Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
Gary Johnson removal? Gary Johnson removal?
View Poll Results: Does Gary Johnson tilt you?
YES
141 63.23%
NO, I DONATE/SUPPORT HIS CAUSE
82 36.77%

06-10-2012 , 01:38 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MinusEV
People watching debates don't watch them to be convinced by one side or the other - they watch them to cheer on the side they already agree with.
Partly true, but not totallly. Then nothing would ever happen. As an extreme example: the Kennedy-Nixon TV debate 1960, which is even seen as decisive for the outcome. http://www.time.com/time/nation/arti...021078,00.html
Wink, wink, the importance of history.

Then we have the advertisement factor. People register and process issues subconsciously, whether they admit it or not.

Last edited by plaaynde; 06-10-2012 at 01:44 AM.
Gary Johnson removal? Quote
06-10-2012 , 02:02 AM
Gary Johnson is on FoxNews' Red Eye right now.
Gary Johnson removal? Quote
06-10-2012 , 02:22 AM
Sorry to hear that Gary doesn't seem to be doing stuff for poker anymore TE.

I still think the 2p2 stuff was worth it, it didn't really cost anything and got some favorable press for a few weeks in the media (newspaper articles mainly iirc).

I guess some people get wound up over politics, but honestly this is a poker forum, so giving someone who really has no chance to win anything some free ads in exchange for positive press coverage.... I don't know, may not be a sexy mark in the history of online poker like the Wire Act interpretation update, but it sure as hell looks like risk free value to my eyes.

It was only a minor bonus or slight "feel good" that Johnson seemed to believe in a lot of respectful things that I happen to agree with, but if he had believed in the wars and raising taxes I wouldn't really care, that's not what this was about and anybody that thought so I think is missing the point of this.

Same goes for the guys that got offended about ads or donation threads in NVG, you're missing the point. The fight for online poker has been such a long and uphill battle and this was clear value for giving up nothing. Getting nitty about traditional forum rules when we have a non traditional way to further the cause is nothing but silly and a needless hurdle. All imo of course.
Gary Johnson removal? Quote
06-10-2012 , 09:53 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChicagoRy
Same goes for the guys that got offended about ads or donation threads in NVG, you're missing the point. The fight for online poker has been such a long and uphill battle and this was clear value for giving up nothing. Getting nitty about traditional forum rules when we have a non traditional way to further the cause is nothing but silly and a needless hurdle. All imo of course.
****ing hell I wish we could keep the politards threads out of all the forums i read, but since we can't, what right do you have to decide what the point is and that I'm missing it?

The bending of traditional forum rules would be very low on my list of reasons for the disgust I felt that 2p2 endorsed GJ. He would make a horrible president; he seems like not that decent of a fellow; and, while people have the right to vote (or not vote) for whatever reasons they please, it is hard for me to have any respect for anyone who votes for president primarily on the basis of whether or not a candidate would recuse the federal government from legislating online poker and make legalization of online poker an issue for each state to decide.

If you support GJ because you're a Libertarian or you read Atlas Shrugged in high school and still have a crush on John Galt (who, coincidently, founded the city where I was born), that's one thing; but if you support him because he will not legislate online poker and leave it to the states to do what they want, then, wow. If you think the fight for online poker is one of the most pressing issues facing the US and should play a role in who becomes president, well, if that is the kind of priorities that playing online poker leads to, maybe online poker isn't such a good thing.
Gary Johnson removal? Quote
06-10-2012 , 10:26 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregorio
but if you support him because he will not legislate online poker and leave it to the states to do what they want, then, wow.
WTF. I thought he supported online poker. Now I feel I don't support him anymore

Note: I'm not a resident of the US. But on a personal level, knowing my vote is mostly wasted anyway, a pro poker guy might very well get it, I know that a better suited for office will win anyway...

