|
A little over a week ago I started doing volunteer petition circulating for the DC Cannabis Campaign, gathering signatures to get Initiative 71 on the Nov '14 ballot, which would legalize possession of up to two ounces for those over 21, and three mature and three immature plants per household. I've never been a marijuana user (straightedge punk teen, then military for most of a decade, then Defense contractor, all drug-prohibited jobs), but it makes sense on a political-practical level so I generally support cutting out the War on Drugs hysteria. I'm quitting one job and starting a new one in a month or so, was bored sitting around the house, ran across a guy in my neighborhood canvassing, and now 10 days later I've gathered over 600 signatures for the campaign and distributed probably 3,000 flyers. I'm pretty new to this, but it's already been a colorful experience, meeting all kinds of people in the best and worst neighborhoods of the capital. I thought a thread would be useful so folks who've worked other campaigns can let us know what worked and what didn't, and other readers can learn and consider helping out on a campaign too. There's a general "drug legalization" thread in D&D that's mostly abstract what-ifs, and a slow-moving thread in TCC that's just occasional legal updates. I suggest this thread be pretty focused on MMJ/decrim/legalization campaigning strategy and stories, rather than on abstract "marijuana is good/bad" except so far as discussing what public messaging works or doesn't.  One short anecdote I mentioned in another thread. The several dozen cops I've ran across and said hello to have all been at least pleasant, and some of them openly supportive, but there was just one cop that wanted to be agro about it:  Afternoon gentlemen! I know you can't sign while on-duty. Pffft, I wouldn't sign it even if I could. Well sir, we'll just have to let the voters decide in November. You mean we'll let the potheads decide in November. [smiles and nods politely, sidles off before I get hauled in for sass]Any CO or WA goons who worked the campaigns? Any who've worked unsuccessful campaigns in other states, or successful limited initiatives like decriminalization or medical marijuana?
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 01:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 4, 2024 23:17 |
|
|
lol at MJ legalization votes during non presidential election years.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2014 08:52
|
|
|
Great, another thing for morons to gently caress themselves up with.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2014 09:52
|
|
|
Previa_fun posted:lol at MJ legalization votes during non presidential election years. This is DC, the base that turns midterm elections conservative just plain doesn't exist there. Congress won't allow implementation or anything, but it will easily pass if on the ballot. https://www.dcboee.org/election_info/election_results/general_election_results/2010
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2014 13:14
|
|
|
Chupe Raho Aurat posted:Great, another thing for morons to gently caress themselves up with. I heard that is weed were legalized people might start using it 
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2014 18:02
|
|
|
Do you tend to answer many questions before people are willing to sign or are opinions pretty well set without getting more information?
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 04:19
|
|
|
Dusseldorf posted:I heard that is weed were legalized people might start using it I'm not worried about people using it, im worried about morons using it then driving and doing all the dumb poo poo people do with alcohol at the moment.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 08:31
|
|
|
Chupe Raho Aurat posted:I'm not worried about people using it, im worried about morons using it then driving and doing all the dumb poo poo people do with alcohol at the moment. Sounds like a real worry that people will start driving on weed once it's legal. Since weed is illegal now people don't want to double down on illegality by driving too.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 08:55
|
|
|
How did the DC movement get started? Do they have connections with similar movements in other states? I'm pretty interested in finding out if my own state is making any moves in this direction and would be quite interested in volunteering to assist with such a program.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 13:50
|
|
|
See what you can do with NORML if you're not working with them already. They're headquartered in DC of course.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 16:10
|
|
|
quote:Do you tend to answer many questions before people are willing to sign or are opinions pretty well set without getting more information? Not often at all. Most peoples' attitude is pretty much "you had me at 'legal marijuana'". Sometimes I'm not even saying anything, and someone down the sidewalk sees my clipboard and saunters up asking to sign. Maybe 2-3 per sheet of 20 signatures ask "so, what is this about exactly?" and maybe 1 in 20 actually read the whole initiative verbiage to make sure they're onboard. More frequently, people ask more questions just as conversation while they're signing, or after they're done signing, because they're excited about it. I've only had a handful of people that needed to be debated into signing. Those kind of folks are either skeptical, and usually end up accepting a flyer and saying something like "I'll go home and read up on it", or some are initially negative and we argue a bit, and a good chunk of those end up saying "those are some good points" but don't tend to sign. AreWeDrunkYet posted:This is DC, the base that turns midterm elections conservative just