By Buy Ambien

April 5, 2010 7:21 AM | Link to this

ljdkjhxsj veins stat nishad testoverview ceilings isolating jokingly commentators seems hayes

By It's a must to vote YES!

October 30, 2009 8:39 AM | Link to this

Look and see who is spending all the money to oppose Issue 3. Just follow the money. “TruthPAC’s money came mainly from MTR Gaming, Inc., which operates Mountaineer Casino, Racetrack & Resort in Chester, W.Va.”

By Tom

October 28, 2009 9:54 PM | Link to this

All going to proposed Ohio casinos (including Ohioans) will see no return for the money they gambled away. And of those dollars spent, only 33% will return to Ohio; the other 66% going into the casino. To get a $1.0 billion return, a casino would need to get 500 busloads (50 Ohio people each), who would gamble at least $50,00/day for 180 days every year. Is this possible? Do Ohio gamblers have that kind of money? 1500 min. wage jobs; 500 Professional casino jobs ; 2000 Construction jobs for Ohioans and 1000 local service jobs. These are per casino, total is 20,000 jobs. What are the remaining 14,000 jobs? Casino Income: (500 buses taking 50 Ohioans each for 350 days per year, each losing $100 is $750 million. 30% tax on this is: $250 million, from Ohioans, who might have bought goods and services in Ohio. Finally, since Issue 3 is a Constitutional Amendment, no changes, without another CA.

By jacob

October 24, 2009 3:24 PM | Link to this

“I’m voting no because gambling will only bring more crime and poverty.” ……This is absolutely NOT true. Look at the city of Detroit. The streets are paved with gold and there are no murders or crime there. Why, you ask? Because of CASINOS. They’ve got three of them within the city, that’s why it’s so posh and safe there.

By automan

October 24, 2009 2:19 PM | Link to this

Has anyone here heard of video slots? They are already in Ohio. All you do is put the money you want to gable with on a smart card, then go to the slot machine you want to play and bet anything from the min to thew max bet then spin the wheel. If you win you cash out you smart card by have the money put on a voucher or something like a home made check. Then you take it to another location and pay a fee to get it cashed. A lot of those place will let you win a lot when you are new but let you win less after you have been playing awhile. They don’t operate under many laws if any at all. For example some of them will have drawings but only certain people can have tickets for the drawing or some are allowed to have more tickets that others. Making it harder for some to win. I also know one place that had a big drawing and they had posted the drawing time but told a few people to be there earlier and started the drawing 2 hours early. There was a lot of people that was mad. At least with this bill the playing field win be the same for everyone and there will be someone watching over the casinos. Keep in mind that there are a lot of those all over ohio.

By The truth will set you free!

October 23, 2009 3:13 PM | Link to this

“I’m voting no because gambling will only bring more crime and poverty.” … … If you people actually believe this, PLEASE do some research before you vote. This is absolutely NOT true. The communities in Indiana that have casinos are thriving and law enforcement agencies there SUPPORT casinos! Oh yeah… law enforcement in Ohio wants them, too!!!

By Don't tell me I can't gamble...

October 23, 2009 3:07 PM | Link to this

Kudos to the DDN for updating the story and reporting where the “Anti-Issue 3” money is coming from… . You know all those TV commercials telling you that casinos kill jobs and hurt the state? They are being paid for by people who own casinos in neighboring states!!! … Issue 3 isn’t perfect but I’m voting for it. We need the revenue here NOW. And by the way, Issue 3 will NOT prevent churches from raising money through gambling.

By No to Gambling

October 23, 2009 11:16 AM | Link to this

I’m voting no because gambling will only bring more crime and poverty. It will encourage addictive behaviors and take away money from those that really need it such as kids. There are people out there who would rather gamble than feed their own kids. No way. I’m doing my part to keep this from coming to Ohio. It’s just not needed.

By very smart

October 22, 2009 11:23 PM | Link to this

In a recent provisonal Ballot I voted this crock of Bull$hit down. I am not stupid enough to think that Ohio and Kids come out on top with casinos. In matter of fact most of them will lose, much like most of the people that come home loosers from the casinos thata left there money with these rip offs.

