Can Republicans stop legalization?

B

BrokrnEyes

New Member
Bernie Sanders has publicly said that he would legalize it, Hillary Clinton has a least commented on it, but almost every Republican candidate that I can think of (please correct me if I'm wrong) has spoken out against it with many saying that they would reinstate the harsh penalties. My question is, do you think that this is all just Republican candidates saying stuff to get elected knowing full well that they can't prevent the eventual legalization of marijuana in the United States at this point anymore? Or, like the plant we are so fond of, do you think that if a Republican does get into the White House that marijuana acceptance in United States will be stunted if not pushed back because of their stance against the plant. I guess what I am asking, is if the genie out of the bottle enough that they can't get it back in?
 
BrokrnEyes said:
Bernie Sanders has publicly said that he would legalize it, Hillary Clinton has a least commented on it, but almost every Republican candidate that I can think of (please correct me if I'm wrong) has spoken out against it with many saying that they would reinstate the harsh penalties. My question is, do you think that this is all just Republican candidates saying stuff to get elected knowing full well that they can't prevent the eventual legalization of marijuana in the United States at this point anymore? Or, like the plant we are so fond of, do you think that if a Republican does get into the White House that marijuana acceptance in United States will be stunted if not pushed back because of their stance against the plant. I guess what I am asking, is if the genie out of the bottle enough that they can't get it back in?
Click to expand...

Brother, I think at this point the genie is no where near out of the bottle enough. 4 states and 1 district legalizing like tobacco and alcohol is no where near enough when there are 46 other states left to go. Plus, Cannabis hasn't been rescheduled below class 1 either, which may be the most important step we need here, it is this very large piece of the puzzle that we need to put in place before it's to the point of no turning back. It's a very delicate situation we have in front of us and we need all hands on deck to get it to all come together.

This is precisely why you always see me stressing so much and with such passion that people have got to start getting active in this fight, we can loose everything in just a matter of a few votes and laws written and then we'll be right back to square one again. I am convinced that we are certainly not out of the woods yet and I implore people to quit counting their chickens before they hatch!
 
I hate to break it to you but there is a Republican who supports the end of the war on drugs and has even put a bill on the floor to change MJ to a schedule II as opposed to a schedule I drug. That would be Rand Paul.
That being said am I endorsing him? No I actually believe the candidate that will be best for America is Bernie Sanders, but if there is a staunch republican out there that feels he or she must vote republican, at least they too have a candidate who is opposed to the prohibition of MJ.
 
BrokrnEyes said:
Bernie Sanders has publicly said that he would legalize it, Hillary Clinton has a least commented on it, but almost every Republican candidate that I can think of (please correct me if I'm wrong) has spoken out against it with many saying that they would reinstate the harsh penalties.
Click to expand...

You are wrong, Rand Paul is running for the GOP presidential position and he opposes the strict laws we presently have
 
I always thought rand Paul was more an independent then a republican but none the less I'm glad to hear a conservative/republican that'd running isn't touting the company line.

I respectfully disagree 420 Warrior (yes, I realize it's a bit long to respond), granted wow only a handful of states have made it recreationally legal as well as DC, silver half of the states having at least made it medicinally legal/decriminalized I think the staunch opponents of cannabis would have a harder Time are we criminalizing at them they would have in the past, namely because many of those states, both the ones that made it recreationally legal as well as medicinally legal are collecting taxes and, for better or for worse, money talks. I think affect the Colorado was able to get out of the red and only a few short years after texting cannabis has made many states see cannabis as a potential source of income rather than something that should be prohibited to the public.

I certainly agree that there is still much work that needs to be done regarding cannabis awareness, and once the parties have the primaries the cannabis movement will have a better idea of what the next four years may potential he look like but the more I think about it, the more I have to believe that, through in action, the Obama administration has more or less made cannabis a states rights issue, which is something that Republicans typically have champion end with their "small government" rhetoric.

I'll definitely be paying closer attention to the primaries this time around than what I typically do.
 