plain doesn't exist there. ... Yup, DC is pretty demographically distinct in the US: - we have no rural areas at all - just under 50% African-American; for contrast, Mississippi has the highest AA% for a state, and they're at 37%. I think DC is 20th most AA% city in the nation (for cities of 25k+) and fourth if we just count large cities of 500k+ - massive depopulation and white-flight over the last century; DC is still below its 1950 high. One upshot of this: if you're a racist old white guy, you probably moved to Virginia years ago. - if you're a white person who's deliberately moved into DC in the last 20 years, odds are you're reasonably progressive (albeit quite possibly a yuppie rear end in a top hat). - City leans massively Democract. If you look at the 2010 results, most named-Republican candidates get vote percentages in the single digits. Only exceptions being in the Northwest fringe of the whitest/wealthiest areas, where a Republican can aspire to maybe get only moderately pummeled, 34% against 64% Dem. quote:Congress won't allow implementation or anything, but it will easily pass if on the ballot. Remains to be seen. Right now there's a decriminalization measure developed and approved by the City Council, which is in its required 60-day Congressional review. There are a few ways this could go down. Congress could nix both the Council's decrim, and again this winter nix the voted-in legalization, but there's a danger there that it'll be bad PR for repeatedly whaling on a small city the feds control while shrugging as other states do the same. Then there's the chance that Congress doesn't want to decrim, but is nervous about legalization getting voted in, so will approve the decrim so they can appear "reasonable" when they reject legal this winter. Basically what's happening in FL, where the threat of very widespread MMJ is causing Republicans to counter-propose a more limited MMJ to head off larger change. So not ideal but forcing their hand is a valid gain. One of the more clever/optimistic possibilities I find amusing: on either measure, the House uses it as a pulpit to holler their tough-on-crime credentials, puff on the racism dogwhistle, etc and shoot it down. It goes to the Senate, they have no interest in getting caught up in the controversy, so they twiddle their dicks until the clock runs out and say "oh, I guess we don't have any unified objection, so I guess DC can do whatever." None of these outcomes is a total failure to the movement. DC authorities are already getting cheeky about the Congressional review, including refusing to send anyone to the hearing other than our non-voting Congressperson, chief of police, and ACLU rep. So the mayor, councilmen and others can instead say "this is an anti-democratic travesty and I refuse to validate this level of interference with the people's will." I'm very curious to see what'd happen if, say, DC internally decides to just tell MPD to stop arresting for marijuana possession, and double-dog-dares Congress to step up and stop them. Which Congress physically can do, but "National Guard Called to Enforce Drug Laws" or "City Services Defunded over Weed Dispute" would be awkward headlines. quote:How did the DC movement get started? Do they have connections with similar movements in other states? I'm pretty interested in finding out if my own state is making any moves in this direction and would be quite interested in volunteering to assist with such a program. There's a good DCMJ About Us page that answers some of the basic questions. Some of the people involved are longstanding cannabis advocates, and while there may some cross-fertilization with Drug Policy Alliance and Marijuana Policy Project, my understanding is the DCMJ describes itself as a free-standing local organization. I'm not personally aware of a single site listing out campaigns by state, but I'd suggest initially taking a look at the Mother Jones article Will Your State Be Next to Legalize Pot? to see where your state is currently at, and then just try googling your state name, marijuana, and terms like "legalization", "decriminalization", "medical" as the case may be. Though maybe some other reader in the thread knows of a more centralized repository. Another odd story: I've only had a few people actively angry at me while I've been doing this. There's a smattering of "that's a terrible idea" but almost nothing like "shame on you". A few of the combative ones are homeless/high/drunk, but one of the few major exceptions, I was in Chinatown and offered my petition to a black man in business-casual attire, who replied "I won't sign it, but I would sign a petition legalizing killing crackers." While maybe not literal, it wasn't just friendly teasing, since he came back and hollered at me later for "pushing drugs to kids" when I was explaining the ballot measure to a group of ~18yr olds. But that kind of stuff is far, far outweighed by people who sign it, give a thumbs up or a "good luck", say "thanks for your work", etc. TapTheForwardAssist fucked around with this message at 16:58 on May 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 16:52
|
|
|
Dusseldorf posted:Sounds like a real worry that people will start driving on weed once it's legal. Since weed is illegal now people don't want to double down on illegality by driving too. Pst, I'm talking about over excited idiots that will RtG 24/7 the moment it's legal. Not the casual smokers already doing it.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 03:12
|
|
|
Chupe Raho Aurat posted:Pst, I'm talking about over excited idiots that will RtG 24/7 the moment it's legal. Not the casual smokers already doing it.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 05:01
|
|
|
Do you feel even a little compelled to try weed since you're campaigning for it?