The thing is to make a statement, not take responsiblity for the ultimate outcome

Last edited by plaaynde; 06-10-2012 at 10:38 AM.
Gary Johnson removal? Quote
06-10-2012 , 11:02 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregorio
****ing hell I wish we could keep the politards threads out of all the forums i read, but since we can't, what right do you have to decide what the point is and that I'm missing it?

The bending of traditional forum rules would be very low on my list of reasons for the disgust I felt that 2p2 endorsed GJ. He would make a horrible president; he seems like not that decent of a fellow; and, while people have the right to vote (or not vote) for whatever reasons they please, it is hard for me to have any respect for anyone who votes for president primarily on the basis of whether or not a candidate would recuse the federal government from legislating online poker and make legalization of online poker an issue for each state to decide.

If you support GJ because you're a Libertarian or you read Atlas Shrugged in high school and still have a crush on John Galt (who, coincidently, founded the city where I was born), that's one thing; but if you support him because he will not legislate online poker and leave it to the states to do what they want, then, wow. If you think the fight for online poker is one of the most pressing issues facing the US and should play a role in who becomes president, well, if that is the kind of priorities that playing online poker leads to, maybe online poker isn't such a good thing.
Of the 3 candidates, Gary Johnson would easily be the best president. His stance on poker compared to the other two is only a sweetener.

You seem to have some sort of irrational hatred towards libertarian supporters and ideas. Are you arguing that Obama/Romney are better choices than Gary Johnson? lol
Gary Johnson removal? Quote
06-10-2012 , 11:08 AM
how the **** is it irrational to hate libertarian ideas. they are horrible. You support libertarian policies? lol
Gary Johnson removal? Quote
06-10-2012 , 11:18 AM
Well, I thought you had a more interesting argument than "I'm a statist, libertarians suck, lol Atlas Shrugged." Guess not. We'll agree to disagree.
Gary Johnson removal? Quote
06-10-2012 , 11:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by plaaynde
WTF. I thought he supported online poker. Now I feel I don't support him anymore

Note: I'm not a resident of the US. But on a personal level, knowing my vote is mostly wasted anyway, a pro poker guy might very well get it, I know that a better suited for office will win anyway...

The thing is to make a statement, not take responsiblity for the ultimate outcome
i am no expert on his policies. but i believe he fully supports the rights of americans to play online poker, and that there are only a very very few issues the federal government should get involved in, and that most issues should be left to the states to decide for themselves.

I believe he would be against any federal legisltaion prohibiting online poker, but I also think he would be against any federal legisltaion making online poker legal in every state, as he would believe that is none of the federal government's business, and these sorts of things should be up to each individual state to decide for itself, so if Wahington State wants to ban online poker, I believe GJ would not have the federal government intervene.

But this is all just imo. I haven't spent any time researching GJ's stance on online poker, because, frankly, who cares about online poker in the context electing a presedent.
Gary Johnson removal? Quote
06-10-2012 , 11:26 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ASPoker8
Well, I thought you had a more interesting argument than "I'm a statist, libertarians suck, lol Atlas Shrugged." Guess not. We'll agree to disagree.
oh no you called me a statist. isn't that the libertarian equivalent of Godwin's law? calling anit-libertarians statists is another great debate strategy to go along with your earlier "lol."

btw, not all people who hate libertarians are statists, and, based on ron paul's position on abortion, it seems like some libertarians are statists.
Gary Johnson removal? Quote
06-10-2012 , 11:35 AM
Gregorio is learning the joys of trolling people who are very easy to troll.
Gary Johnson removal? Quote
06-10-2012 , 11:35 AM
Gregorio, I'm sorry, but you missed my point entirely.

My point is that he was never going to win, it doesn't matter, and that he supported a player's right to do whatever they want with their own money.

No federal legislation, but also no justice department knocking on PS and FTP's door. That, to me, is very obviously better than any proposed federal or state legislation I've ever read about.

Again, you're the one bringing politard crap into this. This isn't about the presidential election, or Gary being a good president, it's about driving as much support as we can for online poker in the media as possible, because this is a poker forum.

