Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Politics
posted by martyb on Wednesday August 26 2020, @08:11AM   Printer-friendly
from the plans-going-up-in-smoke dept.

Trump Is Petrified That Pro-Weed Forces Will Roast Him:

The president and some of his team, already obsessed with the potential drop-off of various demographic groups that make up his battered coalition, have begun openly worrying that the drive to legalize or decriminalize marijuana might hurt him and fellow Republicans at the ballot box.

According to two GOP strategists who've independently discussed the topic with Trump this year, the president believes that inclusion of marijuana initiatives on state ballots could supercharge turnout for voters who lean toward Democratic candidates and causes. The president, according to one of the sources, asked for updates on critical swing-states that could see such ballot measures in the 2020 elections.

"The president is keenly aware of how presidential elections [nowadays]... can be won at the margins," one of the Republican strategists said. "The pot issue is one of many that he thinks could be a danger... He once told me it would be very 'smart' for the Democrat[ic] Party to get as many of these on the ballot as they could."

Decades ago, Trump had publicly advocated full-on legalization, arguing that "we're losing badly the war on drugs," and that "you have to legalize drugs to win that war. You have to take the profit away from these drug czars." During this iteration of his political identity, he put the blame on politicians who "don't have any guts" to tackle drug legalization.

But by his 2016 presidential campaign, Trump had come out "strongly" against legal weed. By the time he reached the Oval Office, he was enthusiastically proposing executing drug dealers by firing squad. And his first attorney general, Jeff Sessions, revoked an Obama-era guidance that discouraged the feds from prosecuting marijuana-based criminal cases in states where it was legal.


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 26 2020, @09:00AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 26 2020, @09:00AM (#1042039)

    And volunteer for editing, so marty can go to sleep early (and get better stories posted, like aristachu's).

  • (Score: 5, Funny) by gtomorrow on Wednesday August 26 2020, @09:40AM (12 children)

    by gtomorrow (2230) on Wednesday August 26 2020, @09:40AM (#1042059)

    Of course Trump has come out "strongly" against legal weed. The President knows weed is for lusers! Everybody knows PILLS AND POWDERS are for WINNERS! Ask W!

    • (Score: 4, Informative) by Thexalon on Wednesday August 26 2020, @03:01PM (4 children)

      by Thexalon (636) on Wednesday August 26 2020, @03:01PM (#1042175)

      Forget W, there's a lot of people who think the current president and/or members of his family might well be coked up right now.

      The War on Drugs has never really been about the drugs though: The DEA's founder Harry Anslinger explained his real motives to Congress, Nixon's people admitted as much, and lots of drug warriors since have made sure that in practice the Wall Street guys can continue to enjoy their hookers and blow without government interference.

      --
      The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
      • (Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 26 2020, @05:21PM (3 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 26 2020, @05:21PM (#1042258)

        What a load of bullshit.
        Trump doesn't even DRINK, much less use illegal drugs.

        • (Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 27 2020, @06:04AM (2 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 27 2020, @06:04AM (#1042565)

          "Colored students at the Univ. of Minn. partying with (white) female students, smoking [marijuana] and getting their sympathy with stories of racial persecution. Result: pregnancy."

          "Two Negros took a girl fourteen years old and kept her for two days under the influence of hemp. Upon recovery she was found to be suffering from syphilis."

          "Reefer makes darkies think they're as good as white men."

          • (Score: 2) by kazzie on Thursday August 27 2020, @06:10AM (1 child)

            by kazzie (5309) Subscriber Badge on Thursday August 27 2020, @06:10AM (#1042567)

            Three "quotations" , no reference.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 27 2020, @07:00AM

              by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 27 2020, @07:00AM (#1042583)

              Gray, Michael (1998). Drug Crazy: How We Got Into this Mess and How We Can Get Out. Random House. ISBN 0-679-43533-6.

