I heard some folks say Hillary wasn't pro-Pot enough. Well, say hello to AG Sessions

[stevenleser]

I have no idea why knowing the other guy will crush everything we care about isn't enough to get some folks to go out and vote or make them enthusiastic.

And yes, regardless of what any Republican nominee says during the campaign, we KNOW they will crush everything we care about.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2016/12/02/trump-pick-could-halt-legal-pot-industry/jJzBgw7GAowt0dKvZiJwIK/story.html?p1=Article_Trending_Most_Viewed

Trump AG pick could halt legal pot industry



WASHINGTON — Donald Trump’s nominee for attorney general, who has a long history of hard-line opposition to marijuana, could unravel the burgeoning recreational marijuana industry across the country, including in Massachusetts.

Senator Jeff Sessions, a former federal prosecutor and Alabama attorney general, has been taking on marijuana dealers since the 1970s.


He said earlier this year that “good people don’t smoke marijuana” and “we need grown-ups in charge in Washington to say ‘marijuana is not the kind of thing that ought to be legalized.’ ”

Because marijuana remains illegal under federal law, Sessions, if he is confirmed, could choose to order targeted prosecutions of recreational marijuana farms and shops that are operating legally under state law. Such a move could seriously threaten the retail marijuana industry, worth a billion dollars in Colorado
.
.
.

[Auggie]

1. The genie is out of the bottle on dope, I think

People would turn ape-shit angry at Trump too.

[NWCorona]

2. My concern is he will usher in the corporate takeover

I know he hates it but big money is already lining up.

[SMC22307]

6. Yeah, that's where I see this going. (n/t)

[SidDithers]

13. Trump Tokes...nt

Sid

[mtnsnake]

3. The beer and pharmaceutical industries will absolutely love that fucking asshole Sessions

because those industries would love nothing other than to keep marijuana illegal. The pharmaceutical industry is petrified about medical use of marijuana because pot can replace so many of their horrific and costly prescription drugs and do a better job, a safer job, and for a fraction of the cost. For obvious reasons, the beer industry is petrified of the thought of legal recreational marijuana usage. The only other ones who might be happy to see Sessions in there would be the illegal pot dealers.

[Warren DeMontague]

4. Well, Hillary and Trump were functionally equivalent on the stump, ie "let states decide".

Now, it's pretty damn apparent to those of us on the West Coast that the Eastern Seaboard is behind the curve on this issue, but not by much, as witnessed by Mass. and Maine.

It remains to be seen what Sessions will do. He may be focused on immigration, which is Trump's signature issue. Trump may not want to expend a ton of political capital going after weed, when it enjoys bipartisan support and there are lots of Republicans, from Rand Paul to Dana Rorbacher, who take a more libertarian approach on it.

[stevenleser]

7. Nope, people have to be smarter than that, as you can see the end result

Last edited Sun Dec 4, 2016, 10:55 AM - Edit history (1)

We had similar results with Gore and Nader re: Bush.

Nader: "Gore and Bush are functionally the SAME re: X, Y, and Z...!!!11!!11!!11"

Oh no they weren't.

And no Hillary and Trump aren't.

[Warren DeMontague]

9. You seem to be arguing with phantom people who didn't actually vote for Hillary.

I don't know where they are, but, you know... knock yourself out.

Yes, in terms of actual statements on the stump; both Hillary and Trump essentially said "states should decide" on marijuana. Hillary was more specific, but then Hillary had a comprehensive grasp of the issues while Trump just said oft-random shit that came into his head. Hillary also called for a rescheduling from I to II, which, by the way, wouldn't have done anything to reconcile the conflict between federal and state law. Trump never mentioned scheduling at all. But they both said "it should be up to the states", of course given the fact that Colorado is a fairly crucial EC swing state I question whether any candidate would have done different on the stump this year. Taking the opposite tack sure didn't help Christie in the primaries.

Now, those of us who dug deeper would have seen that at least the Democratic Platform was a bit more committed and specific on the matter, calling for a "reasoned pathway to future legalization", etc. (Language which, of course, was driven entirely by Sanders people on the platform committee.) And certainly anyone with a memory going back more than 8 years would acknowledge the GOP's traditional authoritarianism on these matters.

But Hillary's campaign wasn't out there highlighting a more progressive approach on cannabis. They didn't make it a focus.

[stevenleser]

11. Nope, I'm arguing re: people who said there was functionally no difference, like you just did. nt

[Warren DeMontague]

12. I'm not going to play one of these "bad internet arguments" games, Steve.

Here, I'll help you out: "You're saying there is no difference which is exactly what the Nader people said about Bush and Gore"


derp.

