|
Upstate New York is literally Vermont with angrier people
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 23:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 17:33 |
|
|
MA is weird; most recent thing I could find is a 7-10 Sept WBUR poll of 506 voters coming our 50-45 for legal weed (MoE 4%) so looking like a real nail biter: http://www.wbur.org/politicker/2016/09/13/wbur-ballot-question-poll CA and NV I'm pretty confident on, moderate on Maine. I'd given up on AZ, but an August pop of 700+ has 50-40 in favor so idk: http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/09/07/poll-half-want-see-marijuana-legalized-arizona/89778892/ MO and MI missed their wickets this go-round? And VT and RI are still on the precipice of becoming the first states to legalize legislatively without the voters. Honestly anything short of getting totally skunked (  ) I'd count as a 2016 victory, and all the more so if Hillary wins and makes at least vague motions to rescheduling. A clean sweep of five legal states isn't impossible, and at least a couple medical should win. Overall even incremental progress is a huge win; hell, anything short of ATF rapelling into Portland weed boutiques is a big-picture win even if zero progress is made from now until 2020.Yet again, a reminder that even just five years ago SA had 100+ page threads insisting that not a single state would be able to legalize without getting stormed by the Feds anytime in our lifetime, yet here we are. TapTheForwardAssist has issued a correction as of 03:49 on Sep 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 03:40
|
|
|
Texas prosecutors are declining to pursue mickey mouse weed cases because they can't find friendly jurors: http://www.mystatesman.com/news/news/are-big-texas-cities-going-easier-on-pot/nsQMP/ in case you were wondering if legalization was inevitable
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 04:06
|
|
|
Yeah, saw that recently; basically Texas leaning towards de facto decrim for "respectable" people, presumably while still stomping the poor and/or minorities. I did enjoy the line: "we expect law enforcement and prosecutors to use discretion and put the resources in the best place,” said state Rep. Bryan Hughes, R-Mineola." It seems some of the folks are avoiding charges through diversion and all that. At what point do even drug diversion folks roll their eyes? Purely anecdotal, but in the military I knew a couple guys sent to AA for getting caught drunk underage or acting up, that had AA tell them "authorities say you have to attend X months, but honestly you're not an alcoholic you're just a dumbass."
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 05:53
|
|
|
Some words from Nevada Democratic U.S. Senate hopeful Catherine Cortez Masto, emphasis mine:quote:Cortez Masto also came out against a ballot initiative to legalize recreational marijuana, which will appear on the November ballot here in Nevada, a subject she had previously remained mum about. The former attorney general said that she believes that recreational marijuana will happen at some point in the future in Nevada, however, she expressed concerns about the state barely having the necessary infrastructure in place to regulate medical marijuana, let alone recreational marijuana. "Barely having the necessary infrastructure to regulate medical marijuana", maybe because lawmakers dragged their feet on that one for fifteen years. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 19:32
|
|
|
Yeah, it's been kinda funny to see the scramble in states where medical had been fumbled. MA just made medical easier by allowing prices to be advertised, dispensaries to deliver to patients, and nurse practitioners to prescribe. All in hopes from the Baker administration that recreational will fail if they actually make it easier for sick people to get what they need. But uh, recreational is coming either by vote or through Maine. Nice try, though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 20:08
|
|
|
The LA Times just endorsed the big weed http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-proposition-64-20160918-snap-story.html
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2016 02:02
|
|
|
Maine and Massachusetts are the real prize for 2016. Even if only one passes it still puts tremendous pressure on other states in the region. If MA or ME legalize (preferably both) the rest can either follow suit or lose out on the gold rush since every state in New England is at most a couple hours drive from the others and all have decriminalized except New Hampshire who's governor is a piece of poo poo and is the only person standing in the way of progress. California is gonna pass this year, its already de facto legal and the state desperately needs the tax revenue. Nevada would just be the cherry on top. Arizona would be a pleasant surprise but it's a long shot given the decrepit cesspool that is the voter base.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2016 18:57
|
|
|
The French Army! posted:Maine and Massachusetts are the real prize for 2016. Even if only one passes it still puts tremendous pressure on other states in the region. Also worthy of note on NH is the fact that the gov is out this term, so their replacement will instantly be in hot water should ME or MA pass
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2016 19:58
|
|
|
The French Army! posted:Maine and Massachusetts are the real prize for 2016. Even if only one passes it still puts tremendous pressure on other states in the region. I think it's quite likely it goes 4/5 and passes everywhere except AZ. 5/5 is even possible, though an uphill battle. So, if MA and ME pass it, RI and VT aren't far behind, presumably. What about Connecticut, though?