              Inciardi, James A. (1986). The War on Drugs: Heroin, cocaine, crime, and public policy. Palo Alto: Mayfield Publishing Company. p. 231. ISBN 0-87484-743-5.

              David E. Newton (2017). Marijuana: A Reference Handbook, 2nd Edition (Contemporary World Issues) 2nd Edition. ABC-CLIO. p. 183. ISBN 978-1440850516.

    • (Score: 2) by Freeman on Wednesday August 26 2020, @04:27PM (6 children)

      by Freeman (732) on Wednesday August 26 2020, @04:27PM (#1042215) Journal

      I assume, W is supposed to be a person.

      --
      Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
      • (Score: 2) by istartedi on Wednesday August 26 2020, @05:06PM (5 children)

        by istartedi (123) on Wednesday August 26 2020, @05:06PM (#1042237) Journal

        The younger Bush (POTUS #43) is frequently referred to as simply W. Also sometimes, "the shrub". He allegedly used cocaine in his younger days. I'm not sure if he ever fessed up, I really don't care now.

        --
        Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
        • (Score: 2) by isostatic on Wednesday August 26 2020, @06:21PM (4 children)

          by isostatic (365) on Wednesday August 26 2020, @06:21PM (#1042294) Journal

          A great statesman, we just didn't know it at the time

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 26 2020, @07:13PM (3 children)

            by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 26 2020, @07:13PM (#1042321)

            A great statesman, we just didn't know it at the time

            Just because someone much, much worse than Dubya took office doesn't make him less of a war criminal.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 26 2020, @11:59PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 26 2020, @11:59PM (#1042449)

              I wouldn't say Obama was much worse, only just on par in the evils department.

            • (Score: 2) by istartedi on Thursday August 27 2020, @07:00AM (1 child)

              by istartedi (123) on Thursday August 27 2020, @07:00AM (#1042584) Journal

              Indeed. The rehabilitation of W in the minds of so many Democrats is one of the most mind boggling facets of our current politics. I guess political loathing is governed by an inverse cube law over time or something. How many multi-decade, multi $trillion, 100s of thousands of lives lost wars has Trump gotten us into? What kind of TSA has Trump started? Did he sign the Patriot Act, or what?

              Oh, but Trump lacks presidential bearing, so suddenly they miss W. WTF?

              --
              Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
              • (Score: 2) by gtomorrow on Thursday August 27 2020, @11:24AM

                by gtomorrow (2230) on Thursday August 27 2020, @11:24AM (#1042624)

                Nixon was buried as "a great statesman." Trump will (eventually) be interred as "a global peacemaker and a man of the people."

                Draw your own conclusions.

  • (Score: 5, Interesting) by Rosco P. Coltrane on Wednesday August 26 2020, @11:14AM (3 children)

    by Rosco P. Coltrane (4757) on Wednesday August 26 2020, @11:14AM (#1042069)

    That just goes to show how much trust you can put in anything politicians says. They don't have any real conviction, just the conviction-du-jour that furthers their agenda - which is, and only is, grab more power and more money.

    I'm surprised anybody bothers to vote for any of those liars...

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 26 2020, @12:59PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 26 2020, @12:59PM (#1042103)

      That's perfect logic! This guy makes me sick. Don't vote for the other guy. And marijuana makes you gay. Don't show up, ya hear?

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 26 2020, @02:30PM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 26 2020, @02:30PM (#1042148)

      If you ever changed your opinion on something from decades ago, you're a hypocrite. Solve your own hypocrisy first before calling out others, lest you look like a fool.

      • (Score: 4, Insightful) by DeathMonkey on Wednesday August 26 2020, @02:56PM

        by DeathMonkey (1380) on Wednesday August 26 2020, @02:56PM (#1042170) Journal

        Changing your opinion over the course of a decade is normal. Trump will completely reverse his own position within a single sentence!