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 05:25
|
|
|
Previa_fun posted:lol at MJ legalization votes during non presidential election years. This. Half of the refferendums in my city would not have been passed if they weren't on the ballot during presidential election years. We have a major university here whose students only seem to know/care about national issues,
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 06:14
|
|
|
Truecon420 posted:This. Again, you guys are ignoring that this is DC. Turnout is down in midterm elections, but there isn't a significant number of conservative old white people who vote without fail to change the outcome much in off years. The Democratic DC rep for Congress got 88.9% of the vote in 2010, and 88.6% in 2012. Used to be that there might be some pushback on an issue like this from the older black folks who vote by the busload after church services, but opinion polls lately have shown that these people are coming around to the idea that the effects of the drug war are a worse moral failure than the drugs themselves. DC now has the highest support for legalization nationwide by a wide margin.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 12:35
|
|
|
I have this feeling that cops are going to start frisking people as soon as they get off the westbound trains in Rosslyn.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 14:09
|
|
|
AreWeDrunkYet posted:Again, you guys are ignoring that this is DC. Turnout is down in midterm elections, but there isn't a significant number of conservative old white people who vote without fail to change the outcome much in off years. The Democratic DC rep for Congress got 88.9% of the vote in 2010, and 88.6% in 2012. The January 2014 WaPo poll is really enlightening: http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/dc-politics/in-major-shift-dc-voters-strongly-support-legalizing-marijuana/2014/01/15/9fcc6d04-7d6a-11e3-93c1-0e888170b723_story.html posted:Washingtonians of every age, race and ethnicity — teenagers and seniors, blacks and whites — registered double-digit increases in support of legalization. Overall, 63 percent are in favor. ... This pretty much. In contrast to Colorado where "no worse that alcohol" was the winning slogan, in DC I'm seeing a lot of focus on "African Americans more than 8 times as likely to be arrested for possession despite usage being 50/50". On canvassing conversations I've had fair success with "if a young person gets caught with weed, would you rather they go to jail and get a record, or get hauled back to their parents' house for a hollering with a $25 ticket?" quote:Do you feel even a little compelled to try weed since you're campaigning for it? A bit, but it's not compatible with my job field, so I'm not too tore up about it. I've read up on cannabis usage off and on, to see what kinds of uses/effects I identify with and find appealing. I've had some over-intellectual friends who found it useful to relax and focus, and folks that find the certain types feel great after weightlifting. I'm not particularly drawn to the whole "stoner culture" cliche about it, which is one thing I'm not thrilled with in the messaging of the current campaign. I don't have any particular moral problem with weed, it's just that a chunk of the public face of it is people equivalent to fratboys chugging Solo cups of Milwaukee's Best as opposed to the responsible adult users (who presumably aren't as upfront about it because of jobs). quote:I have this feeling that cops are going to start frisking people as soon as they get off the westbound trains in Rosslyn. Your safer bet is to canoe across the Potomac. Also extra-bonus, you wouldn't have to go to Rosslyn. Overall I'm not hugely concerned about the November vote, especially since we have almost half a year to do messaging. I'm way more concerned about getting 22,300 signatures. For contrast, CA has one of the higher percentage requirements for initiatives/propositions, requiring signatures equivalent to "5% of the vote count for the last governor election". DC has no governor, but the mayor got 132,000 votes in 2010, so the 22,300 we need is equivalent to 17% of the 2010 turnout. If ours were 5% of turnout, we'd knock it out in a couple of weeks. DC is also a bitch to canvass in for a number of reasons: - We have five other states within commuting range, so at any given moment a huge number of people are walking around the city who aren't even residents. Plus non-citizen immigrants, foreign diplomats and employees of international organizations, tourists, etc. Also since