My favorite headline this week was by the Connecticut Mirror: "Quinnipiac poll: Pot does better than Malloy, casinos."

The story was about the convergence of new polling that shows a negative post-election job rating for Gov. Dannel Malloy, strong public support in Connecticut for personal use of marijuana and a negative reaction to the expansion of casino gambling.

I don't know what the governor plans to do about his negatives.

But I think the state's two casino-running tribes can make a strong argument to convince the public that at least one more casino, somewhere between Hartford and the new MGM casino planned for Springfield, is a good idea.

First of all, it is important to remember that this is very different than a discussion about whether Connecticut should allow casinos in the first place. That's history.

The fact of the matter is that we have two of the largest casinos in the world, and whatever negatives might accompany that, such as problem gambling or more embezzlement arrests, are already with us.

I don't think you could make a convincing argument that people who are inclined to compulsively gamble can't make their way to the enormous casinos already here.

Second, those existing casinos employ thousands of people who depend on those gambling-related jobs to feed their families and pay the rent. The casinos also generate hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue to the state that help offset taxes for the rest of us.

Instead of more gambling, maybe Connecticut residents need to think of it as probably a similar amount of gambling, just with some of it in a different location, more convenient to those who might otherwise drive to Massachusetts.

And remember, this is war.

The gambling giants, MGM and Steve Wynn, who are signed up to start building casinos in Massachusetts, aim to lure Connecticut gamblers over the state line. They are not shy about saying that.

Wynn gloated in one news story that he would, more or less, eat the Mohegans' lunch.

Come on, everyone. That's not just Mohegan Indian profits the wizard of Vegas is promising to take away. It's Connecticut revenue and jobs. Can't we fight back?

This is a no brainer, too, for Connecticut lawmakers.

The existing deals with the tribes, which date back more than 20 years, essentially preclude any new casinos by other operators. So the licensee for a new casino has already been determined.

And lawmakers need not worry whether it makes economic sense.

If the tribes are willing to build a third casino, a satellite for their existing resorts, and take that business risk, so be it. It's up to them to find financing.

Ultimately, residents of any town chosen for a new casino will need to have a say. And prickly negotiations over the state's share of a new casino's revenue still need to take place.

So far, the pace of developing specific plans for Connecticut residents to consider has been too slow. If this has any chance of passing this session of the legislature, a lot of things need to happen quickly.

Hopefully, the coattail reachers can be thwarted, too. This can't be about slot machines in the pari-mutuels, which would violate the long-standing compacts with the tribes.

It's also not about putting keno in restaurants and bars, which the public is never going to be made to like.

Some brave, forward-thinking legislators have stepped up to help fight the war to save Connecticut casino gambling jobs and gambling revenue. Let's cheer them on.

This is the opinion of David Collins

d.collins@theday.com

Twitter: @DavidCollinsct