Hillary: "I believe, as louis Brandeis said, states are the laboratories of democracy"

Trump: "I really believe we should leave it up to the states."

Again, whether people dig deeper or take the candidates at their word is another matter, but in terms of the implications of actual statements, again, they are functionally equivalent.

[stevenleser]

17. And I am saying people have to be smarter than that and use history as a guide.

And yes, the pronouncements that Nader vomited forth from his mouth re: Bush v Gore is all the history you need to understand what is going on.

Anytime you think that the Democratic position is the same as the Republican one, chances are, you are wrong.

We no longer need to elect the Republican to find this out. We should all know better.

[Warren DeMontague]

20. I'm all for people being smarter.

But our candidates can help dispel disinformation like this:

Trump Trolls Target Clinton's Questionable Cannabis Stance in Satirical #StopThePot Campaign




by clearly and forcefully articulating a distinct position.

[Warren DeMontague]

5. Would you acknowledge that maybe DWS was a real problem for our party in Florida?

She teamed up with Sheldon Adelson to try (unsuccessfully) to defeat Medical Marijuana. Which passed by over 70% there. Meanwhile during the campaign she was going to the NY Times talking reefer madness and defending throwing grannies in prison for eating pot brownies.

Is it conceivable, given the strong plurality that weed won that state by while the electorate was divided for President, that her enthusiastic advocacy for pot criminalization hurt our chances there?

[stevenleser]

8. Nope, people not learning from the past was the issue for our party

If Trump is what it takes to reinforce that message, I can live with that.

[Warren DeMontague]

10. You're having a conversation with yourself, which bears no resemblance to anything I asked.

Again, 70%+ people voted for MMJ in FL this year, while DWS has spent the past 3 years defending laws that put sick people in prison for using pot. You don't think that hurt our brand?

[stevenleser]

16. I know that is your argument, and once again, anyone thinking that way should have known

that the reality of the situation we faced was at worst, a Democrat who would not create additional anti-pot legislation if elected versus Republicans who would attempt to turn back the progress made on that, no matter what BS they were selling during the campaign.

A Democracy depends on an electorate willing to educate themselves on the issues and the history of the behavior of the parties and individuals involved. We have seen this before again and again. There is no excuse for not knowing this.

[Warren DeMontague]

18. Who do you think I voted for, Steve?

You're not addressing my point, instead you're clearly on some crusade to battle this ever-elusive "some folks". Maybe try JPR?

In the meantime, prodding our leaders to actually lead in the direction of where voter sentiment lies- and a majority of Americans, now, support legalization- seems to me to be both a moral imperative and good political strategy.

[stevenleser]

19. Why do you insist in thinking this is about you or how I think you voted? This is broader than that.

The last two times a Republican was elected to the Presidency, we heard from one portion of the left that the Democratic nominee wasnt progressive enough and that the Democratic nominee was so functionally equivalent to the Republican that there was no point in voting for the Democrat.

I can almost forgive it the first time because we had no real world example to show that even if they seemed the same, the Republican would be much, much worse. So much worse that anyone on the left not voting for the Democrat would regret it.

There is no excuse this time. And no, I am not referring to you Warren.

[Warren DeMontague]

21. Yes, it's about fighting imaginary battles against "some folks", most of whom aren't even on this

site anymore. I'm not playing. But... if you're going to use cannabis as a shovel to try and dig up all that DU primary fighting goodness we all so enjoyed here this past year, I'm gonna point out that we still could have done better, DWS as figurehead of our party was a fucking clusterfuck of a disaster on that issue, and it was Bernie Sanders' team that got the pro-legalization language into our platform, and rightly so.

You don't have to lecture me about Ralph Nader. I lost friends over that shit.

[stevenleser]

22. This entire forum is about that battle and that "DU primary fighting goodness"

Whether it is a good idea to have this forum is still an open question in my mind, but as long as it is here and these topics are being discussed, I think it's important to point out how this pot question played out.

And the way it played out, like many other issues, is that there was a contingent that said that Hillary wasn't progressive enough and was essentially a Republican.

We see how that is turning out on Pot, yes?

[Warren DeMontague]

23. No, I haven't seen any evidence that it was insufficiently enthused Sanders weed people

that caused HRC to lose the rural rust belt.

Whether DWS's alliance with Sheldon Adelson against the will of 70%+ of the electorate in Florida hurt our chances there is a separate question, to my mind.

[mcar]

14. Hillary wasn't perfect on every issue

Trump is a nightmare on every issue. Amazing how some cared more about the former than the latter.

[stevenleser]

15. Yep, and here we are. nt