I do not know where you are getting your information from. As said above, Rand Paul has come out actually in favor of decriminalizing drugs and/or lessening the penalties for using them. Donald Trump, the current Republican front runner, has stated many times over the years that he is in favor of legalizing drugs. This is a quote from Trump on August, 2015: "You have to legalize drugs to win that war. You have to take the profit away from these drug czars." Jeb Bush also publicly supports the decriminalization of marijuana. Ron Paul, a precious Republican presidential candidate and father or Rand Paul, last year introduced bi-partisan legislation asking to end the federal war on marijuana and allow states to legalize, regulate, tax, and control marijuana without federal interference.
 
Also if you look at the Democrats, some there are also anti-MJ, especially Joe Biden and O'Malley. For the record:

Joe Biden (D): As a senator, Biden took a hard line against marijuana. He spearheaded legislation that created the federal “drug czar” position and mandatory minimum sentencing for marijuana-related offenses.

Jeb Bush (R): At the 2015 Conservative Political Action Conference, he said he supports states’ rights to establish their own marijuana policies and that the federal government should not interfere in their decisions. During a radio interview in December 2015, he said he supports marijuana decriminalization.

Ben Carson (R): He said that he would probably enforce federal marijuana laws in states such as Colorado and Washington, which have made it legal for adult use, but allow for some form of medical use. He also said that, as president, he would “absolutely” continue the war on drugs and “intensify it.”

Chris Cristie (R): Christie opposes the legalization of marijuana and has spoken out repeatedly against states that have legalized marijuana for adults. He also opposed New Jersey’s medical marijuana law.

Hilary Clinton (D): Clinton has expressed support for legal access to medical marijuana and more research into the medical benefits of marijuana. She waffles on full legalization though. When asked about the legalization laws approved in Colorado and Washington, she said “states are the laboratories of democracy” and that she wants to see what happens in those states prior to taking a position in support or opposition to such laws.

Ted Cruz (R): Cruz said he is opposed to the legalization of marijuana for adult use, but he believes states should have the right to establish their own marijuana policies.

Carly Fiorina (R): Fiorina does not support the legalization of marijuana for any purpose, including medical use. She recently expressed support for decriminalization though. She has also expressed support for the rights of voters to establish their own state marijuana policies.

Jim Gilmore (R): Gilmore opposes the legalization of marijuana for any purpose. In 2000, he signed onto a National Governors Association policy plank that urged the federal government to increase funding for the War on Drugs and declared legalization is “not a viable alternative, either as a philosophy or as a practical reality.”

Mike Huckabee (R): Huckabee opposes the legalization of marijuana for any purpose, including medical use. However, he has expressed support for allowing states to develop their own marijuana policies free of federal interference, and he said he is “willing to let states operate under the 10th Amendment.”

John Kasich (R): Kasich is “totally opposed” to marijuana legalization, including the use of marijuana for medical purposes. He believes states should “probably” have the right to establish their own marijuana policies and would not challenge state laws regulating marijuana for medical or adult use.

Martin O'malley (D): O’Malley repeatedly spoke out against the use of marijuana for any purpose as Governor of Maryland, including medical marijuana. Despite his personal opposition, he signed bills into law in 2014 that decriminalized possession of small amounts of marijuana and established a workable medical marijuana program in his sate.

George Pataki (R): Pataki is not in favor of legalizing marijuana for any purpose, including medical use. He has said that he supports states’ rights to set their own marijuana policies without interference from the federal government.

Rand Paul (R): Paul has consistently supported states’ rights to establish their own marijuana policies, and he has been a vocal supporter of decriminalizing or reducing criminal penalties for those arrested for marijuana possession. He is a sponsor of the CARERS Act, a bipartisan bill that would allow states to set their own policies regarding the legalization of medical marijuana without interference from the federal government.

Rick Perry (R): Perry opposes the legalization of marijuana, but he has voiced support for reducing penalties for marijuana possession. He has repeatedly expressed support for states’ rights to establish their own marijuana policies.

Marco Rubio (R): Rubio has expressed some support for allowing the use of non-psychoactive forms of medical marijuana, but he is staunchly opposed to the legalization of marijuana for adult use. In April of 2015, he said that he believes federal prohibition laws should be enforced in states that have repealed state prohibition laws.