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2016 21:03
|
|
|
Tough to say, really. A year of rec cannabis in MA might change their views, but right now it doesn't look too likely
GonadTheBallbarian has issued a correction as of 14:57 on Sep 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
It's super fuckin cool that all those measures are looking good, northeast will be amazing. Like, we have insane tourism here in CO from weed (my wife works at a dispensary and a couple times a week the weed tour bus comes through with 30+ blazed tourists) and the surrounding states are hyper-jealous and i think the governor of Wyoming threatened to sue Colorado to make us "pay for the policing" or something? lol as if they don't turn a profit on a weed case. Anyways, point being that there are tons of interstate jealousy issues and our weed is honestly 2-4 hours from a state border, if not a plane ticket and a couple days off. i can't imagine the northeast politics meltdowns when a couple states are making mad weed bucks from people on a 45 minute jaunt, it should be fun to watch.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2016 11:37
|
|
|
Jonny 290 posted:It's super fuckin cool that all those measures are looking good, northeast will be amazing. Like, we have insane tourism here in CO from weed (my wife works at a dispensary and a couple times a week the weed tour bus comes through with 30+ blazed tourists) and the surrounding states are hyper-jealous and i think the governor of Wyoming threatened to sue Colorado to make us "pay for the policing" or something? lol as if they don't turn a profit on a weed case. I kinda want ME and MA to pass because the apoplectic fits that'd happen in NH would be hilarious to watch
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2016 15:02
|
|
|
GonadTheBallbarian posted:MA split 50-45 in favor/oppose recreational 4.4% MOE
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2016 15:11
|
|
|
computer parts posted:4.4% MOE shutup it's going to pass alright!!!
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2016 15:20
|
|
|
computer parts posted:4.4% MOE You're aware of how MoE actually works, right?
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2016 15:36
|
|
|
it means the polling answer you like loses all those percentage points and the one you don't like gains them
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2016 15:41
|
|
|
Karl Barks posted:it means the polling answer you like loses all those percentage points and the one you don't like gains them  yeah. just seems to be a monthly conversation in C-SPAM. ~probability densitiesss~
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2016 15:42
|
|
|
GonadTheBallbarian posted:You're aware of how MoE actually works, right? It means any given result can be +/- the MOE of that number so with a 4% MOE, you'd have to have at least 8 points between them to be statistically significant
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2016 16:44
|
|
|
But every number within that MoE is not equally likely. The farther you get from the statistic given the less likely it is to be that number.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2016 16:59
|
|
|
Jonny 290 posted:and i think the governor of Wyoming threatened to sue Colorado to make us "pay for the policing" or something? lol as if they don't turn a profit on a weed case. Nebraska and Oklahoma tried suing CO directly, while WY declined to join the suit but was considering suing the Feds for not smacking CO down. If MA and ME both go, VT and RI should go quick via legislature, and that'd be four out of the six states of New England. Will CT be the last holdout, or is Stamford going to become the primary supplier for the whole greater NYC?