DC taxes are high it's relatively common for people who move here to hang onto their old residency as long as they can; the city has an entire office dedicated to tracking down and back-taxing people they catch doing that. - Really transient population, with a lot of young white-collar people moving all the time, and anecdotally some of the black youths registering at a relative's house but moving a lot. So higher wastage for having signatures thrown out because people don't recall which address is currently on their voter card. I had to on-site change my voting address for the 2012 election because I'd moved five times in the previous two years. - A huge number of people in politically/legally sensitive jobs. I get a ton of folks who would sign, but are worried that it's going to be made public and they'll get in trouble back at HUD or Dept. of Commerce or wherever they work. Broadly this Initiative is outside the Hatch Act since it's non-partisan, but the average fed employee isn't spun up on the fine details and just thinks "I can't do politics". There's a big intimidation factor that won't necessarily hurt us on the actual anonymous vote (as noted by anonymous polling), but limits willing petition signers. Honestly, my hope is that we'll just double-down on hiring paid gatherers, particularly ones willing to go into the worst neighborhoods where political intimidation isn't a factor (don't give no fucks) and valid resentment against police biased enforcement is high. Ward 7 and the infamous Ward 8 (councilman: former mayor Marion Barry of "bitch set me up" 1980s crack fame) have been productive place to get signatures, even for me as a white guy. I'm just not thrilled to hang around Ward 8 after dark, nor go door-to-door, but there have got to be plenty of young unemployed folks there who have the people skills and the community familiarity to get huge chunks of signatures from those areas. On the opposite end of town, the massive college/yuppie enclave of Georgetown was a complete bust for me, so yeah canvassing does entail a lot of profiling.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 16:30
|
|
|
TapTheForwardAssist posted:On the opposite end of town, the massive college/yuppie enclave of Georgetown was a complete bust for me, so yeah canvassing does entail a lot of profiling. Is that because none of them are actually registered in DC?
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 17:12
|
|
|
Shame about not getting any luck in Georgetown. Maybe it would have been a better sell if you came up with a "Weedburger" entree that costs >$1k like the Wineburger at Mr. Smith's? That would turn at least a few Georgetown yuppie heads.  Seriously speaking though, as a former political canvasser myself in the 2012 election season, I've also found it really difficult to make any headway on anything progressive or remotely beneficial to societal when canvassing in really ritzy, gentrified neighborhoods. I think that's a universal thing, to be honest (in other words, eat the rich   ).
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 17:20
|
|
|
quote:That would turn at least a few Georgetown yuppie heads. wehavefoundnewhomesfortherich.jpg Yeah, Georgetown was vexing. My on-pace goal is 20sig/hr, and I did stay on pace in Gtown, but literally every single signature was young African-American service personnel, so at that point I just shrugged and took the train down to Congress Heights. Sketchier area, and dealing with hard-drug users who are unemployed and sitting on the sidewalk at 1pm is a little offputting, but it beats people being dicks. I've gotten pretty good at chatting with folks and building rapport while canvassing, as a generally friendly guy. I was getting a group of 6 or so young black voters in Georgetown to sign, and while they were passing the petition I was lamenting my slow progress in the ritzy neighborhood. They were nodding along, so I hammed it up, just rolled my eyes and said "... loving white people." Kids break out into high-fiving, happy shouting, "exactly, exactly!". Good times. Cheesy as it is, I've also gotten lots of smiles for lines like "and ladies, any handsome young men you know, make sure you convince them to vote", and switched for guys. In gay neighborhoods, I've tried the same but just switching it around, and it seems to go over equal well with lots of giggling response. Canvassing involves a lot of, for lack of a better word, "profiling". I've been bracing myself for someone to say "are you just talking to me about weed because I'm black?", but nobody has. And no guy has punched