Bearnie Sanders (D): Sanders has expressed support for allowing states to legalize and regulate marijuana for adult and medical use. He has been critical of the war on drugs. Sanders says he intends to propose legislation that would remove marijuana from the federal drug schedules and ensure states are allowed to regulate it similarly to how they are allowed to regulate alcohol.

Rick Santorum (R): Santorum is opposed to the legalization of marijuana for any purpose, including medical use. He does not believe states have the right to set their own marijuana policies and supports enforcing federal prohibition laws in states that have rejected them.

Donald Trump (R): Trump has said he favors legalizing all drugs, but more recently he has changed his position somewhat to say that he opposes legalizing and regulating marijuana for adult use at the federal level. He supports legal access to medical marijuana, and he believes states should be able to set their own marijuana policies with regard to adult use.

For references to the above position statements and more details on how to contact the list of candidates and give them your opinions on MJ legalizatoin, see this web site: Marijuana Policy Project | We Change Laws
 
Wow thank you very much for posting that, I have to admit I'm surprised at the number of politicians on the Republican side better for it in some form, though I do hope it's not pandering with no intent to follow through with it, guess I'm a cynic when it comes to politicians, decidedly more when it comes to the Republicans than the Democrats, though that's another story completely.
 
You are absolutely right Big Sur and I apologize for leaving Donald Trump off the list of Republicans who are in favor of decriminalizing MJ but I did so only because he has not said how he specifically plans on doing anything other then getting the top brights smarts guys and gals on it. To me, that is not a proposed solution, that is just more political double speak, much like we have been getting from politicians for the last 50 years. Oh wait he does have a solution for immigration that he actually did give specifics, he intents to build a wall, not just any wall but an amazing wall that only he is capable of building. And the beauty of this is we will not even have to pay for it, because Mexico will be paying for this wall. Perhaps his solution for the drug problem will include getting the Columbian drug cartel to pay for our new drug policies.
Either way, as you may have noticed, I do not see his promises as a viable option, though at least Rand Paul is believable.
 
Well, what politicians say and do and what they believe and what their cabinet will go along with and what the party will go along with and what the senate and house will pass are all different things. I was surprised that Marty O'Malley was against weed so strongly, and again when he signed the MMJ bill in Maryland. A complete contradiction to his beliefs. Obviously Trump has had to back-peddle on what he believes and has said before about legalizing drugs to pull in more of the right wing voters in the primaries. Hillary has waffled a lot and is trying to not go one way or the other. Cruz is more neutral than I would have thought, as is Bush. Paul and Sanders are obviously the most pro advocates of the lot, one from each side of the isle. There are also several staunch Republicans and Joe Biden that would widen the war on drugs and go after the states that have legalizes rec weed. Fortunately they are all low in the polls or out of the race.

In the end what any of them will actually do remins to be seen. I lived through the Nixon administration and he pretty much single handedly administered the Paraquat spraying campaign in Mexico. That was against the advice of his own cabinet that he was poisoning the population. He did not seem to care. Of course, he was doing other terrible things as well that led to his demise and complete disgrace in office. My experience in the west has been that law enforcement has been pretty lax on weed crimes. That is reflected in the fact that all 4 states that have legalized weed are in the west, and the next three likely to legalize it are here as well: AZ, CA, and NV. DC of course is the exception in the east, and the one that baffles me the most. In the national capital, weed is legal, but it remains a federal crime.
 
I remember tricky Dickie as well. What a piece of work he turned out to be. By the way, you did a great job on showing where all the candidates stand on the positions. A big kudos to you. Like you I was surprised by some of their positions, though I figured a few would favor it only because that is the direction of the political winds, which is why I was really surprised by Hillary. She normally swings with the political winds and this is one where she is not. Also though Bernie Sanders is running on the democratic ticket, he is and has always been an Independent. To my knowledge he has not officially joined the democratic party but I could be mistaken. Would not be the 1st time and I doubt it would be my last time if I am wrong.