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2016 17:11
|
|
|
the mass legislature is pooping their pants because the MA ballot question basically pre-wrote any bill and left nothing to the legislature. which is good because the MA legislature is really loving bad. the medicinal marijuana roll out has been a complete disaster. so I'm hoping this will influence, RI, CT, VT, and NH, because as it's written it's better for individuals. the ohio bill, from what I recall, was basically written for the giant weed farm corporations. edit: yeah here's an article about it: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-great-ohio-weed-war-20151023
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2016 17:22
|
|
|
computer parts posted:It means any given result can be +/- the MOE of that number Not quite. It's the maximum difference of potential outcomes within a set confidence interval, typically 90, 95, or 99%. Inside that margin, potential outcomes aren't spread equally, but along a probability density curve, with a falloff of varying slopes depending on how big/small the sample size is. Most of the time, it's a normal-looking bell-like curve, but over a long enough timeline that can change a bit as attitudes change. This is a good primer on it.  If the poll was conducted hundreds of other times, X% of those results would fall in that range for each answer. However, the distribution of possible results won't be even across that range. It's not accurate to say that a "no" vote is "just as likely" or the results aren't indicative of a "yes" vote being ahead, instead, it's that a "yes" vote has more probable winning outcomes than a "no" does according to that poll (as the two curves only overlap with a smallish area). The story would be different were the numbers farther apart or the sample size bigger, but given the aggregates of all the other polls, MA will be close, but the edge is to a "yes" vote winning a simple majority. e. Actually, a good example of this playing out was overexuberant Bernie fans getting encouraged when he was pulling within MoE on a lot of polls. Despite him outkicking his coverage a bit, mere entry into that range didn't increase his odds of winning contests appreciably. The distribution of probabilities having him winning in those states played out just as statisticians would have expected them to. GonadTheBallbarian has issued a correction as of 17:42 on Sep 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2016 17:30
|
|
|
I just got the state voter guide for Massachusetts, and the No arguments for Question 4 are a real doozy. Among their objections: - legalizing marijuana (actually, their blurb uses "pot" here, which amuses me for some reason) will make the opioid epidemic worse - people will be able to home grow, which they treat as self-evidently bad - weed will be sold next to preschools - and my favorite, that legalization of edibles will lead to "accidental overdose by kids and pets" Lord Hydronium has issued a correction as of 23:15 on Sep 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 23:13
|
|
|
Yeah I got Real Mad reading that, but apparently the state doesn't provide the arguments, just the biggest organizations on either side. Seems enormously hosed up, because they have no obligation to be truthful
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 23:17
|
|
|
Yeah, it kind of amazes me that that's the best the no side could do. When we had it in the ballot in California in 2008, they at least had the decency to make their arguments about lack of regulation rather than pot-smoking toddlers.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 23:24
|
|
|
quote:- and my favorite, that legalization of edibles will lead to "accidental overdose by kids and pets" they fed some dogs a bunch of pot brownies to come to this conclusion
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 01:39
|
|
|
Lord Hydronium posted:Yeah, it kind of amazes me that that's the best the no side could do. When we had it in the ballot in California in 2008, they at least had the decency to make their arguments about lack of regulation rather than pot-smoking toddlers. The problem facing the no side is now people know what regulation looks like and they see that its working in the states that have tried it. In the face of the evidence and the tide of rapidly changing public opinion all they have left is intellectual dishonesty and scare tactics. Legalization advocates in New England need call these people out and publicly debunk their claim that legalization of marijuana will add to the heroin epidemic. The only reason pot could possibly be considered a gateway drug is because you have to buy it from drug dealers. Moving marijuana sales to a legal forum will prevent many people who may be at risk for substance abuse from ever being exposed to opiates at all outside a clinical setting. And if their argument is that legally available intoxicants make people want to move on to other harder substances than alcohol is truly the ultimate gateway drug and it should be banned immediately. When you put it in these terms any reasonable person will agree that there is no conceivable way that legal pot will add to the opiate epidemic and may even help fight it to some extent. I should move to Maine and cast another yes vote. fat bossy gerbil has issued a correction as of 04:59 on Sep 23, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 04:43
|
|
|