  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday August 26 2020, @11:17AM (11 children)

    by JoeMerchant (3937) on Wednesday August 26 2020, @11:17AM (#1042070)

    Which people do you give what they want? The ones that keep you in power, of course:

    By the time he reached the Oval Office, he was enthusiastically proposing executing drug dealers by firing squad.

    What does Putin really want? KAG2020 and find out.

    --
    🌻🌻 [google.com]
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 26 2020, @01:02PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 26 2020, @01:02PM (#1042105)

      > What does Putin really want?

      Puppies? I don't know. Was this meant to be rhetorical? Because if it was, it isn't any more.

    • (Score: 2) by Thexalon on Wednesday August 26 2020, @03:06PM (9 children)

      by Thexalon (636) on Wednesday August 26 2020, @03:06PM (#1042182)

      What does Putin really want?

      From what we've seen in European military maneuvers, it sure looks like what he'd like is (1) maintain his absolute power in Russia, and (2) push the European military front against him from roughly 2/3 into Ukraine to somewhere around where the former Iron Curtain was.

      --
      The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
      • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday August 26 2020, @05:01PM (8 children)

        by Phoenix666 (552) on Wednesday August 26 2020, @05:01PM (#1042231) Journal

        From what we've seen in European military maneuvers, it sure looks like what he'd like is (1) maintain his absolute power in Russia, and (2) push the European military front against him from roughly 2/3 into Ukraine to somewhere around where the former Iron Curtain was.

        Is this serious? Is this considered plausible in the conversations you're in?

        Russia has no capacity to do this. It is a shadow of what the USSR was. Also, if they committed to a conflict with a populous, modern, and mostly united Europe, they'd not only get their asses soundly and roundly kicked, they'd be eaten ass-first by Beijing, which is keen to seize all those tasty, tasty resources in mostly empty Siberia.

        The only thing Putin wants is 1). 2) will never happen.

        --
        Washington DC delenda est.
        • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday August 26 2020, @05:15PM

          by JoeMerchant (3937) on Wednesday August 26 2020, @05:15PM (#1042253)

          There's plausible, then there's what Putin wants. Much like what Trump wants vs. some semblance of reality.

          --
          🌻🌻 [google.com]
        • (Score: 2) by Thexalon on Wednesday August 26 2020, @06:29PM (6 children)

          by Thexalon (636) on Wednesday August 26 2020, @06:29PM (#1042303)

          Is this serious? Is this considered plausible in the conversations you're in?

          1. Just a couple of weeks ago, the US announced it was removing forces from Germany [cnn.com]. Those forces are there to assist in the defense of Europe against possible Russian attack. This move of course makes no sense from the point of view of the US allied with NATO and the EU, but makes perfect sense from the point of view of the US allied with Russia, which the current US president certainly seems to be [senate.gov].
          2. Although this has largely left the headlines, Russia is still occupying territory in Ukraine and has been now for over 5 years.
          3. Earlier this year, Belarus's president suggested the Russians are trying to annex them [rferl.org].

          So I do think the Russians are *trying* to recover the old Warsaw Pact countries to the best of their ability. Does that mean they're succeeding easily? Not at all, and I agree that if they tried to attack the EU they'd have a fight they couldn't handle on their hands, but I'm pretty sure that's a long-term goal. It also makes Russia's big diplomatic goal the encouraging of Brexit and similar efforts to dis-unite Europe and NATO enough so if they make a grab for, say, Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia, that might not lead to an immediate counterattack by the EU powerhouses or the US.

          --
          The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
          • (Score: 2) by Bot on Wednesday August 26 2020, @09:26PM (2 children)

            by Bot (3902) on Wednesday August 26 2020, @09:26PM (#1042385) Journal

            As much as Russia pushing to get a friendly UK to clash with EU is totally realistic (Forsyth had made a novel about this, right?), the fact that brexit is politically a strange occurrence which was completed merely days before the covid 'pandemic' makes me think it has been planned well above the plan of national struggles.