me for mis-guessing and telling him to influence "handsome young men". The only misstep at all was last night I gave a card to a young Latino man, he seemed a bit unclear on the card and was replying in monosyllables, so I started explaining in Spanish, and he rolls his eyes and says "Man, I understand it just fine!" But that's compared to easily 50-100 other times I've switched to Spanish to explain something and got an appreciative reaction. quote:Is that because none of them are actually registered in DC? While there is some of that for the kids, all the adults were giving me the stink-eye too, except for a few fat older guys with cigars hollering "like, faaar out man!" at me and chortling. Canvasser have to be polite, but it's hard to resist saying "laugh it up rear end in a top hat, there are people in jail for this." Crossposting from TCC: The House Oversight Committee's Government Operations subpanel met today to discuss DC City Council's approval of decriminalization of marijana ($25 ticket for possession). Since we're not a state, Congress gets 60 days to consider nixing our legislation. This first day seems to have gone pretty well; I've read some of the coverage, and though it's still uncertain there doesn't seem a strong inclination to block this. Mica (R-FL) presided, and while he did say he wanted to hear more about "Has the narcotic changed in its potency? Does it pose an even greater risk?", he doesn't seem hostile. He even brought a fake joint as a prop for discussions about weight/quantity, and joked that one of his staffers had rolled it since they're better at it than him. The main stickler is a rep who's a medical doctor, Fleming (R-LA). Apparently a big drug warrior, and he's indicated that if the panel doesn't move to block it, he might go mucking around in the House dicking with the DC budget appropriations as punishment. Ah yes, Louisiana, a state well-known for its effective legal system, dedication to social justice, and devotion to sobriety. That and drive-thru liquor stores and making black convicts pick cotton.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 21:43
|
|
|
I've read an article recently that, for the reasons you've said (and others such as illegibility of signatures, etc), the number of valid signatures has turned out unfortunately low once they have gone through the validation process - do you know if this is true? From what you've seen so far and from what you've heard from the organization, does it look like you'll be able to gather enough valid signatures to get it in the November election, or is it looking like you'll have to go for the special election?
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 22:47
|
|
|
I fully support legalization and regulation - one thing I think Colorado really got right (having been there since it's been legalized, haven't been to WA) is that the industry really embraced an engagement with the state to put together a structure to regulate the system. I think it's going to wind up being far too complicated, and probably simplified down the line, but it was well done. I'm in TX and even Gov. Perry (whom we all know and love) has advocated for decriminalization here, which I think will pass at some point once a few more states get on board. That said, I did see the most amazing bumper sticker today: "Legalize Gay Marijuana" I laughed at that one a lot, being in Texas.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 05:47
|
|
|
SgtScruffy posted:I've read an article recently that, for the reasons you've said (and others such as illegibility of signatures, etc), the number of valid signatures has turned out unfortunately low once they have gone through the validation process - do you know if this is true? From what you've seen so far and from what you've heard from the organization, does it look like you'll be able to gather enough valid signatures to get it in the November election, or is it looking like you'll have to go for the special election? I take it you're meaning the column in City Paper? Yeah, not thrilled with that article on a number of levels, but without getting in to campaign internal stuff, rollout isn't as fast as hoped, but we are gathering more and more volunteers and paid circulators, and we have like 8 more weeks to gather signatures. The DCMJ Twitter posted a very useful piece explaining how names were getting rejected for shortenings: e.g. "Greg" vice "Gregory", "Jen" vice "Jennifer", etc. So another place we're getting wastage, aside from just the harder-to-avoid issues of people not being registered or never changing their