somebody did a survey of californians' opinions on four important propositions - funding for schools, extending a tax on rich people, jacking up the cigarette tax, and legalizing marijuana http://capitolweekly.net/survey-support-tax-tobacco-school/ the 60-36 margin for the weed referendum is the largest yes margin of the three (47-43, 54-38, 59-36), and more voters rated the weed proposition as 'very important' than any of the other three - but unlike the other referenda, the no voters were the ones more likely to consider the ballot measure very important quote:Proposition 64. A majority of likely voters (60%) would vote yes on this measure to legalize marijuana use under state law by adults 21 and older and tax sales and cultivation (36% no). Most Democratic (65%) and independent (64%) likely voters support the proposition. Republicans are divided (46% yes, 52% no). Just over half of Latinos would vote yes, while support among whites and other racial/ethnic groups is slightly higher. Support is higher among those 18 to 34 years old (74%) than among older voters (59% 35–54, 54% 55 and older). Half of likely voters (50%) say the outcome on Proposition 64 is very important. Those who would vote yes are much less likely to say the outcome is very important than those who would vote no (46% to 59%). i had seen a poll months ago where latinos were noticeably less likely to vote yes than whites, and this one claims 'just over half' for latinos and 'slightly higher' for other groups, but you'd think a 60% total margin would require more than 'slightly higher' numbers for non-latinos if they're barely over 50%. whatever here's the full polling release, which includes presidential numbers (47-31 clinton), massive support for allowing undocumented immigrants to say (80-18; even trump voters go 52-45), a 34-64 negative response to building a wall along the entire border with mexico (trump supporters 82% in favor, clinton supporters 92% against), and other stuff, including a relatively close margin in the senate race, where harris who is overwhelmingly favored to win 'only' leads by 7. 32% harris, 25 sanchez, 19 undecided, and 24% volunteering that they wouldn't vote for either - presumably mostly republicans who are pissed that they don't get an R to vote for. this severely undercuts the idea that sanchez, the more conservative democrat, could win on the backs of republican voters http://ppic.org/content/pubs/survey/S_916MBS.pdf
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 21:46
|
|
|
One thing about the Maine Question 1 is that there is no formal registered No On 1 campaign or whatever the appropriate term is. I don't know if there have been any polls since March, but I would be floored if it didn't pass.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 12:52
|
|
|
EX250 Type R posted:One thing about the Maine Question 1 is that there is no formal registered No On 1 campaign or whatever the appropriate term is. I don't know if there have been any polls since March, but I would be floored if it didn't pass. I'm sure Maine is getting all the "No legalization" ads from Mass, and our local talk radio extends at least into Southern Maine as well.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 13:41
|
|
|
Pillowpants posted:I'm sure Maine is getting all the "No legalization" ads from Mass, and our local talk radio extends at least into Southern Maine as well. Fortunately, southern maine is all liberal hippies that legalized weed in Portland already so it should be falling on deaf ears
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 13:48
|
|
|
EX250 Type R posted:Fortunately, southern maine is all liberal hippies that legalized weed in Portland already so it should be falling on deaf ears True, but everywhere North of Portland is people who make Paul Lepage look liberal
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 13:51
|
|
|
computer parts posted:It means any given result can be +/- the MOE of that number lo loving l
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 14:31
|
|
|
Pillowpants posted:True, but everywhere North of Portland is people who make Paul Lepage look liberal Nah, most of us in central and northern maine are live and let live, you would be surprised
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 14:35
|
|
|
EX250 Type R posted:Nah, most of us in central and northern maine are live and let live, you would be surprised I've got a bunch of extended family north of Bangor And that isn't the case when I go to visit.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 14:40
|
|
|
Latest poll in ME is favorable http://www.pressherald.com/2016/09/26/most-mainers-favor-legalizing-marijuana-poll-finds/ CA and NV are layups, ME is a yes, MA is a strong maybe, AZ unfortunately looks like a no. Dmitri-9 has issued a correction as of 01:54 on Sep 27, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2016 01:41
|
|
|
Lord Hydronium posted:I just got the state voter guide for Massachusetts, and the No arguments for Question 4 are a real doozy. Better: people can home grow without getting their neighbors permission, the horror!
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2016 03:59
|
|
|
WBZ-UMass poll has MA 53-40 (4.3%MoE) in favor of Question 4 Poll stats because why would you ever release the report in an easy place to find: N=700 Likely voters WBZ posted:Support for the measure cuts across all demographic categories, with only voters over 55 years old and self-described conservatives opposing the measure. GonadTheBallbarian has issued a correction as of 16:07 on Sep 28, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2016 15:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 17:33 |
|
|
4/5 states is the baseline now, imo this is pretty incredible
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2016 16:10
|
|
