« Amazing | Home | The other gambling dichotomy »

Thu Jul 3, 11:53 AM Pacific

Playing to win versus playing for the thrill

I live in Las Vegas so it shouldn't be a surprise that I've got nothing against gambling or those who gamble.

My game is poker, which I've played for years, and when I play, I play to win. I haven't played much over the last year or so, mostly because I've been more interested in the presidential campaign.

But I did find this article in Time about the Obama and McCain's gambling habits to be very interesting.

Obama, predictably, is a poker player in home games. McCain, as I've written about it in the past, is a craps player in casinos.

(Definitely check out my previous post, by the way, it's about how McCain played craps in 14-hour stints with gambling buddy who is now a lobbyist who helped get McCain to switch positions on the biggest land swap in Arizona history -- which benefited one of McCain's top contributors.)

Another way of putting this is that Obama is playing a game that he can beat over the long-run. (This is even easier because there is no house fee in home games.) McCain, on the other hand, is indulging in a game in which he has no hopes of winning.

Time relates an interesting story about McCain:

In the heat of the GOP primary fight last spring, he announced on a visit to the Vegas Strip that he was going to the casino floor. When his aides stopped him, fearing a public relations disaster, McCain suggested that they ask the casino to take a craps table to a private room, a high-roller privilege McCain had indulged in before. His aides, with alarm bells ringing, refused again, according to two accounts of the discussion.

I was pretty amazed to learn that he'd actually been given a private room in Vegas. I don't know exactly how much you have to play to get one of those, but I do know that I've seen people out on the regular floor playing blackjack for over $1,000 per hand. So unless he was given a room on the basis of of being a senator, he was putting some serious money into play.

Again, as I noted at the outset, I think gambling is a fine recreational activity. I also think it does tell you something about the kind of presidents they will be that Barack chose to play a game at which he knew that he could (and apparently did) while McCain chose a game at which he knew that he would lose (while having fun).

I think at this point in our history, I'd prefer the winner to be president.

Home Page | Archives

All rights reserved. Not affiliated with any political campaign or candidate.