Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

darkwing42 t1_j0xkgly wrote

Fucking Draftkings tried to sneak their online gambling into a California proposition last election wording it like its supposed to be all about Native American casinos. So glad their shitty backdoor attempt failed spectacularly

131

CarmenxXxWaldo t1_j0yp8im wrote

It's about to go live in Ohio. If my standing in a convenience store line for years when I smoked is an indicator, there are a shit ton of degenerate gamblers in Ohio already so it's gonna be fun.

14

queekbreadmaker t1_j0ysub9 wrote

Poor people in Ohio and a constant need to drop 80 dollars a week on gambling and scratch offs, can't find a more lucrative clientele for these vultures

6

AlexHimself t1_j0ziy2a wrote

Eh sneak? They & others just clearly wanted to legalize online gambling.

What's F'd is the greedy Indian Casinos and random horse track crap. The Indian Casinos essentially have a monopoly on gambling in CA except for horse races and poker rooms and they wanted to gain more share and prevent others, so they released their own competing prop that allowed dice games and things (craps, etc.), in-person sports betting at horse tracks (wtf?), AND allowed them to enforce laws and easily sue poker-rooms whether or not they were frivolous...essentially allowing SLAP suits.

Like it was so obvious they cut a deal with the horse tracks to support their bill with that weird horse race add-in AND the change to the legal system to allow their enforcement instead of just the government.

5

comped t1_j10mycg wrote

Very similar in Florida - but DeSantis just took a ton of money in campaign funds from Vegas casinos, so I suppose one of the things he might do before he tries to run for president is legalize commercial gambling here.

This time, unlike previously, Disney doesn't have enough money to fight this.

1

happyscrappy t1_j1012bh wrote

The other prop did more of that. Draftkings instead had ads running saying that their prop would benefit tribes that don't have casinos ("non-gaming tribes") more than the other proposition.

Which is true I suppose. But it didn't have a lot of money for that. Or for the homeless (as they claimed). It was really mostly for them.

1

[deleted] t1_j0z9aoa wrote

[removed]

−5

AlexHimself t1_j0zj3h3 wrote

You're getting downvoted but you're right. The Indian prop also allowed them to enforce gambling laws instead of the government...basically a license to bury poker rooms in frivolous legal challenges.

2

Scottla94 t1_j0zglax wrote

That's funny the native American casino in Connecticut actually works with draftkings their banners are everywhere

1

comped t1_j10n1hw wrote

Mohegans are much more commercially minded - they're opening up casinos outside the US now.

0

Scottla94 t1_j164oiy wrote

I was talking about foxwoods I've never been to mohegan sun

1