I thought I made that clear in my post.
Gary Johnson removal? Quote
06-10-2012 , 11:56 AM
I am not the one bringing up the politard crap in this thread. I avoid discussing politics with people on the internet unless it is thrown in my face.

2+2=GJ s has never been about driving as much support as we can for online poker in the media as possible. It has been about electing Gary Johnson.

Mason has been clear that he supports Gary Johnson for his adherence to the guidelines laid down by the great Milton Freidman. I don't think Mason's reason for having 2p2 endorse GJ is limited to getting media publicity for online poker. I'm pretty sure Mason suports GJ for president and would like to do everything he can to see that GJ gets elected. This has always been about electing GJ and not just getting publicity for the fight for online poker.
Gary Johnson removal? Quote
06-10-2012 , 01:06 PM
gregorio is quickly becoming my new favorite poster.

I think the point that was most missed back when it happened is that, regardless of what you can logically argue with facts and reason, this whole thing left a bad taste. In an industry concerned with avoiding the appearance of impropriety, it seemed odd to turn political with money that users of this site helped generate through providing content and viewing pages. And then it basically turned to, "Well, Mason is supporting the guy, and it's his company, so sod off." Which is fine, too, because that's all true and it's his right. Just like 2+2 was basically a shill for PokerStars with the "play now" link embedded in the sidebar for so long. So why not links to donate to a political campaign, even if poker was the bottom of the priority list for the candidate?

I don't really care that much, tho' I felt squeamish about it at the time, but I agree that championing this candidate with the idea that he's online poker's savior is rather short-sighted and needlessly controversial. I'm not even remotely surprised that he was eager to use us when he needed us, and that he's ignoring us now. I also wouldn't be surprised if 2+2 and/or MM was helped in some way by it, anyway. That's just business.
Gary Johnson removal? Quote
06-10-2012 , 02:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregorio
frankly, who cares about online poker in the context electing a presedent.
I do. As long as he doesn't become elected in reality, because I would primarily vote democratic. I support the support for GJ, so to say. Can you understand that or do you feel it's hypocritical?
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregorio
2+2=GJ s has never been about driving as much support as we can for online poker in the media as possible. It has been about electing Gary Johnson.
Do you really think Mason would bother if it wasn't about the poker? I'm seeing that as very unlikely. Mason appears to agree on the other issues GJ has as well, I can give you that though. "2+2=GJ" I personally think is about getting the exposure of poker and online legislation in the media, and that it's the primary reason we have GJ involved.

Last edited by plaaynde; 06-10-2012 at 02:44 PM.
Gary Johnson removal? Quote
06-10-2012 , 02:39 PM
I just feel the need to point out one fact. There is no way that Gary Johnson or any other politician would have been actively endorsed if they were not willing to make a statement expressing their support for online poker in the United States.
Gary Johnson removal? Quote
06-10-2012 , 04:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by plaaynde
Do you really think Mason would bother if it wasn't about the poker? I'm seeing that as very unlikely. Mason appears to agree on the other issues GJ has as well, I can give you that though. "2+2=GJ" I personally think is about getting the exposure of poker and online legislation in the media, and that it's the primary reason we have GJ involved.
Mason has posted elsewhere that 2p2 would not endorse a candidate who did not express support for online poker in the United States. However, many politicians have expressed support for online poker, but, afaik, none have been given a free platform to campaign on 2p2.

Mason's/2p2's support of GJ goes far beyond GJ's stance on online poker.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mason Malmuth
You need to understand that the issue is not poker but personal freedom, and that poker is one example of this.

Mason
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mason Malmuth
We use the guidelines set down by the great Milton Friedman as our guidelines. And as for our bottom line, if our government was following Dr. Friedman's advice, we believe that our economy would be in much better shape, and 2+2, like almost every other company out there, would be doing better and thus our bottom line would increase. And as for Governor Johnson, of all the candidates out there, he is definitely the closest, if not almost identical, to the Milton Friedman advice.