address. So I'm not necessarily pessimistic about this, but it is a little frustrating. I have no problem getting 100+ signatures in a day, so if we had just 40 people gathering at that rate, even with 50% wastage we'd be done in less than two weeks. I really hope they find a few crazy-motivated paid circulators that can just beat pavement all day and bring in 200 sigs per. [img]http://i57.tinypic.com/2rpwnjq.jpg[[/img] A panel from the House Oversight Committee met on Friday to discuss DC's decrim law (passed by the Council), and though they didn't seem hugely supportive, nor were they outright strong against it. We don't need their approval, we just need them to not rule against it, so ambivalent is fine. Though there are already concerns that a few of the hardcore drug-warrior congressmen will start messing with DC's appropriations as punishment even if the Committee waves it through. WaPo article, good summup.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 20:07
|
|
|
I got an automated sheet for a few hundred signatures I turned in last week, and it was pretty enlightening to see what number were valid. I'd heard that as a rough number from petitions nationwide, you end up losing about half the names for various reasons. DC is especially tough for reasons mentioned above, so apparently my 41% valid rate is pretty decent. Of my invalid names rejected, I was pleased that only a couple were for basic things like failing to fill out a portion of the row, and only three where someone failed to use their proper name (nickname, or used middle but not true first name). Of all the remaining invalids, they were split almost evenly between "NOT DC Registered Voters" or "With Address inconsistent with Registered Address". For the former, I think a lot of it's folks that just assume they're automatically registered to vote when they get a driver's license, some folks that misrecall singing up, don't want to admit they're not voters and sign anyway trying to be "helpful". For the addresses, I think a big chunk of that is due to how transient DC is; I myself didn't change my voter address for nearly a year after moving, and had to do an on-site change of address to vote in the 2012 presidential. I feel better knowing that my invalids aren't just due to sloppy handwriting or whatnot. The only real way to improve at all would be caveating "your address as shown on your voter card", which might make a handful pause and say "oh right, I haven't changed it yet" and put down their proper old address. Signature collection is still making steady progress and 22,300 is reachable, but it's not the easy slam-dunk we hoped for, and it's always a struggle to find enough (and competent) volunteers and paid collectors. It's frustrating to think that if we only had 8 talented collectors (volunteer or paid) working 20hrs/500valid a week, we could knock this whole thing out in 6 weeks. I can totally get 500 in a week, just my new job is actually gearing up and I can't spend several hours outside every day.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 20:35
|
|
|
Campaign still running tight, so we're just pressing and recruiting as many volunteers as possible. More annoying than the anti- folks are the "with friends like these" types. People who are generally in support, but want to argue about some minutiae about ounce weights, or whether we should have waited for 2016 or whatever. Fundamentally, I'm here now collecting signatures, sign it or gently caress off, I don't need to hear your pontification about how this is just a subterfuge by which The Man is going to tax marijuana and ruin all the wholesome natural goodness. There's another kind of "useless friend" I run across every few days, and the one today held forth at greater length than usual: Sign the petition? Vote 71 to legalize marijuana in the District? Nah man, it's cool, I don't do that voting poo poo. Well, we're voting to legalize in November, so you might wanna vote then. Nah, I'm sure it'll pass just fine. Sir, if people just like you don't go to the polls to support it, it will not pass. Man, you gotta have a little faith in these things, it'll go through, trust me. So you want it to go through, but don't want to do anything to help it? Man, that's why we got folks like you, out doin' your thing! Nice work.Is there a catchy sociological term for this, like "crab bucket syndrome", but to apply to folks that really want things to change but want everyone else to do the heavy lifting?
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 02:34
|
|
|
Yes, the term is 'free rider.'
