|
Dmitri-9 posted:It would be a huge overreach, 80% of the country supports medical marijuana. Then there's about a 100% chance they will do it.
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 17:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 6, 2024 23:44 |
|
|
Let's arzy about this after the dust settles
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 17:41
|
|
|
Christie is also probably out of consideration after his shunning wrt the bridge scandal. Giuliani is the frontrunner, which is almost as bad.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 18:03
|
|
|
We have three options for the incoming Trump administration 1) Standard Option: GOP will crack down. Trump doesn't care about pot, but that swings both ways as the enforcement policy will be left to the incoming (likely Guilliani) Attorney General. Will an AG who made his name on the war on drugs and locking up the lower class not use existing laws with his new authority to wreck havoc? The notion of an authoritarian reducing his own authority is something of a nonstarter and states right is toilet paper for those who use it as a political wedge issue. Useful when you need it, garbage when you're done. The most likely of the three options. 2) Populist Option: GOP realizes that winning the hearts and minds of stoners is worth the loss of police authority and will allow some level of legalization. From this perspective, the economic, employment and tax benefits of legalization is worth a great deal. Another perk is that legal pot means less activism from the element of society that just wants to blaze their lives away (me). Just like how Nixon was the only man who could go to China, only the GOP can end this front on the War on Drugs. Less likely than a crack down, more likely than detente, the only chance here is that Trump gives a poo poo about the issue enough to seize its benefits and take full ownership of it. 3) Status Quo Option: The fragile detente between the marijuana industry and the federal government shall continue at pace, with the federal government not enforcing the laws while also not rescheduling the substance or reducing the legal penalties. This was the guarantee from a Clinton presidency, and I think the least likely of the three. Everyone should realize that Trump has gone full board with the GOP's standard slate of issues every time and has contradicted himself and reversed past positions that might seem more appealing. No need to  because the status quo is in place, but I'd stock up a good supply before inauguration hits.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 18:27
|
|
|
It's looking like pot legalization might fail now in ME. 4000 absentee ballots still not counted and the current margin is <3000. They might not even be counted until Monday. Almost a 100% chance that there will be a recount and a good chance LePage will try to block some part of it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 18:46
|
|
|
I could see Trump or at least one of his kids deciding to keep the current detente in effect to withhold weed as a wedge issue the Dems can use against them in The Republican Party's rank and file voters are split enough on the issue that it isn't necessarily in the party's best interest to force it and piss off the substantial chunk of the right that leans libertarian on weed. But this is almost entirely in Trumps hands now so who knows, we just have to wait and see.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 18:48
|
|
|
Attorney General Rudolph "arresting black people for jumping turnstiles since 1994" Giuliani is very bad news for marijuana users
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 18:49
|
|
|
If Trumps AG is seriously stupid enough to crack down on legal states there's going to be massive backlash from both citizens and state politicians who are seeing, what, tens of millions of dollars a year pouring into their economy now?
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 18:56
|
|
|
Zoq-Fot-Pik posted:If Trumps AG is seriously stupid enough to crack down on legal states there's going to be massive backlash from both citizens and state politicians who are seeing, what, tens of millions of dollars a year pouring into their economy now? Most of those are already solidly Democrat anyway. Why would he care about losing support he never had?