Best wishes,
Mason
The message from 2p2 isn't "Support GJ because he supports your right to play online poker," but rather, "Support GJ because he is the best person to be president of the US."

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mason Malmuth
We recommend that everyone here who is interested go to the Johnson2012 website and read up on where Gov Johnson stands on all the issues. We also believe that once this is done, for most who do go and read they will like what they see.

Best wishes,
Mason
Gary Johnson removal? Quote
06-10-2012 , 07:27 PM
Any politician willing to post on the forums would be welcome to do so, and depending on their willingness to support poker, it's also likely they would be given banners. Thus far, only GJ was willing to post here. Given the negative response, it's not much of a surprise that he didn't stay too long.
Gary Johnson removal? Quote
06-10-2012 , 10:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChicagoRy
Sorry to hear that Gary doesn't seem to be doing stuff for poker anymore TE.
He came out for poker and made some public statements and appearances for it. He's clearly still very supportive of the pro-poker position. That has all been good for PPA and the poker community. It's all positive for us, for sure. I am appreciative.

I was simply relaying some current info so no one thinks PPA is not reaching out to the campaign.
Gary Johnson removal? Quote
06-10-2012 , 10:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by plaaynde
I do. As long as he doesn't become elected in reality, because I would primarily vote democratic.
Just wanted to side with plaaynde since gregorio thinks we don't exist. I think voting is stupid and pointless personally, but I give a crap about this one issue, so it will be the main factor in influencing my vote, and it will probably determine if I vote at all (depending upon the availability of a potentially winning candidate supporting ipoker).

I don't want your opinions on my opinion, because I don't care, just wanted to let you know we are out here.
Gary Johnson removal? Quote
06-10-2012 , 11:41 PM
I think it's painfully obvious there are idiots out there, but thanks for the heads up.
Gary Johnson removal? Quote
06-11-2012 , 12:01 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregorio
how the **** is it irrational to hate libertarian ideas. they are horrible. You support libertarian policies? lol

You don't? lol. Libertarianism is a moral philosophy stating that it's wrong to use violence, aggression, coercion against peaceful, non violent, non aggressive people. You learn this ****ing **** in kindergarden. Don't take other kids coloring books. Don't take their crayons. Don't push or slap or hit other kids. Don't spit in their food or drink. Why and when did it become ok for the government to not follow these universal moral principals we all learn in ****ing kindergarden?

What is your stance on the PATRIOT act? The US's constant aggressive intervention in other countries' affairs? The indefinite detention of American citizens without trial? Protest on government grounds or near secret service being illegal? Favoring rich corporations at the expense of individual taxpayers through crony capitalism? The war on drugs? You know who is on the moral side of those issues? Here's a hint, it's not Obama, and it's not Romney.

Are you supportive of any of those? If you answered yes, then you're a sick ****ing person.

People need to wake the **** up and recognize that just because it's the government doing something and not your five year old, doesn't make it moral. Go back to ****ing kindergarden. Learn some ****ing morals.
Gary Johnson removal? Quote
06-11-2012 , 12:26 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mat Sklansky
Any politician willing to post on the forums would be welcome to do so, and depending on their willingness to support poker, it's also likely they would be given banners. Thus far, only GJ was willing to post here. Given the negative response, it's not much of a surprise that he didn't stay too long.


The negative response was more about 2+2's role and strategy in all this. Don't blame the users for running off GJ. Brought it on yourselves imo.

If it was just GJ posting on here and banners that we more appropriate then I would be all for it.
Gary Johnson removal? Quote
06-11-2012 , 12:30 AM
I believe it's possible to agree with much of what you're saying while not being libertarian.
Gary Johnson removal? Quote
06-11-2012 , 12:41 AM
Could it be that the leadership of 2+2 got a little carried away? I forgive them. Could be something of a messiah effect. It may be that they haven't engaged in politics so much before. Now there was GJ, with the right opinions about poker and willingness to come over to 2+2. Other stuff looked good as well. "Let's go for it".
Gary Johnson removal? Quote

      
m