By dawn

October 22, 2009 10:24 PM | Link to this

Vote this down!!! What kind of jobs will this bring after the construction ends? Not very high paying ones, regardless of what’s being said. If this passes, not only will the rich get richer, eventually we will have Gambler’s Anon in OH too. ever see the billboards traveling thru WV? It’s not like we don’t have options to go and gamble. All the talk of the money going o the schools etc. in other states. i have read no research that shows schools or any other group have benefitted from the money except the fat cats whose money built it.

By To lazy to drive to the boats

October 22, 2009 9:55 PM | Link to this

Issue 3 will pass by about 60-40. Common sense tells Ohioans they’ve far too long sent countless millions to neighboring states and got nothing in return. If there are indeed issues with gambling, lets at least get some tax money out of it and ease the load on property owners.

By dontbstupid

October 22, 2009 8:52 PM | Link to this

if casinos are so great…how come dayton isnt getting one….dont we need jobs here…matter of fact..put one in every city in ohio..dont they sell ohio lottery tickets in every city….

By Plain Truth

October 22, 2009 7:31 PM | Link to this

I have already voted No on this issue that feeds off the poor to keep the rich, rich. There is always a ploy of kids and school to rip the people of this state off for more money that will not see all the money promised by politicians and greedy A$$ casino operators!!

By mdizzie

October 22, 2009 6:40 PM | Link to this

The rich will always throw money at things that can bring them more money. That’s how rich people stay rich. If we put those millions into out school system, we wouldn’t be in hot water, like we are now. Even with this issue passed, churches will still have their bingo nights, don’t fret church bingo goers. I don’t gamble, but I don’t want to impede on anyone who has the means to gamble, and who wants to gamble. Let the casinos come, we get tax money back, and its not cost effective to ship and move employees out of state of Ohio to work in the casinos. Its just not feasible, people.

By IloveMonteCarlo

October 22, 2009 6:13 PM | Link to this

if this passes say goodbye to gambling at fish frys, festivals, say goodbye to Bingo halls etc,etc Too much control for fat cats that want to gank our money, and it’s a constitutional ammendment surely there is an easier way to accomplish this gambling issue without eliminating monte carlo nights and gambling at festivals and more importantly without changing the blody state constitution

By IloveMonteCarlo

October 22, 2009 6:12 PM | Link to this

if this passes say goodbye to gambling at fish frys festivals, say goodbye to Bingo halls etc,etc Too much control for fat cats that want to gank our money, and it’s a constitutional ammendment surely there is an easier way toaccomplish this gambling issue without eliminating monte carlo nights ad gambling at festivals and more importantly without canging the blody state constitution

By A is A

October 22, 2009 5:54 PM | Link to this

The primary reason I’m against Issue 3 is that it’s an amendment to the Ohio Constitution. The Constitution should be about high principles, not relatively minor particulars. The Constitution details the Rights of the people and constraints on the government, not implementation of those principles. The laws are what implements the principles listed in the Constitution. To put both Issues 2 and 3 (and to a lesser extent, Issue 1) in the Constitution is a perversion of what the constitution is supposed to be about. Now, if Issue 3 was a regular ballot initiative directing the legislature to implement casinos, I’d vote for it in a New York minute.

By greg

October 22, 2009 5:01 PM | Link to this

It’s funny both sides are backed by Casino money from out of state, just different ones trying to grease the right palms in Ohio to get the best deal for them. I’m sure Stricknine will get his cut.

By This is PART of the story...

October 22, 2009 4:33 PM | Link to this

This article mentions who backs the pro-Issue 3 side…but does NOT mention WHO is backing TruthPac!?!? Hmmm… is this bias from the DDN or simply sloppy reporting? I suggest that the DDN update the story and mention the out-of-state casino owners funneling money to the anti-Issue 3 side.

By i don't care

October 22, 2009 4:23 PM | Link to this

who cares they ain’t givin me any dang money