external image

Santorum's out, Romney is anti-gambling. Bothered?

In light of
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
, what effect might this have on the future of online gaming for the USA bearing in mind Romney is anti-online gambling? Do the Republicans stand a good chance of getting in? Anyone any thoughts?

I hope the Republicans reclaim office. I will just worry about gambling online later, or continue to walk the vague legal line of internet gambling the way I have always done, if the possibility to do so remains.
 
If he made it into office would it a) be too late bearing in mind States have already started he legalisation process and b) would he really be able to veto it on personal grounds? I know he *could* but the financial situation seems to have made online gambling a priority and what are the alternative ways out? It'a already got many of the original "family values" mob singing from a different hymnsheet and common sense dictates the industry needs regulation.
 
Honestly feeling dispirited. Not so much because I was a Santorum supporter but because from the beginning of this primary season I have been an "anybody but Romney" supporter. If Romney doesn't get people more excited, Republicans are just going to stay home instead of voting and hand the thing right over to Obama.

This country cannot take another 4 years of Obama. The "Unaffordable Healthcare Act" is one of the worst pieces of rammed down legislation I can remember. One of the worst Presidents EVER. Terribly Anti-small business.

I'm with KSB-I'll deal with the online gambling issue if Romney wins.
 
If he made it into office would it a) be too late bearing in mind States have already started he legalisation process and b) would he really be able to veto it on personal grounds? I know he *could* but the financial situation seems to have made online gambling a priority and what are the alternative ways out? It'a already got many of the original "family values" mob singing from a different hymnsheet and common sense dictates the industry needs regulation.

He may be personally against gambling but he is for giving more control to the states on a lot of issues and less about growing a bigger federal government.
 
ANY body but Romney,,,,,The man that hog tied the middle class in Mass...........You think the feds are non partisan now? lolol Wait to see what happens if we are cursed enough to get him as our leader.....
 
In the grand scheme of things, online gambling is pretty unimportant - and politics is as emotive a topic as gambing if not more so - but if we could keep this discusion on how Romney in the driving seat could impact online gambling legislation specifically, that's what I was really after hearing :thumbsup:
 
In the grand scheme of things, online gambling is pretty unimportant - and politics is as emotive a topic as gambing if not more so - but if we could keep this discusion on how Romney in the driving seat could impact online gambling legislation specifically, that's what I was really after hearing :thumbsup:

Yes you're right it is an emotional subject.:) I can't see that he would govern against the will/majority of the people though. (unpopular veto) I think the gambling legislation may be impacted more on whether the Republicans take over the Senate in 2012 as they did with the House in 2010. (super majority)
 
I can't see that he would govern against the will/majority of the people though. (unpopular veto)

Thing is though, the legislative attempts are really being driven by the politicians who need to raise money for their State's welfare. Although there are undoubtedly a lot of Americans that would like to gamble online I'm sure, the UIGEA didn't get the general public up in arms exactly. Pockets of complainants obviously. Even Kentucky's blatant ongoing attempt at Internet Censorship hasn't caused much more than a few ripples on the surface of the popular press from what I can gather.

If the global financial troubles started to ease, I wonder if a combination of a new anti-gambling president and a loss of momentum might effectively come into play. Of course, now NJ have legalised it and a few other States probably will have by then, maybe it's too late to stop it? Especially if, as you say above, Romney is keen to ensure the States have more independence in decision making processes.
 
He is on record now for giving more control to the states and one of the first "big hitters" to come out in his camp was Governor Christie of New Jersey, there was even some talk of his being a possible running mate. This may carry some "weight".
 
There are some days I'm really happy not to be directly involved in the mess of American Politics anymore. ;)



I'd probably vote Republican if I could be promised a shrinking of the Federal Government- and an expansion of states rights. I feel that be for the best on all things- including Online Gambling.

New Jersey and Nevada would probably become big Online Casino Licences. Both states already have legal gambling in some places, and so the frame-work is already in place to get licenses out there.

I'd think it take a lot less work to just modify the current land-based licensing requirements and government offices than to create a whole new set of laws, with a new governmental department set up- and probably cheaper too!

