Lets Go Democrats!

[akoff 0]

LOL sorry DM I wasn't aware you were already on it untill I went back and relooked at the thread...I guess I need to be quicker on the post.I am a capitalist...I'll split them with you!

[Courtsdad 0]

..that was my point. Nothing to do with the Unlawful Internet Gambling Law occurred today. Sure, you could postulate that a democratic congress will revoke it, but, you're likely wrong. Just because Republicans put it through doesn't mean that the Democrats are gonna remedy it.I really only posted to let you know there was very thorough discussion allready in Off Topic, but, it seems as though that's been lost. Good luck.

If anything it could get worse. I mean poker discriminates against the minorities and less fortunate. So we MUST change the law and make everyone equal. All of those with large bankrolls must give a percentage to those with smaller bank rolls to even out the playing field. Its just not fair that someone has more money than someone else, even if the worked their butts off for it.

[RhinestoneCowboy 2]

I hold 79s on the button in a 6 handed NL game with one limper in late position. Is this automatic raise? Or is this one of those "mix it up" type plays where you let it go sometimes, and you raise others..**RMan decided to hijack poker threads with political BS so I thought I would get some poker discussion going here**

[DonkSlayer 1]

I hold 79s on the button in a 6 handed NL game with one limper in late position. Is this automatic raise? Or is this one of those "mix it up" type plays where you let it go sometimes, and you raise others..**RMan decided to hijack poker threads with political BS so I thought I would get some poker discussion going here**

Rhinestone, what if the grass COULD grow but it's cut short?

[NoSup4U 0]

I hold 79s on the button in a 6 handed NL game with one limper in late position. Is this automatic raise? Or is this one of those "mix it up" type plays where you let it go sometimes, and you raise others..**RMan decided to hijack poker threads with political BS so I thought I would get some poker discussion going here**

Suited or unsuited, auto raise.Mark

[CBass1724 1]

Didn't Bush Sr raise taxes after he said "read my lips, there will be no new taxes."

He also said he would not eat his broccoli. BROCCOLI!

[fleung22 1]

So are y'all happy with the result or what?

[CBass1724 1]

Suited or unsuited, auto raise.Mark

I honestly disagree with you here. You fold after calling but bet the flop no matter what. Then you have the nuts, muck, and then. Check.

[nutzbuster 7]

Suited or unsuited, auto raise.Mark

ummmm... I think the better play here is to raise $210 with A-Q unsuited as long as 3 are already all in and you only have 6 outs!

[BWToth 0]

Lame Duck. Woo.

[KDawgCometh 2]

What you should worry more about is that your job raises increase at a better porportion then the GDP's growth rate, the dems or republicans have little to do with that

heh, I was really tired when I wrote this. what i meant was staying ahead of the CPI and inflation rates. And before I go looking and all of the bush defenders go on about how great the economy is right now because of him, if this is true, then he is also responsible for the double dip recession a few years back tooedit: I expected ballon guy to chirp about something, o well. As far as whether the dems will do anything about the internet gaming bill, they won't, cause threre are more pressing needs to the country. If something is to happen with it, it itself won't get reversed, but a new law will be made for regulation which will nullify the internet gaming bill. One thing though, if the dems were controlling the comitees when frist tried to push this through, I highly doubt that it would've been attached to teh port security bill

[WowThats 0]

You people are fools... nothing is going to change. Online gambling in its current form is operated by organized crime this is a fact that is indisputable. And now you believe with all your faith the newly elected officials is going to change for the law for organized crime.

[psujohn 0]

If anything it could get worse. I mean poker discriminates against the minorities and less fortunate.

Actually it's quite the opposite. State lotteries discriminate against the minorities and the poor. Online gambling is overwhelmingly populated by people with above average incomes and educations.And to respond to those who say Democrats will raise taxes I can just quote Bill Maher:

One: when they say Democrats will raise taxes, you say, "We have to because someone spent all the money in the world cutting Paris Hilton's taxes and not killing Osama bin Laden."In just six years, the national debt has doubled. You can't keep spending money you don't take in. That's not even elementary economics. That's just called, "Don't be Michael Jackson."

I remember when people used to call Democrats "Tax and Spend". I guess the Republican response is "Cut taxes and spend even more".

[nutzbuster 7]

As an Australian with little knowledge of the American system, what will it exctly mean if the democrats actually get control of both?

Historically? It would mean a trend towards more funding for social programs, education and special interests and far less for the military. More laws, bigger government, more hand outs, and without a doubt, higher taxes.And I have yet to hear ANYONE, Dem or Republican, say that they would consider turning over the online gaming ban.

[Chalkeater 0]

YES! GO DEMOCRATS!!!!!!i can't wait for taxes to go up for the rich and down for the poor and middle classed...

fixed your post.

[Chalkeater 0]

YOU HAVE ZERO CHANCE FOR THE ONLINE POKER ITEM TO BE REPEALED.I will take all bets at any amount with odds to you, PM if you want to discuss a wager.