            --
            Account abandoned.
            • (Score: 5, TouchĂ©) by Thexalon on Wednesday August 26 2020, @09:48PM (1 child)

              by Thexalon (636) on Wednesday August 26 2020, @09:48PM (#1042394)

              That's hilarious, thinking Brexit was planned.

              --
              The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
              • (Score: 2) by gtomorrow on Thursday August 27 2020, @11:32AM

                by gtomorrow (2230) on Thursday August 27 2020, @11:32AM (#1042625)

                Well...technically, it was planned, but it certainly wasn't organized! I guess that's what happens when you have to transform whims into a plan. Plus there was all that high-priority boat-naming to do.

                Silly Britischers.

          • (Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday August 26 2020, @10:34PM (2 children)

            by Phoenix666 (552) on Wednesday August 26 2020, @10:34PM (#1042412) Journal

            1. Just a couple of weeks ago, the US announced it was removing forces from Germany [cnn.com]. Those forces are there to assist in the defense of Europe against possible Russian attack. This move of course makes no sense from the point of view of the US allied with NATO and the EU, but makes perfect sense from the point of view of the US allied with Russia, which the current US president certainly seems to be [senate.gov].

            That has nothing to do with Russia. That's a spat between Trump and Merkel, the latter of which isn't ponying up more money for NATO as it should. Germany also isn't the frontline with Russia anymore. Poland and the Baltics are all members of NATO. Belarus and Ukraine aren't. The US doesn't need ground troups in Germany to come to Europe's aid against Russian invasion, even if such a far-fetched scenario came about; military strategy has changed. But Europe absolutely doesn't need any American help to defend its member states against Russia. France and the UK, both members of NATO, have their own nuclear weapons that are plenty to end all life in Russia, and Germany could wake up early tomorrow and have a force of ICBMs built before breakfast if it wanted to. Europe's collective conventional forces and productive power alone are more than enough to do the job, too.

            So Trump's withdrawing American troops from Germany has nothing to do with military considerations, because there is no risk there. It's about money, and the fact that Europe has been getting a free ride from American taxpayers for 50+ years such that they can afford fancy social benefits while Americans go without.

            2. Although this has largely left the headlines, Russia is still occupying territory in Ukraine and has been now for over 5 years.

            Ukraine should either throw them out themselves or ask their pals in the EU to help them out. Might be a fine moment for the EU, in fact, to recapture its mojo by fighting for a common purpose of liberating fellow Europeans from the shadow of Russian encroachment.

            3. Earlier this year, Belarus's president suggested the Russians are trying to annex them [rferl.org].

            Boo-hoo. Belarus is run by autocrats. That's like Putin crying that Xi Jinping is trying to annex them. Might be true, but it's awfully hard to muster up tears for them. Maybe the Belarusans(?) Belarussians(?) ought to quit being autocratic dicks and get the Europeans to like them such that they help them out.

            --
            Washington DC delenda est.
            • (Score: 4, Interesting) by Thexalon on Wednesday August 26 2020, @11:28PM (1 child)

              by Thexalon (636) on Wednesday August 26 2020, @11:28PM (#1042440)

              It's about money, and the fact that Europe has been getting a free ride from American taxpayers for 50+ years such that they can afford fancy social benefits while Americans go without.

              So let me get this straight: The EU has all the forces they'd need to defend themselves without US help, but at the same time the only way they can afford to have fancy social benefits is with US help?

              I'm going to hazard a guess that the real reason that the bigger powers in the EU have social benefits has a lot more to do with (a) taxing their people a lot more, and (b) not having their military budgets be the giant cesspool of corruption and pork spending that the Pentagon is. (It doesn't take much digging to see what kind of money is going to waste, either: All the military contractors have shareholder reports declaring billions in profits that came right out of the US Treasury.)

              --
              The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
              • (Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Thursday August 27 2020, @11:36AM

                by Phoenix666 (552) on Thursday August 27 2020, @11:36AM (#1042626) Journal

                So let me get this straight: The EU has all the forces they'd need to defend themselves without US help, but at the same time the only way they can afford to have fancy social benefits is with US help?

