51:29 PM  
ALL law is based on morality

All law is based on economics. Show me how a state sales tax-exemption for emu feed is somehow a moral, religious, ethical or spiritual law.

This law is no different. This law keeps US dollars on US soil. That is all.
 
KNW
2006-11-06 03:55:52 PM  
MonkeyBoy666

Turn the other cheek? Haven't you heard? Jesus is a white capitalist who carries a USMC-issued automatic rifle (with the miracle infinity-magazine). This 'child of Jewish brown people' was just a myth.
 
2006-11-06 03:57:28 PM  
Ass_Master: wait..what? I seem to remember learning that we stagger the elections in thirds so that we never end up with a totally new crop of reps. Also, I don't think I'm seeing enough annoying commercials to account for EVERYONE in the house running. (I'm certainly seeing enough of the ones that are running)

The logic is that if everyone was new, no one would know what to do. I find fault with this logic, and would say that the staggering is in place to ensure that voters can't throw one whole party out of office in a single election, they have to stay angry for 6 years.


Representatives serve two-year terms, being elected every other year. Yes, in theory you could get an entirely new House every two years.

Senate races are staggered so that every two years one-third of the Senate is up for re-election to its six-year term.
 
2006-11-06 03:58:23 PM  
Hickory-smoked


Jektal: Ok, so is that an actual word somewhere, or just some stupid political flame-bait buzzword like "lieberal"?
==========

The Google results seem to point to the latter, but I'd love to be corrected if I'm wrong.

It's a made up term. I'm not sure if it's quite as flame-baity as your suggest... If anything, it's respectful of moderate Christians by not lumping them in with the asstards who make a political agenda out of faith.


=====================================

I started using it myself on another site. I don't say I made it up, but I didn't read it elsewhere first, I was responding to somene else who referred to "Americanism" and "Islamism" and "Islamist" beliefs, etc etc.

"Christianism" seemed to fit. I use it to distinguish between those who pray to Jesus on their own time without bothering others as opposed to those who stand on a bully-pulpit and try to influence our legal system based upon their Christian fear of their god and their Christian values.
Suffice it to say, I can not stand people who make an imaginary being the focal point of their lives, and those who would try to make OTHERS' lives revolve around that stupid, anachronistic, warping, obstructionist myth are truly due an ass-whipping, IMO.
 
2006-11-06 04:00:28 PM  
dwclou
Stay home next election day, the same thing will happen no matter who you vote for.


And this, my friends, is why America is farked: you have too many clueless idiots who vote stupidly or not at all.
 
2006-11-06 04:06:16 PM  
I voted against my democrat (Diana DeGette) who voted for this legistlation.
 
2006-11-06 04:06:44 PM  
Are there any politicians who are for online-poker?

Mark Foley was the only Florida Republican to vote against the ban. He might like little boys, but he wanted to protect your right to play poker.
 
2006-11-06 04:19:47 PM  
Christianist:, n. Someone who claims to follow the Bible but hasn't read the sixth chapter of the book of Matthew

Conjugated: pl. Christianists,

See also: Islamist, Fundamentalist
 
2006-11-06 04:21:13 PM  
If by "on-line poker" you mean "soliciting underage pages via email," then yes. I think some politicians are for that.
 
2006-11-06 04:24:22 PM  
SoxSweepAgain

A Christian who keeps their silly paws to themselves and keeps their deity-worship properly ensconced in a pointy-roofed building is simply a Christian. No sweat off my ass.

But, but... my hometown church has a flat, slanted roof! How does that affect your sweat-to-ass ratio?

/Is there an inverse relationship between pointiness of church roofs and sweatiness of asses?
 
2006-11-06 04:25:04 PM  
That's nothing man.
100 million pot smokers won't vote either.

Get out and vote - I'm tlaking to you NEVADA and COLORADO!
 
2006-11-06 04:30:40 PM  
Not voting against Republicans would be a -EV move.
 
2006-11-06 04:32:14 PM  
http://www.pokerplayersalliance.org/alerts/HR4411_Votes.pdf

Link to the Poker Players Alliance page that lists the vote on the ports bill.

/thinks jcaustin would not be much fun to have a beer with
 
2006-11-06 04:35:32 PM  
I play poker online, and I won't be voting tomorrow, but that's not because I play poker online, it's because I don't want to vote. actually. I may vote. I don't know. I got.. what... 26 and a half hours to decide?
 