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 19:32
|
|
|
Achmed Jones posted:Yes, the term is 'free rider.' Ah, right. Those rear end-hats. Had one of the more neurotic signers today. This kinda dweeby 20-something guy was about to go into a bar, I caught his attention, and he wavered a bit about his opinion on the issue. I emphasized to him that he's not necessarily signing in favor of marijuana or even legalization, but just that he wants to see it on the ballot in November. A dozen times this has convinced other waverers, when I emphasize that they don't need to truly decide until November, but can sign now for democracy. Usually folks just accept that, but this guy no poo poo made me go line-by-line with him through the boilerplate, not about what Initiative 71 actually does, but the stuff at the top that says "We the voters of DC request an election be held on Topic X" to reassure himself that he was only signing to put it on the ballot, not to support its passage. While he was signing I was emphasizing that the Hatch Act (bars federal employees from partisan activities) does not apply since this is non-partisan, and he froze in the middle and demanded I repeat my last words about "not barred from political activities". He then finished signing and leans in: "my concern is that I'm a licensed professional, a practicing optometrist". Seriously man? What scenario are you possibly envisioning where anybody gives a gently caress what a given optometrist's position on weed legalization is? I can vaguely see people in the legal system, or ATF/DEA/FBI being nervous about taking a stance, but I get loving annoyed when people who are HR drones at Dept of the Interior are petrified that they'll lose their job for signing a petition. I've got a clearance and I'm out publicly volunteering; sack up, people.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2014 03:36
|
|
|
I was involved in the Prop 203 campaign for MMJ here in Arizona. Much depended on the support of the Marijuana Policy Project in Washington DC. They tailored the proposition to fit the electorate here in AZ, and provided financial support. At least here one really has to have paid gatherers in addition to volunteers to stand a chance at getting on the ballot. There is/was an effort to get a full legalization measure on this year's ballot, but without the outside funding, doesn't appear to stand a chance. We did have a great time attending arts events and so forth getting signatures. That's one thing I would suggest: get to any arts or music events you can. Have signs and shirts made up to catch peoples' attention. Work in teams. Don't waste time arguing with opponents, but focus on positive interactions.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2014 02:37
|
|
|
Beaters posted:That's one thing I would suggest: get to any arts or music events you can. Have signs and shirts made up to catch peoples' attention. Work in teams. Don't waste time arguing with opponents, but focus on positive interactions. We're definitely on that, hitting all the festivals throughout June. That reminds me, I should find a list of the various neighborhood outdoor movie nights: people attending those tend to be local (vice coming in from MD or VA), and generally hipstery. Same reason we hit up farmers' markets One thing we've had great success with is targeting places that DC residents are forced to go to, like the main downtown courthouse, DMV, and social services. Those places get a line forming around the block before they're open, and get a lot of working-class people that strongly favor legal weed. Plus people are bored as hell standing in line, it's not like they have anything better to do than sign. Even better, at the courthouse a lot of them that are forced to be there for jury duty, parole checkin, etc are angry at The Man and glad to sign. Better yet, in DC even former felons can vote; only felons actually in prison at the moment are unable to vote in DC. For the DC "Yes on 71" campaign, it was looking pretty gloomy for a while, with just 8k or so signatures the first few weeks, but last week we had a huge surge of paid and volunteer gatherers and got 10k in a single week. If we can maintain that kind of pace (or better) for a couple more weeks we're golden. Our twitter also announced that weekend after the holiday we're arranging a huge door-to-door Sunday canvassing, coordinated/endorsed by DC Councilman Grosso, so that could get us a few thousand in just a day, plus a higher chance of getting resident voters and people actually putting the right address down. Do we have any goons on the Alaska campaign? I think that's the main other one making credible pushes for a 2014 popular initiative, a lot of others seem to be waiting for 2016 (OR, CA, ME). TapTheForwardAssist fucked around with this message at 06:25 on May 23, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 06:23
|
|
|
Your PM inbox is full.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 10:51
|
|
|
AreWeDrunkYet posted:Your PM inbox is full. I freed up some space. Need to go get a re-supply of the little flyers and also we have some kind of signboard to issue out. I think we're also getting slightly more leverage in getting middle-class gov't employees to sign, since we're getting more positive press and have had our Congressperson and at least one Councilman come out in support of us. 
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 19:29
|
|
|
After weeks of slow start and lagging (on a very compressed timeline), we've hit our stride and we're now about halfway to our target, with five weeks left to go. So we could still pull those out, but it'll be tight. If it gets on the ballot, I think we're golden to get it voted in, particularly as we'll have several months to go register every 18-19yr old in the city and poke and prod them to vote. But even just with regular turnout we have a pretty good chance. Our twitter announced we've got 30,000 raw signatures, and we need 22,300 valid sigs. Validation rate (signatures with correct name and address of a properly-registered voter) is running between a third and a half, so we need close to 50-60,000 to get 22,000 valid. I'm excited for Sunday, where we're gathering a ton of volunteers together under Council Grosso (At-Large, so he's councilman city-wide, not for a specific ward), and do some door-to-door canvassing spreading out through the Capitol Hill area. It's the Campaign's ambitious goal to get 10,000 signatures in that one day. If we do that, just one or two more weeks of hard push will finish us off, and we can close up canvassing and switch to voter registration at GOTV efforts, ad blitz, etc. 