                The force posture of the US in Europe is a relic of the Cold War, when NATO was facing down the Warsaw Pact. The US spends 3.5% of GDP [forbes.com], which is as much as the next 10 countries combined. Germany spends 1.2% of GDP [worldbank.org]. Doesn't it strike you as odd that the US spends more to defend Germany, than Germany spends to defend Germany?

                As far as Europe's own military strength goes, taken together [worldatlas.com] they have 1.43 million troops. Russia has 900K. Russia has nukes, but so does Europe. Europe can defend itself against Russia.

                So, America really doesn't need to spend that kind of money "defending Europe from Russia." If the Europeans like having that American security blanket in addition to what they already have themselves (which I have argued is quite sufficient to keep the Russians at bay), then they should pony up more money to have it. That might mean they have to cut back on other kinds of spending.

                (b) not having their military budgets be the giant cesspool of corruption and pork spending that the Pentagon is. (It doesn't take much digging to see what kind of money is going to waste, either: All the military contractors have shareholder reports declaring billions in profits that came right out of the US Treasury.)

                I'll cede this point. The MIC is notorious. I will further observe, however, that such a sorry state of affairs is not unique to America. There was a recent scandal in Europe [theguardian.com], was there not, surrounding the Typhoon fighter?

                --
                Washington DC delenda est.
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by khallow on Wednesday August 26 2020, @11:56AM (1 child)

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday August 26 2020, @11:56AM (#1042073) Journal
    There's not much of a story here. It's basically just the observation that Trump faces downside to pro-marijuana initiatives on the ballot for those four states, particularly Arizona. So what's he going to do about it, if anything? He could do something shifty like block or remove from the ballot those initiatives (say via a lawsuit). Or he could preempt by decriminalizing enough at the federal level to take the air out of the sails.
    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 26 2020, @12:19PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 26 2020, @12:19PM (#1042077)

      Or he could talk loquaciously for months about the evil of drugs and Mexican rapists. Yep, I think we know where he's going with this.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 26 2020, @12:21PM (2 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 26 2020, @12:21PM (#1042078)

    He does what he wants. And he hasn't exactly been enforcing federal marijuana laws either.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 26 2020, @12:24PM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 26 2020, @12:24PM (#1042079)

      And he ejected Sessions from government after taking him out of the senate, then firing him.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 26 2020, @01:07PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 26 2020, @01:07PM (#1042106)

        And then hired Barr. Currently ranking the 2nd worst AG of all time after Alberto "The fact that the Constitution—again, there is no express grant of habeas in the Constitution. There is a prohibition against taking it away" Gonzales.

  • (Score: 2) by Bot on Wednesday August 26 2020, @12:36PM (9 children)

    by Bot (3902) on Wednesday August 26 2020, @12:36PM (#1042084) Journal

    Trump isn't. Obama wasn't. Bush wasn't. Clinton wasn't. And TutanBiden doesn't look anything like Duterte.

    --
    Account abandoned.
    • (Score: 3, Interesting) by epitaxial on Wednesday August 26 2020, @12:57PM (3 children)

      by epitaxial (3165) on Wednesday August 26 2020, @12:57PM (#1042102)

      The DEA employs too many people along with all the private prisons. No politician wants to go on record for costing people jobs.

      • (Score: 3, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 26 2020, @01:11PM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 26 2020, @01:11PM (#1042108)

        Meat packing. Close the prisons and put everyone to work doing meat packing. It's the clear solution.

        • (Score: 2) by Gaaark on Wednesday August 26 2020, @01:52PM

          by Gaaark (41) on Wednesday August 26 2020, @01:52PM (#1042121) Journal

          Soylent Green packing. Close the prisons and put everyone through a furnace grinder. It's the final solution.