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 19:03
|
|
|
Clunk Tap It posted:Most of those are already solidly Democrat anyway. Why would he care about losing support he never had? It's a wedge to hurt his opponent's advantage in future elections. Weakening your opponent's base is how this election was won to begin with, not taking an obvious advantage is just foolish.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 19:10
|
|
|
GonadTheBallbarian posted:It's a wedge to hurt his opponent's advantage in future elections. Weakening your opponent's base is how this election was won to begin with, not taking an obvious advantage is just foolish. I don't understand. How would overturning legalization weaken Trump's opponent's base? And why would this motivate him to NOT do it? Clunk Tap It has issued a correction as of 20:47 on Nov 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 19:39
|
|
|
His one single brief comment on the subject is one of the few things Trump has said that I believe - he's apathetic. Doesn't care one way or another. He won't go out of his way to help move things along at a federal level but he won't do anything to oppose it. It'll be just like Obama.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 21:51
|
|
|
Clunk Tap It posted:I don't understand. How would overturning legalization weaken Trump's opponent's base? And why would this motivate him to NOT do it? I think there's a miscommunication here. RE the comment that only a republican could legalize, I'm saying any move that would weaken the appeal of democrats in their stronger states is the smart way to go, ergo  could be a big win for them if they're smart.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 22:00
|
|
|
935 posted:His one single brief comment on the subject is one of the few things Trump has said that I believe - he's apathetic. Doesn't care one way or another. He won't go out of his way to help move things along at a federal level but he won't do anything to oppose it. It'll be just like Obama. The worry is that he's going to go out of his way, the worry is that he cares so little he's going to let someone else make the decision.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 22:08
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:The worry is that he's going to go out of his way, the worry is that he cares so little he's going to let someone else make the decision. Congress is already second guessing the DEA mj eradication program. Politicians only have so much political and literal capital to spend they aren't doing to use it to contradict voters in Ohio, Florida, Arkansas, etc.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2016 02:26
|
|
|
I idly wonder if right now MPP and NORML are pondering how to jam more states through in 2017-2018 so Congress has more invested members, or focused more on defending existing legalization from attack if the winds change. RI and VT have been edging on legalizing legislatively for a couple years, but Kevin's Sabet was crowing that the new VT governor is anti-legalization so idk. EDIT: if anyone sees any good "which states are next?" articles, definitely post them here.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 19:46
|
|
|
New Jersey as soon as Christie is out.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 20:19
|
|
|
NH will definitely not happen for another 8 years at the very least. Should lead to some really awful cross-border bullshit with MA, ME.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 20:28
|
|
|
GonadTheBallbarian posted:NH will definitely not happen for another 8 years at the very least. Should lead to some really awful cross-border bullshit with MA, ME. I hope MA sets up weed shops right on the border, and if they try to give us poo poo about it we can point to their explosives shops on the border and laugh at the turnaround
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 20:30
|
|
|
MI is already planning for Legal on the 2018 ballot: https://www.mlive.com/articles/19335173/petition_drive_planned_for_201.amp?client=safari States to watch next include: MT, WI, MI, MD, DE, NY, CT, RI, VT. Oklahoma will likely vote on MMJ in 2018; meanwhile only like five states have zero medical cannabis provisions, though most of the south it's very, very limited CBD programs or "trials". TapTheForwardAssist has issued a correction as of 20:36 on Nov 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 20:31
|
|
|
Is this just rumor still, or is Canada looking to have a legalization referendum in 2017 rather than just legalize outright? https://www.mtlblog.com/2016/10/canada-to-vote-on-legalizing-recreational-marijuana-in-2017/amp/?client=safari
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 21:07
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:I hope MA sets up weed shops right on the border, and if they try to give us poo poo about it we can point to their explosives shops on the border and laugh at the turnaround Is MA one of those dumb and bad states that bans fireworks? Actually of course they are, why wouldn't they be.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 21:24
|
|
|
Sorry we like having hands
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 21:27
|
|
|
TapTheForwardAssist posted:MI is already planning for Legal on the 2018 ballot: https://www.mlive.com/articles/19335173/petition_drive_planned_for_201.amp?client=safari I'm surprised that activists aren't trying to push full decriminalization as a stop gap measure via lobbying in states that lack ballot initiatives but have more liberal or moderate governments that might be open to reform but are still too shy to push legalization. And in states like Wyoming, Arkansas, Florida, Utah, etc. that have direct voter ballot initiative but are too conservative to reliably pass legalization we should be working to put full decriminalization (and medical) in front of voters as soon as possible. There are a lot of people who support decriminalization for philosophically conservative reasons like fiscal responsibility and limited government while still not being sold on full legalization, especially in red states.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 21:36
|
|
|
Powercrazy posted:Is MA one of those dumb and bad states that bans fireworks? Actually of course they are, why wouldn't they be. Yes, it is, so when you want Fireworks you pop 2 minutes across the border to one of the neighbouring states. It is actually a fun tradition, making the yearly pilgrimage. The NH fireworks shops actually even advertise in MA telling people to come up and buy their fireworks in NH.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 21:39
|
|
|
They have them in Connecticut too. Not as cheap, but I used to see them when we would go to the Costco across the border during the summer.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 21:44
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:I hope MA sets up weed shops right on the border, and if they try to give us poo poo about it we can point to their explosives shops on the border and laugh at the turnaround After the stateline liquor stores in NH, this will be the payback they get. And it's gonna get ugly. Powercrazy posted:Is MA one of those dumb and bad states that bans fireworks? Actually of course they are, why wouldn't they be. The bar for "dumb and bad" has significantly shifted this election. As a former NHer, I'm less embarrassed to call MA my home after the bullshit that transpired this year.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 21:51
|
|
|
GonadTheBallbarian posted:After the stateline liquor stores in NH, this will be the payback they get. And it's gonna get ugly. We'll trade our cheap booze and fireworks for your weed. State trade, etc, etc.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 22:10
|
|
|
I forget, is NH the one with the drive through liquor stores so you can pick up your booze and head right back across state lines, or it just the ones built into the very design of the highways, apparing on both sides as soon as you cross the border?
