Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="OzExorcist, post: 1739797, member: 23910"] Cute edit. One big difference though - anyone who wants to change the regulatory environment with relation to alcohol is fighting [B]against[/B] the status quo. It's always easier to leave things how they are and there's already a massive regulatory and enforcement system built around alcohol. We're on the wrong side of the status quo with poker. While in general I believe that people can and do change their minds on issues you've hit the nail on the head - the opposition on this issue is largely made up of the kind of people you've described. Their position is a moral and emotional one which is why I've been saying all along that you'll never change their minds with emotional arguments because the ones on our side simply aren't strong enough. What about the undecided, I hear you ask? Sure you'll convince some with an emotional argument about handicapped people that don't get to engage in their favourite hobby any more. But for every one you convince you'll lose [I]dozens[/I] more when the opposition counters with their own emotional arguments which, as we've discussed before, are a slam dunk. Hungry kid beats a hobby every day of the week. Give those same people an alternative though, something that acknowledges the opposition's views but then presents a different set of positives and maybe you've got a chance. Suddenly undecided people are weighing hungry kid against jobs for Americans, revenue in a time of massive national debt and a safer, more supportive environment for those that happen to be problem gamblers. Hungry kid still wins for some people but a lot more will take our side than if you had've just taken the emotional line. [/QUOTE]

Verification

Search

Reply to thread

About CardsChat

Our Community

Our Site

Follow us