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 05:37
|
|
|
You can still pull those sigs out in time for sure, we did. I was a big part of a statewide campaign that gained national recognition a few years ago and know most of the influential people in MJ policy nationwide, so if you want to talk privately about this regarding help/who to get in touch with/how to get a bunch of valid sigs fast, send me a PM since yours are full. I have since graduated and my career mostly precludes my further participation, so I can't do a whole lot on my own anymore, but if you guys are working without much DPEG/SSDP/DPA/LEAP involvement, I can very likely get you some help via connections. I just don't know what your situation is there at the moment, who you know, or who's funding the campaign currently. Either way, shine on you crazy diamond  Read, highlight, and carry Mason Tvert's book around with you if you aren't already!
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 07:50
|
|
|
MrTheDevious posted:You can still pull those sigs out in time for sure, we did. I was a big part of a statewide campaign that gained national recognition a few years ago and know most of the influential people in MJ policy nationwide, so if you want to talk privately about this regarding help/who to get in touch with/how to get a bunch of valid sigs fast, send me a PM since yours are full. Though I would if we were earlier along (and I were high in the food-chain), fortunately the campaign, with 5 weeks left, has really hit momentum. Part of that is just wrassling up enough pro-petitioners who migrate from state to state; we have at this one dude who's like the LeBron James of signature gathering. The man carries 5 clipboards at a time, yet is able to grill folks on the spot to make sure their names/addresses are right, issue out change-of-address cards if they're unsure, and has a ludicrously high validation rate. I'm in awe. Being a low-level guy, I'm not privvy to all the subtle political alliances, though I have had fun meeting a really colorful LEAP member in cowboy hat and boots at a CATO panel, as well as a former CIA analyst who's a big-wheel in Virginia's NORML. The campaign is increasingly picking up public support from serious local figures. Our Twitter has the details on when Eleanor Norton (DC's only Congress delegate) signed our petition publicly, as has the candidate likely to win the 2014 mayoral election. Our rally on Sunday had presentations from councilmen Grosso and Wells, who are in clear support. Since DC is a city/"state", basically kick each of these positions up one notch (mayor=governor, councilman= state congressman) for how much influence they have over legislation in the capital. 
TapTheForwardAssist fucked around with this message at 06:10 on Jun 3, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 04:10
|
|
|
Chupe Raho Aurat posted:Great, another thing for morons to gently caress themselves up with. I felt the same way about reading this post. Let's ban things irrationally, consequences be damned, because I live in fear of other people's behavior at all times!
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 05:00
|
|
|
I walked throughout the downtown core of Toronto putting up posters for a rally to free Marc Emery (The Canadian Marijuana Party Leader) from his bullshit sentence for selling seeds to someone in Illinois. Then I marched in said rally. That's all about all I got for weed activism. Just wanted to say that you are doing a good job and that it's really inspiring reading about you going through this process. I'm definitely taking notes from your posts for future activism, not just for weed but for other social justice causes. The next big thing in that arena here in Toronto is probably going to be a debate over a potential safe injection site like the Insite program in Vancouver and I will gladly campaign for that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 11:41
|
|
|
mdm posted:I felt the same way about reading this post. Let's ban things irrationally, consequences be damned, because I live in fear of other people's behavior at all times! Do you work on a psych ward? Do you see the people that come in everyday? Did i say ban? gently caress off?
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2014 08:41
|
|
|
Chupe Raho Aurat posted:Did i say ban? So you're actually on the same page as everyone else discussing this, you just figured this would be a good place to threadshit with how you don't like it when other people get high?
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2014 12:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 4, 2024 23:17 |
|
|
Chupe Raho Aurat posted:Do you work on a psych ward? This is just as bad as the "But kids will start using it if it's legal!" Just replace 'kids' with 'people with mental problems'. Here's a shocker: Everyone else already has access to weed. If anything, legalizing it will make it easier to control who gets access.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2014 19:22
|
|