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 22:14
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:I forget, is NH the one with the drive through liquor stores so you can pick up your booze and head right back across state lines, or it just the ones built into the very design of the highways, apparing on both sides as soon as you cross the border? the second one
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 22:22
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:Yes, it is, so when you want Fireworks you pop 2 minutes across the border to one of the neighbouring states. It is actually a fun tradition, making the yearly pilgrimage. The NH fireworks shops actually even advertise in MA telling people to come up and buy their fireworks in NH. In MN we have no fireworks and the idiot cops actually camp on the border waiting to arrest people getting them from WI  .
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 22:24
|
|
|
Wait they arrest you in MN? I'm pretty sure they just fine you in Iowa, arresting someone for buying freedom MN, really?
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 22:27
|
|
|
It might just be a fine but the point is MN has an authoritarian streak on personal liberty issues which pisses me off, we won't have legal weed here for a while.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 22:33
|
|
|
Bass Bottles posted:Sorry we like having hands Is MA going to ban swimming pools soon? Sometimes freedom is dangerous, and that's ok!
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 22:44
|
|
|
fat bossy gerbil posted:And in states like Wyoming, Arkansas, Florida, Utah, etc. that have direct voter ballot initiative but are too conservative to reliably pass legalization we should be working to put full decriminalization (and medical) in front of voters as soon as possible. There are a lot of people who support decriminalization for philosophically conservative reasons like fiscal responsibility and limited government while still not being sold on full legalization, especially in red states. I don't know how large this factor is and/or how large it's becoming, but one downside to fundraising for decrim is that no block of businesses makes a lot of money off of decrim. Under decrim, sellers still can't have a store or pay taxes, and if anything some folks (police, corrections) might lose money if they have less work. Contrast with full-legal where you can (in theory) have a whole body of investors hoping to get in on a green rush. I would imagine in the past that moneyed interests played a smaller role in cannabis advocacy, but am I right in guessing that "I want this to be legal so I can make money off it... plus ideological reasons" is increasingly a part of the calculus? Legalizing in RI and opening a few dozen stores, vice decriminalizing in WY and opening none, might be more and more the thought process, with decrim left to be a grassroots movement and legal being the one backed by businesspeople.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2016 01:30
|
|
|
fat bossy gerbil posted:Montana and Michigan are the only two states on that list that allow for direct voter ballot initiatives which means any movement in the other states is going to require the state legislature to make it happen and most of those state legislatures (even in blue states) are still quite hostile to the idea of reform. VT and RI are the only two states where legislators have shown real interest in trying to possibly pass legalization, CT has been very skeptical and New York is a pipe dream for now. I could see Maryland going green on its own.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2016 01:45
|
|
|
Though fear of the immediate future is the mood this week, I ran across an interesting mention of what's coming down the pike:quote:The UN General Assembly Special Session on Drugs, scheduled for 2019, has been brought forward to next month following a request by the governments of Colombia, Guatemala and Mexico. These countries appear intent on shifting global drug policy away from the "war on drugs" approach to a more progressive, holistic one. Barring a massive crackdown between now and then, I imagine there's going to be a whooooole lot of "um, the US made us all sign anti-weed agreements but clearly they don't care themselves so can we all just give up the fiction?" Not universal by any means, plenty of parts of the world are more totalitarian than the US on drugs, but I imagine plenty will point out the hypocrisy if the US stays in its current detente.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2016 03:35
|
|
|
That actually kindasorta frees us up to change the federal stance too, maybe in 4yrs.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2016 04:58
|
|
|
Right now the single weediest thing I'm watching nervously for is if Trump picks Chris Christie as AG. I'm just hoping some combo of Christie's inherent patheticness, Bridgegate, and lack of capital to really help Trump with, will outweigh whatever potential loyalty Trump may feel towards him. Apparently Trump replaced Christie with Pence as head of his Transition Team; please let that be just the beginning of the corncobbing of CC...
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2016 05:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 6, 2024 23:44 |
|
|
TapTheForwardAssist posted:Right now the single weediest thing I'm watching nervously for is if Trump picks Chris Christie as AG. He'd be a shoe-in for Secretary of Transportation.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2016 05:24
|
|