I guess I'll need to do some more research since MY personal wishes for an American President have changed since leaving the country. :o
 
a Mormon for president.. :what:
republicans are pushing the limits of craziness. well actually he's the least crazy of the bunch but still..
if anybody doesn't know what those fruitcakes believe in, watch this south park episode, yes it's funny and absurd, but it's actually what Mormons believe to be the truth :D
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

so. Obama is here to stay. Thank god! (Please god!)
Not sure how Obama feels about online gambling, but who cares, this is much more important than gambling.
 
There is a near zero chance of federal online gambling. It looks like there is no interest in passing it, and now states are taking it into their own hands. Once a few states have acted on it, the feds will be too late to the party. Poker has a slight chance, everything else is zero IMO.
 
$10,000. bet

While sparring with Rick Perry over healthcare at the debate in Des Moines, Romney challenged Perry to a wager. The stakes? A cool 10 grand. That's not exactly your typical bar bet. "I'll tell you what. 10,000 bucks? Ten-thousand-dollar bet?" Romney said. :D
 
a Mormon for president.. :what:
if anybody doesn't know what those fruitcakes believe in, watch this south park episode, yes it's funny and absurd, but it's actually what Mormons believe to be the truth

Southpark also made fun of the Muslims.

Hope there are no members here who practice the Mormon faith or who have relatives that do. (as I do)

Calling someone's religion crazy, fruitcakes is a sign of religious intolerance and highly offensive :rolleyes:
 
Well I'm sorry if that offended you but I don't see the Mormon religion as a religion, because then the church of scientology would be one as well. And even though they are very dangerous group compared to the Mormons, the beliefs are almost equally crazy.
Seriously, I see you have an avicon which is an Indian image right? They believe an Indian Angel contacted Joseph Smith and gave him the golden tablets and seer stones, and this Angel was white. This is explained to be because Indians used to be white but when god put them on the earth he made them red as punishment..
or something.. (more or less correct, I'm not an expert) so dark skinned people are dark skinned because they were punished by god?! you don't find that offensive?
just a small example.. oh and Adam and Eve used to lived in Virginia.

here's a wikipedia quote, source:
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

According to the Book of Mormon, a Lamanite (play /ˈleɪ.mʌn.aɪt/)[1] is a member of a dark-skinned nation of indigenous Americans that battled with the light-skinned Nephite nation. Although mainstream archaeologists, geneticists, and historians do not recognize the existence of Lamanites, adherents of the Latter Day Saint movement typically believe that the Lamanites comprise some part, if not the entirety, of the indigenous peoples of the Americas and the Polynesian people.

The Book of Mormon describes the Lamanites as descendants of Laman and Lemuel, two rebellious brothers of a family of Israelites who crossed the ocean in a boat around 600 BC. Their brother Nephi founded the Nephite nation. The Lamanites reputedly gained their dark skin as a sign of the curse for their rebelliousness (the curse itself being the withdrawal of the Spirit of God), and warred with the Nephites over a period of centuries. The book says that Jesus appeared and converted all the Lamanites to Christianity; however, after about two centuries, the Lamanites fell away and eventually exterminated all the Nephites. By the end of the Book of Mormon, the Lamanites were defined less by their skin color than by their lack of Christianity. Many Mormons believe that the Polynesian people originated from the descendents of Hagoth who led his people off on a ship and was never heard from again. Although Hagoth was a Nephite, these Mormons regard Polynesians as Lamanites.

The existence of a Lamanite nation has received no support within mainstream science or archaeology. Genetic studies indicate that the indigenous Americans are primarily from northeast Asia, and the Polynesians are from southeast Asia. This has led many Mormon apologetic scholars to hypothesize that the Lamanites were a small nation that merged with the indigenous population of northeast Asian origin and left no clear traces surviving into the modern world. Within the culture of Mormonism, indigenous Americans and Polynesians are still often called "Lamanites", but the practice is waning.
 
@ silencio

You should have stopped at I'm sorry.