          --
          --- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 26 2020, @07:27PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 26 2020, @07:27PM (#1042328)

        Don't fire them. Retire them. Add ten years to their length of employment and give them whatever retirement that number of years would entitle them. The ones close to retirement can just retire, and those far from retirement can get other jobs while having their lower retirement checks as supplemental income.

        No one in the agency will fight that. Sure it'll cost more, but no one in DC has even given lip service to the public debt for years now; what's a few billion more at this point.

    • (Score: 2) by Thexalon on Wednesday August 26 2020, @03:09PM (4 children)

      by Thexalon (636) on Wednesday August 26 2020, @03:09PM (#1042185)

      Nothing would hurt the drug cartels more than legalizing weed and replacing punishment of users of the more addictive stuff with effective treatment. But that would anger the hypocritical killjoys who want to make sure nobody else is having a good time.

      --
      The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
      • (Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday August 26 2020, @05:10PM (3 children)

        by Phoenix666 (552) on Wednesday August 26 2020, @05:10PM (#1042244) Journal

        I agree with you on the first point. I philosophically agree with you on the second point, but drug addiction, even to marijuana, is a terrible thing. My brother-in-law is hopelessly addicted to pot and it has destroyed his life. Everything he does and is revolves around getting baked. Tragically, it has so altered his brain chemistry that he is only minimally tolerable when he's stoned out of his mind, and a miserable, insufferable bastard when he's not.

        Smoking a joint now and then doesn't seem like a bad thing, and dropping acid or doing mushrooms for the experience doesn't sound too horrible, but the nature of drugs rather makes casual use difficult or impossible, doesn't it?

        --
        Washington DC delenda est.
        • (Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 26 2020, @06:12PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 26 2020, @06:12PM (#1042292)

          mushrooms and lsd are not addictive. mushrooms are probably actually good for you as long as you don't go completely crazy with the dosage. see the Fantastic Fungi doc. weed is somewhat psychologically addictive, but easy to quit if you have the desire. your brother-in-law doesn't really want to quit.

        • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Thexalon on Wednesday August 26 2020, @07:08PM

          by Thexalon (636) on Wednesday August 26 2020, @07:08PM (#1042319)

          I've never been into drugs myself. I don't even like being drunk, and do that rarely (as in, less than once a year). But I've known people who were into all sorts of things (including some friends of Timothy Leary), and from what I can tell, the ranking of real danger amounts to:
          1. Opioids: That stuff will kill you if you don't break free of the addiction. And it also causes a lot of property crime as addicts desperate for their fix steal in order to pay for it.
          2. Tobacco: That stuff could very likely kill you with cancer, emphysema, and other long-term damage.
          3. Alcohol: Alcohol kills mostly through drunk driving and violent stupidity, although alcohol poisoning can definitely be an issue. Other major issues here include unprotected sex leading to disease and pregnancy, domestic violence, and fist-fights.
          4. Sugar: This is a very powerful psychological addiction for a lot of people. Heck, you might be a sugar addict and not think about it - I sure was for a while. The main way this harms is through obesity and diabetes. Like alcohol, once in a while and not too much it's fine, every day it's a problem.
          5. Psychedelics: The biggest danger with acid, shrooms, and other similar stuff is that you blithely do something suicidal while you're tripping and don't see what you're doing. There can also be psychological surprises for people who are tripping if they aren't well-prepped for the experience. However, the folks I know who do these kinds of drugs generally arrange to have people they trust who aren't tripping to keep them out of trouble. And I've met nobody who has done these on a regular basis.
          6. Cannabis: There's definitely a chance of psychological addiction with it, just like alcohol. However, since the worst effects of a pothead not getting their dope seems to be that they're a bit miserable and cranky, and there's been no proven medical dangers, I consider it to be far less harmful than many other drugs.
          7. Caffeine: If you don't think that there are people with psychological and minor physical dependency on caffeine, look at what happens when you take away the supplies from a regular coffee drinker - they get miserable and cranky and possibly get a headache.

