Among the campaign posters blanketing the roadsides are a multitude of small signs urging “Vote Yes on 1.”

That’s all they say, but for voters needing more information, the signs list a website address, www.takechargemaine.org. Not surprisingly, the site belongs to the entrepreneurs behind Question 1, who hope to win voter approval for a casino in Oxford County.

We can understand why a political consultant might consider “Vote Yes on 1” to be a convincing message ”“ no matter what the issue. Question 1 is the ballot position allotted to citizens’ initiative and people’s veto proposals ”“ causes pursued by true believers.

Lately, Question 1 has  been on a winning streak. Last June, voters killed an expanded sales tax law that struck many as confusing and unfair. A year ago, Question 1 revoked the rights of gay couples to marry. In 2008, Question 1 vetoed a beverage tax enacted to fund Dirigo Health.

Among Question 1 defeats in recent years were property tax reform in 2004, the Taxpayer Bill of Rights in 2006, and a plan for an Indian casino in Washington County in 2007. (An Oxford County casino plan was rejected in 2008, but that was Question 2.)

This list of questions since 2004 shows that there may be a constituency for a generic “Vote Yes on 1” campaign. But based on this newspaper’s editorial positions over the past six years, we’d have to say that a more sensible overall stance would be “Vote No on 1.”

Neither slogan is a sensible approach to the serious question of whether to expand gambling in Maine. For more detailed arguments visit the advocates’ website and check out CasinosNo, an organization that is opposed.