Poker is a very small niche issue. When I say support, I mean he won't vote to outlaw poker and would almost certainly veto any law that would at the Federal level. I kind of doubt he cares about poker one way or another.

They spent several minutes last night on The Daily Show highlighting Sheldon's influence over potential Republican candidates and lampooning the influence an old casino mogul cruising around in a scooter can have on national politics.

Hopefully there's more of a general pushback against Sheldon generally, due to the vast amounts of $$ he's throwing around and the visible influence this (very) old man wields.

If anyone is at a campaign stop by the politicians behind these bills, I'd put them on the spot by asking them who wrote the bills.

Is it just me, or does anyone else see a resemblance between Adelson and the evil villains in the James Bond movies? Even his riding around on a scooter fits the mold.

More like an evil villain in an Austin Powers movie:

Robert Reich talks about Adelson in a column printed in my local paper today. I'm going to use that hook to do a letter to the editor and point out that Adelson is behind a online gambling ban bill cosponsored by my representative.

Adelson can afford the stiff price to get access to the full copy of this research paper. I doubt he will bother though as it shows that access to online gambling does not cause problem gambling!

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/...5#.Uz0oCqhdXrA

Here's the presentation by the authors at the 2013 Canadian Gaming Summit.

Thank you for that link. I especially liked the way that they cite the availability of 1c/2c poker as potentially protective in terms of problem gambling - given that problem gambling is weighted to financial harm. Letting people participate but at far lower, indeed trivial, stakes should be much more in the campaign.

if Adelson wants to prevent 1c/2c poker then when will he deal it to let us have it as a protection from his higher stake games?

This is pretty huge IMO and probably deserves its own thread. This study should go to the top of our talking points list.

If Sheldon represents any villain it for sure is emperor palpatine.

The authors also state that the convenient access of online gambling, which is usually stated as a danger (casinos "invading" our homes), may actually be protective. I hadn't considered this before but it makes sense. If someone travels x number of hours to a casino then they're likely to ensure they get enough gamble in to make the trip worth it.

Maybe this is the real reason Adelson wants to stop iGaming. If more studies like this appear then before long there will be bills before Congress to shut down Adelson's predatory land-based casinos.

Angry Birds Is the Gateway Game to Online Gambling Addiction, New Adelson Ad Warns

I cover the same issue - that the Uk proves Adelson is wrong in this guest appearance on PokerXanadu's site. Apologies if this is bad etiquette but I can't get the graphs I spent too much time on in a post..Warning a bit TLR but the graphs are nice...

http://pokerxanadu.com/adelson-case/

Someone needs to respond with a commercial incorporating these FACTS:

Any idea on the timing when the federal online gambling bill would be voted on?

It may never be voted on, it still has to make it through committee first. That looks like a long shot at this point, but things are always changing.

I am writing a letter to my congressman, Jason Chaffetz. I believe that Sheldon Adelson at one point supported online poker and was going to have a partnership with one of the sites. I cannot find anything about it. Can someone refresh my memory on what that site was and some of the particulars.

Venetian Interactive itself held a license from Alderney for online gambling.

Sharpen your Google skills, there is a nice news article about it from 2003, all about how regulation makes it safe:

"The company hasn't yet determined when it will launch the as-yet unnamed site but expects to finalize operational plans within the next several months, said David Friedman, assistant to the board chairman of Las Vegas Sands Inc., The Venetian's parent company.

"An Internet gaming license in Alderney provides Venetian Interactive with some of the highest regulatory standards and controls in the industry, which supports our goal of providing a user-friendly gaming and entertainment experience in a totally secure and trusted environment," Richard Depew, chief executive officer of Venetian Interactive, said in a statement.

The company decided to apply for a license with Alderney regulators because the island has developed stringent regulations that are in harmony with federal and Nevada laws relating to Internet gambling, Venetian spokesman Kurt Ouchida said"

...

The Venetian is controlled by businessman Sheldon Adelson.

Adelson's Venetian Interactive is only the second major Las Vegas company to introduce an Internet casino.

...

Last fall, MGM MIRAGE, introduced an Isle of Man-based Internet gambling site for U.K . and European bettors ..."


http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2003...ernet-gamblin/

Clearly, something has changed the Venetian's mind on the topic since then.

Opinion Piece on CNN:

For Adelson, Koch brothers, buying a politician is good business

http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/07/opinio...tml?hpt=hp_bn7

"But the problem's not just that Adelson is writing blank checks to the candidates of his choosing. The problem is that Adelson and other super-wealthy Republican donors are directing their largesse to buy elected officials who support policies that benefit their bottom lines at the expense of middle-class American families."

Thank you.

Found this in an SEC financial filing from ~2004...

This notes a figure at this time of "$1.3 million in development costs of an Internet gaming site."

Nice find. Could be used to show Adelson is a hypocrite or he might just claim that he used that investment to do research which helped him understand the social cost of internet gambling. Could be something. Could be nothing.

Thanks and agreed.

I think it's absolutely nothing at this point.

Just a very minor footnote that's easily defensible, just like you said.

In politics, all such items are useful.