Debating about religion and one's ethnicity is irrelevant to Romney being anti-gambling which is the topic of this thread.
 
well you called me intolerant.. which is bs.
if you start declaring things that aren't true, I shouldn't respond?
it seems to me you are just ignorant.
also south park never made fun of muslims. they do make fun of jews every episode, but you never hear them complain.

oh and I forgot about ron paul. he was the least crazy of the bunch :)
:end derail:
 
it seems to me you are just ignorant.

Please remember that you are required by the Forum Rules to treat your fellow forum members with respect and decency. This applies regardless of what you think of their opinions or beliefs:

1.1 - No "Flaming": Please do not post any messages that harass, insult, belittle, threaten or flame another member or guest. Abusive behavior will not be tolerated and your account may be suspended. Please refrain from potty mouth language.
 
Yes, let's try to keep debates here level headed. I know it's tough in the political section since this topic can really wind people up - especially when religion is involved. :p

I can see Silencio's point in being alarmed with anyone who may be a fundamental believer being elected as President. Mind you, I am not saying Romney is - if fact I believe he is rather moderate in his belief, and if one were a fundamentalist (no matter what flavor of religion), you would be unelectable in my opinion.

If Romney truly believes that Lamanites are people who were punished by God and had their skin turned brown, then I think the Republican party has a serious problem. The same goes for any candidate who believes the world is 6000 years old, it was born from an egg, or if it floats on the backs of sea turtles. Politicians need to be able to ensure that they are a true representation of the people and not cater to their ministry.

The US has had a Catholic president. And for some, that's a pretty whacky religion. But JFK was able to put his religious doctrine to the side in order to fairly serve the people. The question should be whether ANY candidate can do that. That is what this debate should be about.
 
This has - perhaps inevitably - moved away from the original question I posed re. online gambling into pure politics and having drifted OT, I am closing the thread. Thanks to those that contributed.

Simmo!
 
oh damn it's reopened.. :thumbsup:
Yes, let's try to keep debates here level headed. I know it's tough in the political section since this topic can really wind people up - especially when religion is involved. :p

I can see Silencio's point in being alarmed with anyone who may be a fundamental believer being elected as President. Mind you, I am not saying Romney is - if fact I believe he is rather moderate in his belief, and if one were a fundamentalist (no matter what flavor of religion), you would be unelectable in my opinion.

If Romney truly believes that Lamanites are people who were punished by God and had their skin turned brown, then I think the Republican party has a serious problem. The same goes for any candidate who believes the world is 6000 years old, it was born from an egg, or if it floats on the backs of sea turtles. Politicians need to be able to ensure that they are a true representation of the people and not cater to their ministry.

The US has had a Catholic president. And for some, that's a pretty whacky religion. But JFK was able to put his religious doctrine to the side in order to fairly serve the people. The question should be whether ANY candidate can do that. That is what this debate should be about.

Yes all very true, but Catholics were a majority. Mormons a minority. That's why I thought Romney being anti-gambling doesn't matter cause he will never win. But then again Republicans would probably rather vote on someone who follows the Church of Satan than vote for a Democrat :D
So...

Southpark also made fun of the Muslims.
also south park never made fun of muslims. they do make fun of jews every episode, but you never hear them complain.
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Did you actually see the episode? Cause I did :cool:
 
Thanks for starting the thread Simmo!

As has been said here already, I don't think the election of either candidate will have an effect on online gambling. It is up to the states now.

The debate if online gaming is legal is over, per the DOJ letter, this is why many states are chomping at the bit to get online.

States have always decided their gambling laws and this will be the case moving forward with U.S. IGaming.

IL. has already started selling lottery online, Nevada poker will be online soon and N.J. will have poker and other games before long.

The more I view this industry within the U.S. the presidential election has squat to do with the gambling industry.

Vote for the guy that can lower the dang gas prices! :thumbsup:
 
Well for me, any one running for the "Big Seat" in the white house should really sit back and think about something. And to be quite frank, "The Land Of the Free" is really starting to piss me off.

First, if they were to legalize gaming online, the "BIG JERK in the BIG SEAT" should start seeing dollar signs, because a lot of revenue for this country would be generated. With all the seizures of processors and bank accounts, someone should have by now run the numbers to see what the total amount of money that they could have had taxed from just Americans who were doing it illegally. I am sure that number would be high.