2006-11-06 04:44:10 PM  
jcaustin: I dunno. I've been to Vegas and I sure as hell wouldn't want that around where I live.

It wouldn't be like that where you live. In fact Vegas would stop being like that. Vegas is the way it is because it's the only place you can go for legal hookers and gambling.

Ban alcohol and legalize it in Salt Lake City. I promise that within a year it would be a hellhole.
 
2006-11-06 04:44:50 PM  
Well, a different kind of hellhole.
 
2006-11-06 04:47:04 PM  
g92vr4: Vote. Not voting says "I'm an idiot who doesn't care who is in charge of my country".

Your forefathers didn't come here so you could sit at home playing online poker in your boxers on voting day.
 
2006-11-06 04:51:47 PM  
So let me get this straight, it's a very bad thing if a company rakes off five to ten percent of the money wagered in a hand of poker but it's a good thing for society if a state lottery takes forty to sixty percent of the money wagered on a draw of the daily number?

I can't privately offer you a fair game with fair odds, but the state can offer you a total sucker bet and call it a good thing because the millions of suckers who get fleeced are buying a new firetruck for East Bumfark?

Damned hypocrites.
 
2006-11-06 04:56:35 PM  
BKITU


SoxSweepAgain:

A Christian who keeps their silly paws to themselves and keeps their deity-worship properly ensconced in a pointy-roofed building is simply a Christian. No sweat off my ass.
=====
But, but... my hometown church has a flat, slanted roof! How does that affect your sweat-to-ass ratio?

/Is there an inverse relationship between pointiness of church roofs and sweatiness of asses?

================================================
If the roof of your church slants, that's a point!
 
2006-11-06 04:57:04 PM  
Jument And this, my friends, is why America is farked: you have too many clueless idiots who vote stupidly or not at all.

So, you are saying you want the non-voting clueless idiots to vote, right? And the voting clueless idiots are wrong for what? Not voting your slate?

In truth, America is farked because you are all voting tomorrow to get "your" share of the pie. Wealth redistribution is all you seek, and you deserve it. Every last piece of it.

I'm staying home tomorrow to watch the paint dry.
 
2006-11-06 05:00:23 PM  
Barnstormer So let me get this straight, it's a very bad thing if a company rakes off five to ten percent of the money wagered in a hand of poker but it's a good thing for society if a state lottery takes forty to sixty percent of the money wagered on a draw of the daily number?

Yeah, but the 5%-10% goes to evil private capitalists while the 40%-60% goes to the public trough ... I mean, public bad, er, you know what I mean, don't confuse me with the facts.
 
2006-11-06 05:01:01 PM  
YoggiSothoth: I'm staying home tomorrow to watch the paint dry.


Which is why you deserve it. :)
 
2006-11-06 05:03:47 PM  
I lost a good side income, right after I bought a house, so fark the republicans.. I don't like the dem's either, I just wanna stick it to the rep's.. Fark ALL the politicians.
 
2006-11-06 05:13:55 PM  
k00k

I lost a good side income, right after I bought a house, so fark the republicans.. I don't like the dem's either, I just wanna stick it to the rep's.. Fark ALL the politicians.

My understanding is Neteller, PokerStars and FullTiltPoker are staying in the game, have you heard differently? Also, I seem to recall Hower Lederer heading up a coalition to reverse the anti-online-poker fervor in this country. Do you know anything about that?
 
2006-11-06 05:15:50 PM  
20 to 50 million?? I don't think so. There's only 300 million people in the U.S. and many of those are children and not of voting age. You can't tell me that 1 in every 3 or 4 adults play online poker! My husband and I don't. My neighbors don't even have an internet connection. That's four more people right there. My parents, my sister, and my brother-in-law don't gamble either. Where did they get these numbers from?
 
2006-11-06 05:21:38 PM  
kOOk Fark ALL the politicians.

Agreed. That's one of the reasons I don't vote.

To others, I'm not professing to everyone not to vote, because, hey, if it gets your rocks off, by all means do it! Just don't get all zealous over non-voters' cases like you've discovered some profound cause. You didn't.
 
2006-11-06 05:26:31 PM  
Answered my own question, apparently Howard Lederer has joined the Poker Players' Alliance. Think I'll join up, too.
 
