U.S. Senate
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Somebody
80%
20%
Governor
See Full Big Line
(D) Phil Weiser
(D) Joe Neguse
(D) Jena Griswold
60%
60%
40%↓
Att. General
See Full Big Line
(D) M. Dougherty
(D) Alexis King
(D) Brian Mason
40%
40%
30%
Sec. of State
See Full Big Line
(D) A. Gonzalez
(D) George Stern
(R) Sheri Davis
50%↑
40%
30%
State Treasurer
See Full Big Line
(D) Brianna Titone
(R) Kevin Grantham
(D) Jerry DiTullio
60%
30%
20%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Hurd*
(D) Somebody
80%
40%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert*
(D) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank*
(D) Somebody
80%
20%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(R) Gabe Evans*
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(D) Joe Salazar
50%
40%
40%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
October 03, 2008 04:59 PM UTC
14 Comments
Ever played blackjack? The way that the betting is set up now it is virtually impossible to win that game in Blackhawk.
If they raise the stakes, players might actually stand a chance.
Do you really think the casinos will change the rules to make it possible for you to win more at blackjack with higher bet maximums.
You might “win” more but I guarantee you there will be less money in your bank account at the end of every month you go to gamble. The reason the casinos want Amendment 50 is not because they love education, it’s because they want to make more money, and from your answer it looks like you are one of the ones they’ll be making the money off of.
But I know how to play Blackjack, and you cannot possibly win with $5 max bets.
If they do change the limits, it will be possible to win more, that is how you play the game.
I think you might have a better chance of reaching people if you take the position Car 31 took by saying that this is a special interest amendment, and not worthy of the taxpayers’ votes. Get more money for higher education some other way, or benefit more than one interest group.
I’m voting No on this amendment BTW.
Ever played the NYSE? The way that the investing is set up now it is virtually impossible to win that game.
If they raise your ability to leverage your positions with synthetic derivatives, players might actually stand a chance.
*** *** ***
😉 Come on redstate your position is … zzzzzzzzzzzz
this amendment is MEGA zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
last time I went to the lodge I played blackjack for 6 hours and ended up with $ 20 more than I started with. I hope they do raise the stakes.
I have won more gambling than I have lost. That includes gambling in Vegas, Monte Carlo, Central City, Paris and Bucharest. I love to play blackjack, and you can win money if you are disciplined. I never spend more than I have either. If I do well at a smaller table I move to a higher stakes table, and then maybe back to cool off.
Way to show the personal responsibility …
I love Dems with money and a focus on something other then politics. They somehow start talking like Libertarian-Republicans.
Plus you get to pay many more taxes. Ye-haw!
You would be correct in saying that recreational players who may have a big win or a series of big wins would pay taxes.
You can, however file a series of forms with the IRS declaring yourself a professional. Essentially, you are like an S Corp, and you get to write off your losses and pay a lower tax rate than you would if you were a recreational player.
like saying, up is not down
…appropriating MORE money to community colleges (beyond what’s generated by gaming)? If not, there doesn’t seem to be any “jeopardy” to colleges from Amend. 50.
And you need to quit sticking your nose in other adults’ business.
DO you honestly believe that raising the stakes, drawing more people and generating more tax dollars is going to lead to Gilpin County armageddon?
Quit being a nanny. I’m going to gamble if I want to (which is not often) with or without your permission.
If someone chooses to gamble his/her money, that’s their decision. We’re (mostly) adults here.
If raising the stakes, which could feasibly attract more gamblers who are willing to bet more money, that helps the economy. Community colleges can get more money out of the deal? Bonus.
I think they do need to be raised. What I disagree with is the casino owners doing an end run around the legislature.
Or continue to bet $5 if you’re more comfortable.