The down side to this, is it might cause more people to claim bankruptcy, but in this day and economy, people are doing it anyway. When I first moved here to the Syracuse NY, area my husband was employed by the largest company in Central NY. They employed over 10 thousand people. 17 years later, this company now only employs 735 people, and have many vacant buildings. Most of this operation was sent to Singapore, because of the high taxes here in NY. But if they would have taxed online gaming years ago this might not have happened because the country might not be is such a financial hole. Lets say that an American hits a random jackpot for 15 grand, if the government taxes it at the rate of B&M casinos the taxes would total 40%, so the government would get 6 grand. Now if you multiply that by Americans playing poker and sports betting etc. and I have seen many win a lot more than 15 grand, look at all that money they could have had. But no, they would rather raise taxes, empose f'n rediculous fess on just about everything and give the a-holes in Washington a raise. Raise the taxes because they are trying to get more money.

Second, the "BIG JERK in the BIG SEAT" should be thinking about what WE THE PEOPLE WANT, not what the corrupt a-holes want. There are million of Americans playing online, if not billions. Whether if be casinos or bingo or sports betting. It is being done and being done by a lot of citizens. What pisses me off, is that the "BIG JERK in the BIG SEAT" is willing to block this source of income for our country, but looks the other way on the a-holes that are in the Senate or House of Representatives that are taking bribes, squandering money and all other things that are morally and ethically corrupt.

The term "BIG JERK in the BIG SEAT" refers to anyone sitting in that seat, where they are pro online gaming or not. A Lot of revenue for this country is being lost, but hey lets go after processors and bank account in foreign countries to try and get some money. Which in turn make this country the brunt of many jokes and other countries laugh at. Yes it is true, we do elect these idiots, but when they are blatantly lying to our faces during the election, because every Senator and House Rep. has yet to do what they say because of all the bureaucratic bullsi*t that is going on.

This idiots should be listening to the people, and not each other. If they can figure out a plan to catch processors and poker sites, why are they not thinking up plans to tap into this billion dollar industry and keep a large amount of their citizens happy? Instead they would keep the millions of citizens who do game online pissed of as hell and hide their winnings and lose out on the extra revenue.

It is going to be interesting to see how this all pans out, but honestly, the "BIG JERK in the BIG SEAT" who ever it will be is not going to be able to change this all by themselves, because there are to many greedy idiots in the other houses that are going to purposely butt heads just to show they have balls. They can have their balls, just give me back my god given right to live in the land of the free, without these a-holes telling me how free I can be.

Rant over....

LH
 
I voted for Santorum and he took the state of Tn and most southern states except for poor ole Newt , I think Romney will make a fine President , God knows its better than what we have had and I do think he will do whatever it takes to bring money and Jobs back to the states and that could be online gaming among other things.

My last worry is about online gaming when it comes to the problems that face our nation but what leader is strong enough and can work across party lines to keep us from falling like Greece and I think as a long time voter , never missed voting mind you, so I have that right to Bitch , its Romney , hands down compared with OBAMANATION, we can't afford 4 more years of this, so exercise your right as an American and VOTE , If you do not vote imo , you should'nt Bitch:D

Laurie
 
I voted for Santorum and he took the state of Tn and most southern states except for poor ole Newt , I think Romney will make a fine President , God knows its better than what we have had and I do think he will do whatever it takes to bring money and Jobs back to the states and that could be online gaming among other things.

My last worry is about online gaming when it comes to the problems that face our nation but what leader is strong enough and can work across party lines to keep us from falling like Greece and I think as a long time voter , never missed voting mind you, so I have that right to Bitch , its Romney , hands down compared with OBAMANATION, we can't afford 4 more years of this, so exercise your right as an American and VOTE , If you do not vote imo , you should'nt Bitch:D

Laurie

AMEN sister!!!!!!!!!!!
 
MOJO hit Santorum for his unwanted bashing of a little bitty tiny
island. I myself thought he would be a good choice until his ill adviced
blunder. 150,000 unable to vote for president voters on the island may
seem squat but 600,000 FORMER islanders living and voting on the mainland
can be a formidable group.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Accredited Casinos

Read about our rating system and how it's done.
Back
Top