2006-11-06 05:28:07 PM  
kOOk: Poker Players Alliance (www.pokerplayersalliance.org)

k1j2g3: 50 goes into 300 6 times.
20 goes into 300 15 times.

Those numbers are accepted in the industry as accurate.
 
2006-11-06 05:33:28 PM  
For those of you that are interested. I found my Rep. and his vote.

Needless to say I will be voting against him tomorrow.

Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act
 
2006-11-06 05:33:50 PM  
I will laugh at all you "I don't vote cuz politicians suck!" when this bill passes by one vote. Morons. I don't know why one thing has to do with another.

If you're voting on it, that means it's either gonna be a law or it ain't. And if you don't vote, you're giving the decision to people who might disagree with your opinion on whether you want this law in place.

Go vote, dumbasses.
 
2006-11-06 06:04:39 PM  
Voted two weeks ago. Tried and tried to convince my roommate to, but he was in a tournament and couldn't be bothered.
 
2006-11-06 06:04:41 PM  
serpent_sky: I mean, if you legalized all gambling, prostitution, and drugs, and taxed them like normal businesses, there's a hell of a lot of revenue, and new streams of legal money and employment. It's so logical, the fact that these things remain illegal blow my mind.

There is a lot of revenue in NOT providing these things as well.

1) Law enforcement.
2) Jails.
3) Kickbacks.

Can't have any of the above if it's all nice and legal like.
 
2006-11-06 06:24:23 PM  
Wait a second here!
"The 8.5 million voting aged Americans affected by the UIGEA annually spent about $6 billion (4.7 billion euros, or 7 billion pounds) last year to gamble online."

They need to get a calculamator thinggy! $6billion = 3.16 billion pounds...

I think the whole article is just a random rant.
 
2006-11-06 06:29:56 PM  
SoxSweepAgain

If the roof of your church slants, that's a point!

Not really. It slants from front down to back, not A-shaped. Imagine the roof of a lean-to shed. Kind of like that. No points on it.

Internally, the lines from the roof and walls all focus toward a cross that hangs in front of the back-wall windows. Kind of a neat architectural trick, I always thought.

So... ass-sweatitude. Affected or no?
 
2006-11-06 06:34:58 PM  
Oh, 'tis better to have tried and failed than never to have been told by another Farker "Put down the crack pipe, bud."

Today, my 27th birthday and, just as important, my first receipt of a direct attack on Fark.

This shall now fall second only to November 5th, 1955 as red-letter November days in history.
 
2006-11-06 07:09:35 PM  
I would like to get up in arms about this issue but living here in the Seattle area we're too preoccupied with how close our strippers can stand to us and how high the wattage in the light bulbs on their gyrating stage must be. Plus, we've already outlawed even the right to ruminate about online gambling. I love me some nanny state.

/Oops, I just thought about online gambling -- send the police
 
2006-11-06 07:50:12 PM  
Im sorry, 300 million people live in the US. There is no way 20-50 million play Online poker.
 
2006-11-06 11:18:58 PM  
Your Dog...you are using 300 million as the number, but many of those are underage (0-18). In fact, I just looked it up, the estimated number of children in the U.S. is close to 75 million. Even if babies and toddlers are gambling online, they sure aren't going to be voting tomorrow.

Your numbers would be closer to 1 in 4 (50 million) or 1 in 11 (20 million) if using those statistics...and I still think that is a bunch of hooey!

If you remove the 75 million children, it would have to be at the least 1 out of 11 VOTING AGE Americans are gambling specifically ONLINE. Not at casinos. Not at the church bingo game. Not buying lottery tickets. I just don't believe it.
 
2006-11-06 11:31:45 PM  
YoggiSothoth

Think about this, the two main parties go after the "swing" vote like nothing else. They ignore the majority's wishes in order to find some minority or other who will give them 5%. And there usually at least one 3rd party candidate. So if you vote for the 3rd party and every other apathetic person did the same it sends a message to the two main parties. Usually the 3rd party guy is saying stuff that most people agree with so eventually the two main parties will start pandering to the majority for a change.

Not voting because you don't care is fine. But keep in mind that the votes for the winning candidate are the only ones that count, the other votes tell the candidates something.
 
Displayed 46 of 96 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report