I guess what scares me even more though is if you follow both sides debates, I saw something that reminded me a lot of another guy who ran for the head of the state back in the late 30's not in America but in Europe. He used hatred for others as a platform to get elected and I see a bit of a correlation between then and now. Blame a specific race or religion for your problems and give the people someone to hate. Hate the Mexicans because they are flooding our southern borders and are a burden to our inter-stucture. Hate the Muslims because they are terrorists and want to kill Americans and what we stand for.
Now change that from Mexicans and Muslims to Jews, blacks and gays and who would I be referring to. Kind of scary when you look at it that way. Just saying.

Any platform based on hatred and bigotry is not a good platform I believe in my humble opinion.
 
oldergrower said:
I remember tricky Dickie as well. What a piece of work he turned out to be. By the way, you did a great job on showing where all the candidates stand on the positions. A big kudos to you. Like you I was surprised by some of their positions, though I figured a few would favor it only because that is the direction of the political winds, which is why I was really surprised by Hillary. She normally swings with the political winds and this is one where she is not. Also though Bernie Sanders is running on the democratic ticket, he is and has always been an Independent. To my knowledge he has not officially joined the democratic party but I could be mistaken. Would not be the 1st time and I doubt it would be my last time if I am wrong.

I guess what scares me even more though is if you follow both sides debates, I saw something that reminded me a lot of another guy who ran for the head of the state back in the late 30's not in America but in Europe. He used hatred for others as a platform to get elected and I see a bit of a correlation between then and now. Blame a specific race or religion for your problems and give the people someone to hate. Hate the Mexicans because they are flooding our southern borders and are a burden to our inter-stucture. Hate the Muslims because they are terrorists and want to kill Americans and what we stand for.
Now change that from Mexicans and Muslims to Jews, blacks and gays and who would I be referring to. Kind of scary when you look at it that way. Just saying.

Any platform based on hatred and bigotry is not a good platform I believe in my humble opinion.
Click to expand...

I have certainly had that thought in the past as well about that particular candidate that you're talking about, there are a few key differences retrain that candidate and Mr. dorky mustache though, both in personality, background as well as economic situation. What got The people on Hitler's side in my opinion was how the Allied forces treated Germany after World War I. We (America, Great Britain, etc.) put massive war debt on Germany to the point that Germany was more or less bankrupted and in such a deep depression that the government was the mending its citizens pay in the gold rather than in the countries on Currency. Couple that with the traditional idea that that the Jews are gifted with a financial know how and I imagine this was seen or at least perceived by the non-Jewish population of Germany you will get a mix of class warfare with ethnic hatred. Hitler gave The German people a scapegoat to focus their anger and hatred on as well is said "follow me and I will take you to the promised land." and sadly, they followed him.

I don't think The candidate in question has much to stand on though, we are coming out of the recession that we went into back in 08, gas his hit rock bottom (I don't drive but still, thank God) and he would be going up against the cultural tradition of America being the great melting pot, granted he certainly has the power to stir people up but I don't believe there are enough people to win him the election, not to mention our system of government is fundamentally different from that of pre-World War II Germany that it would be very difficult for any group that radical enough to get the foothold needed that the Nazis carved out.

Hillary Clinton is waffling doesn't surprise me in the least to be perfectly honest, she has a lot of things that are working against her. She would be another link in a political dynasty, something that America clearly is not interested in when you look at how America is looking at Jeb Bush, been Ghazi occurred on her watch (i'm sure that movie that just came out isn't going to do her any favors), email gate (ironic pun concern who you're talking about Nixon, LOL), and the fact that she was busted for saying that the majority of her donors are women, well technically true the overwhelming majority of her campaign warchest has come from big donors. I don't deny that because she has name recognition that she has a chance, but I think she is going to tread very carefully until the Democratic primaries, at which point we may see her start to become a little bit more bold if she gets the nomination but I think she'll still keep it toned down until after Election Day. I think out of all the candidates she is the one that is walking the highest tight rope right now.

Even if Bernie Sanders is indeed an independent, considering the fact that he's been in the Democratic the Bates does that mean that he is still trying to run on the Democratic ticket that's if he gets the party nomination wouldn't he in effect be a Democrat? I think for cannabis legalization, Bernie Sanders is our best bet but last I heard his campaign was suffering financially Plus the lack of media coverage is probably hurting his chances as well, which is a shame, I think out of all the candidates right now if you seems to be the most levelheaded.
 