I'd take the same bet with abortion, gun laws, etc...politics is no longer about economics, something that would make sense, but about which party can scare their constituency more. In order to scare people - you have to keep the boogeyman lurking at all times.Hell, if the democrats want to play the game for once and get rich poker players to vota against their own economic interest, I say more power - I'm sickened by the right conning farmers into voting themselves off the land, factory workers into voting themselves into poverty, and the middle class into getting back at the "elite, snobbish upper-class" by voting in oil men, fortune 500 CEOs and military-industrial complex barons.Since politics has moved out of the realm of economics, it's most central axis for hundreds of years, and become just bickering about culture - you can't complain about single-issue voters. They're given no other choice. Something small enough and instantly satisfying to millions while also being relatively non-controversial such as the UIGA may actually stand a chance of being something that is revoked - it stands a hell of a lot better chance than Roe v. Wade, the greatest bogeyman of them all..

[Courtsdad 0]

Actually it's quite the opposite. State lotteries discriminate against the minorities and the poor. Online gambling is overwhelmingly populated by people with above average incomes and educations.Sorry my sarcasm didnt come throughAnd to respond to those who say Democrats will raise taxes I can just quote Bill Maher:I remember when people used to call Democrats "Tax and Spend". I guess the Republican response is "Cut taxes and spend even more".

I dont disagree that the republicans spent money like drunk democrats. To quote Bill Maher about Rep. is equal to someone else quoting Rush L. on Dems and holding it as gospel. Both have agendas.Historically you know( and the numbers show it) that the sterotype of Dems taxing and spending is valid.

[Chalkeater 0]

If anything it could get worse. I mean poker discriminates against the minorities and less fortunate. So we MUST change the law and make everyone equal. All of those with large bankrolls must give a percentage to those with smaller bank rolls to even out the playing field. Its just not fair that someone has more money than someone else, even if the worked their butts off for it.

This is a totally accurate picture of what the democrats will do. The legislation for mass redistribution of wealth is actually on Nancy Pelosi's desk as we speak. There's no way this would cause rioting and lynching in the streets. It wouldn't be a political suicide en masse at all.You're being so realistic and logical about this whole thing. Except..you know..for the whole ridiculously demonizing aspect of your post...you know?

[Courtsdad 0]

This is a totally accurate picture of what the democrats will do. The legislation for mass redistribution of wealth is actually on Nancy Pelosi's desk as we speak. There's no way this would cause rioting and lynching in the streets. It wouldn't be a political suicide en masse at all.You're being so realistic and logical about this whole thing. Except..you know..for the whole ridiculously demonizing aspect of your post...you know?

Have to love Nancy. If only people toook the time to take a look and see what she really is.

[Chalkeater 0]

Have to love Nancy. If only people toook the time to take a look and see what she really is.

What is she exactly?

[Jeepster80125 0]

I'll put in my $.02.I find it hilarious that there was so much pro-dem BS here, and in the rest of America the last year. Now the dems have control. I'll wait to bump this thread in two years, when I brag that nothing has changed.I can't believe how many people think that things are going to drastically change in the next two years, without a presidential election.My guess, is that the fence sitters will see that voting dems into office did nothing, and they will vote rep in 2008. Just like they did in 96.Good luck.

[mx957 0]

I'll put in my $.02.I find it hilarious that there was so much pro-dem BS here, and in the rest of America the last year. Now the dems have control. I'll wait to bump this thread in two years, when I brag that nothing has changed.I can't believe how many people think that things are going to drastically change in the next two years, without a presidential election.My guess, is that the fence sitters will see that voting dems into office did nothing, and they will vote rep in 2008. Just like they did in 96.Good luck.

Jeepster, as usual, you are 100% accurate on this. Same old politics, it's just a knee jerk reaction that won't change anything.

[Chalkeater 0]

My guess, is that the fence sitters will see that voting dems into office did nothing, and they will vote rep in 2008. Just like they did in 96.Good luck.

Great example! Oh wait..they further upped the republican stronghold on Congress...losing the presidency only because of a remarkably dynamic and charismatic and..smart..candidate fielded by the democrats.If the repubs do the same thing and McCain gets in - well, I'm all for them. At least he'll be more of an Eisenhower Republican...someone who knows the military-industrial complex inside out and knows that it's extravagancies must be guarded against at all costs...

[Jeepster80125 0]

I think that we should have a requirement to scan and post a "I Voted" sticker before anyone is allowed to discuss politics. I can guarantee that no less than 75% of the people here who complain, didn't vote, or are from Canadian. Just 'sayin.

Jeepster, as usual, you are 100% accurate on this. Same old politics, it's just a knee jerk reaction that won't change anything.

Thanks.

Great example! Oh wait..they further upped the republican stronghold on Congress...losing the presidency only because of a remarkably dynamic and charismatic and..smart..candidate fielded by the democrats.If the repubs do the same thing and McCain gets in - well, I'm all for them. At least he'll be more of an Eisenhower Republican...someone who knows the military-industrial complex inside out and knows that it's extravagancies must be guarded against at all costs...

Just by the fact that you use "guarded at all costs", tells me that you aren't that bright, or you just follow party lines and what your father says, and by "further upped the repub stronghold", are you talking now, or '96? I'm thinking Your Retarded.That's a lot of comma's.

[Courtsdad 0]

What is she exactly?

A Socialist among other things. Just ask her.