          --
          The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 27 2020, @06:23AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 27 2020, @06:23AM (#1042570)

          I've heard this lie before from so many people. The closest this cool bro story approaches the truth is that you have a brother-in-law you can't stand, and you saw this person using weed once or twice.

          Let me try my version (which is still a lie...):

          I agree with you on the first point. I philosophically agree with you on the second point, but weapon addiction, even to handguns, is a terrible thing. My brother-in-law is hopelessly addicted to guns and it has destroyed his life. Everything he does and is revolves around shooting things. Tragically, it has so altered his brain chemistry that he is only minimally tolerable when he's at a gun range, and a miserable, insufferable bastard when he's not.

          Target practice now and then doesn't seem like a bad thing, and clay pidgeons or paintball for the experience doesn't sound too horrible, but the nature of weapons makes casual use difficult or impossible, doesn't it?

  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by krishnoid on Wednesday August 26 2020, @02:30PM (1 child)

    by krishnoid (1156) on Wednesday August 26 2020, @02:30PM (#1042150)

    I hope they go head-to-head [mercurynews.com] on this, I'd love to see how both of them justify their current/historical positions and actions.

    • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 26 2020, @02:51PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 26 2020, @02:51PM (#1042165)

      It's pretty obvious, no?

      For Republicans, going in the bat-shit insane direction is natural tendency. Drugs are bad. Crazed negroids. Whatever you need.

      For Democrats, they're so scared of holding a position on anything they fill in the right-wing space vacated by the batshit crew, hoping that nobody will yell at them.

  • (Score: 2) by richtopia on Wednesday August 26 2020, @03:28PM

    by richtopia (3160) on Wednesday August 26 2020, @03:28PM (#1042190) Homepage Journal

    The article only points out Arizona and Montana. What are the other two states with marijuana proposals on the ballot? I want to know for a friend.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 26 2020, @06:14PM (2 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 26 2020, @06:14PM (#1042293)

    it doesn't matter what kind of lame candidate we have. it's about ballot and debate access. can you imagine a competent libertarian in a debate with the puppets of the two major parties?

    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Thexalon on Wednesday August 26 2020, @07:34PM (1 child)

      by Thexalon (636) on Wednesday August 26 2020, @07:34PM (#1042333)

      Johnson / Weld was the most credible ticket I've seen from the Libertarians in my lifetime. And I think that was at least somewhat reflected in the election results, although they were also helped in a big way by how bad the Democratic and Republican candidates were.

      But the Libertarians have the same problem the Greens have: They have a tough time getting local traction without a strong national presence, and they have a tough time getting a strong national presence without local traction, and the Democrats and Republicans collectively control elections and things like the debate commission, which makes it hard for them to be taken seriously.

      --
      The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 27 2020, @07:03PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 27 2020, @07:03PM (#1042846)

        i didn't like johnson/weld for shit, but i still voted L. i didn't know who badnarik was until after the fact, but he seemed way more legit that J/W. i would have preferred kokesh won the nomination this time, but i understand that wouldn't have been very practical. i'm not too concerned with practical.

  • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 26 2020, @08:55PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 26 2020, @08:55PM (#1042376)

    I guess the gist of this submission is that dopers can't imagine living without getting stoned, so a president's drug stance can be a dealbreaker for them: single issue voters.
    Grow up, Cheech and Chong LARPERs.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 27 2020, @07:09AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 27 2020, @07:09AM (#1042587)

      I guess the gist of this submission is that hoplophiles can't imagine living without shooting things, so a president's gun stance can be a dealbreaker for them: single issue voters.
      Grow up, cowboys and indians LARPERs.

  • (Score: 4, Funny) by Opportunist on Thursday August 27 2020, @12:03AM

    by Opportunist (5545) on Thursday August 27 2020, @12:03AM (#1042453)

    He should just stop smoking it 'til after the election. Problem solved.

    Have some self discipline, dammit!

(1)