Good points Brokrneyes

I by no means was insinuating that Donald Trump was going to be the next Hitler, I was merely comparing how both pretty much ran a campaign on hatred. Now if you happen to be a white christian, you may not see it that way, but if you happen to be hispanic or a Muslim you may be taking it slightly differently. As far as I am concerned Donald has a snowball chance in hell of winning, but then again I said the exact same thing about GW Bushes 2nd term.

I agree that Hillary waffles more then the international house of pancakes. I do not trust her one bit and believe she would tell you that the moon was made of green cheese if she thought it would convince you to vote for her.

As for Bernie, well call him an independent, a democrat, a socialist, heck call him a dam commie what he is labeled makes no difference to me. What does matter to me is his record of where he stands and what he votes for. He is the only candidate I have seen so far that votes for the average American. He prefers to think of war as a last resort and only after every and all avenues have been tried, he believes that every American has a human right to health care and that everyone including large corporations and the super rich pay their fair share to keep the country strong. The DNC wants Hillary, that is pretty clear, look at when the debates were held, the Saturday before Christmas. Really? Kind of make you wonder if they wanted anyone to actually watch it. The press plays as if Bernie is not even a contender yet the polls show differently, yet they report it as if he is not even challenging her.

I hope that America wakes up before it is to late, while ending prohibition is a huge issue, the direction of our country is at stake here and it appears that the super rich may end up buying yet another election if people do not wake up.
 
I don't think Trumps appeal is so much coming from white Christians but from people who are chafing under political correctness when it comes to minorities. These are people who have bought into the fear mongering that people like Trump have been spouting for decades and while I wouldn't call any but a small percentage truly bigots (I consider someone a bigots who has hatred for a group in their hearts, not fear) enough of them believe the crap from groups like fox "news" that white america is getting shafted in theaters of commerce and industry. I seriously doubt he'll get the nomination, but he has indicated he'll go independent and he does have the cash to do it, though if he does it will divide the republican vote and give a free path for the democrats for the election.

As for GWB, John Kerry has too much of a air head look both then and now so when I saw that John Kerry had the nomination, I knew it was from a sure thing that GWB would get reelected. I just pray that guy stays on his ranch painting "cats".

I am more interested in that it really seems this time around that the Republican Party seems to be splintering even more so than when the tea party was founded. If Trump does run as an independent, I strongly suspect that we may very well see the end of the two-party system as I can't see the GOP remaining together for another four years not in control of the White House. I think the Democrats are starting to splinter as well but not nearly as much as the Republicans have done.
 
I agree that both parties are falling apart. The democrats had to pull in an Independent to even make it appear that there was going to be any kind of horse race for the DNC nomination. While the Republican party is still trying to recover from what the tea party has done for them.
I have seen Independents split the vote in years past but it has never been more then 3 on the final ballot. Imagine if Cruz got the GOP nomination and Donald ran as an Independent, and if Hillary gets the DNC nomination what if Bernie ran as an Independent also.
Now I do believe we have had up to 4 names on the ballot before in American history (will have to look that one up) but it has always been a name you would look at and go, "Who the heck is that" we have never had 4 names on the ballot where each one of the 4 have a solid base supporting them.

I actually see Bernie's chances of being elected better with 3 or even 4 names on the ballot but like with Bush I could be very very wrong. For the record, when I was amazed that GW was elected I honestly believed that short of Adolph Hitler, anyone would have been able to beat him. Man was ever wrong on that one. Hopefully when he is down on the ranch painting cats, he is using a canvas and not actually "Painting Cats" :rofl:
 
"Come here India, gonna change your spots again hehehe..."
 
finger slipped…

It would certainly be a historic election if there were four candidates on the ballot. And I even think that such a thing would cause a historic turnout for voters as there would be far more potential representation then in the typical election but as for who would win the election, it probably would be something like what happened in 2000 where it was "too close to call" with the vote being divided 4 ways.
 
Back
Top Bottom