Why are Democrats so afraid to say they're for legalizing recreational marijuana?

[storyteller]

Cliff notes:

Poltical achievements take time. But people want instant gratification politics. Nah, you have to consistently vote in people who can get what you want done.

Some of the stuff we want now will unfortunately only be available to future generations. If you keep voting for the bernies of the world it will take even longer. Deal with it. Accept he didn't proceed because he's an outsider. And starts voting for potential winners. And compromise.

Supporting "winners" whose policies barely move the needle is about as obvious a way to drag changes out as you could ask for. I get the stance, but the constant attempts to discourage voters from pushing for larger changes is annoying as hell. Bernie pulled the party left on healthcare off the strength of his performance, even if he doesn't win the next term everyone with aspirations will at minimum have to back a public option now.

 

[AnonymityX1000]

Supporting "winners" whose policies barely move the needle is about as obvious a way to drag changes out as you could ask for. I get the stance, but the constant attempts to discourage voters from pushing for larger changes is annoying as hell. Bernie pulled the party left on healthcare off the strength of his performance, even if he doesn't win the next term everyone with aspirations will at minimum have to back a public option now.

Really, it is a stall tactic to not getting anything done. But let's pretend they are sincere, it is also a terrible negotiating tactic. If your opposition is on one end of a spectrum you don't jump to the compromise position automatically. In the end you are going to get something in the middle of that and the extreme of your opposition.

 

[the cac mamba]

Oh look! Another reaching Democrat thread! Because Democrat politicians aren't a monolith in beliefs that's one. Two, a lot of them are older(this is where voting, which a lot of folks here despise, comes into play;vote younger people in;legalization is an age issue more than anybody wants to admit) and older folks even older liberals view weed with a stigma. Vote in more younger left leaning politicians and it will become a reality. It's not gonna be overnight, which I know annoys a lot of people.

Some of you are so politically clueless.

Although it's likely just a sneak diss at Hillary. Ya'll aren't slick.

who's being sneaky she was the last "option" they gave us, she's pertinent here. motherfukk her

 

[Dr. Acula]

Cliff notes:

Poltical achievements take time. But people want instant gratification politics. Nah, you have to consistently vote in people who can get what you want done.

Some of the stuff we want now will unfortunately only be available to future generations. If you keep voting for the bernies of the world it will take even longer. Deal with it. Accept he didn't proceed because he's an outsider. And starts voting for potential winners. And compromise.

Lol. You want to play it safe with a side who has been using CHIP, literally children's healthcare, as a wedge issue in a short term government funding bill. These are the people who you want to make sure you "progressively inch" towards a progressive idea. Its laughable.

This type of politics is dead and over. One side is playing for keeps. You don't fight that with p*ssyfooting around ideas. Obama showed you how this failed. If you still don't understand this, you're clueless

Is this Nap's alias lol?

 

[Ebonomics]

The type of democrats that are pro weed arent the same ones that will go to the voting booth consistently and vote locally (older democrats). There are also ome reddish- blue democrats that can easily flip sides over contreversial issues like marijuana.

Dont think marijuana should be a democrat platform, they should be focuse on the lower/middle class families, and i honestly dont think the issues facing lower/middle class families is smoking weed.

Alot of people are getting distracted with this weed battle. Yall fighting for Monsanto.

 

[Dr. Acula]

Because they think if they go too far left or too liberal they'll scare off "reasonable republicans" or some shyte. Only issue is "reasonable republicans" don't actually exist.


That and a lot of democrats are weak pieces of shyt who are bought and paid for by corporations.

This is the right answer.

 

[bzb]

who's being sneaky she was the last "option" they gave us, she's pertinent here. motherfukk her

to be fair obama/holder weren't advising to prosecute and persue mary j cases to fullest extent. they were actually closer to decriminalizing possession. trump/sessions want to buck state laws and have advised the doj to go prosecute and incarcerate.

 

[the cac mamba]

to be fair obama/holder weren't advising to prosecute and persue mary j cases to fullest extent. they were actually closer to decriminalizing possession. trump/sessions want to buck state laws and have advised the doj to go prosecute and incarcerate.

well, this is untrue

 

[bzb]

well, this is untrue

Eric Holder

"We don't want to put into the federal system, low level people who are simply there for possessory offenses,"

 

[the cac mamba]

"we dont want"? so what the fukk did he do about it?

im not impressed by this lip service that whore raided more dispensaries in obamas first term than bush did in two terms

 

[bzb]

"we dont want"? so what the fukk did he do about it?

im not impressed by this lip service that whore raided more dispensaries in obamas first term than bush did in two terms

i'm not going to walk you through the playground on this. it's already clear they weren't pursuing more prosecution of people for possession. they were also being hands off about what states wanted to do with their own legalization process.

i agree with op that dems should be more vocal about this. my guess is they're probably picking their battles and letting the states get punches in before making it a national thing. plus there are a good number of republicans on the legalization side as well.

 

[the cac mamba]

i'm not going to walk you through the playground on this. it's already clear they weren't pursuing more prosecution of people for possession. they were also being hands off about what states wanted to do with their own legalization process.

i agree with op that dems should be more vocal about this. my guess is they're probably picking their battles and letting the states get punches in before making it a national thing. plus there are a good number of republicans on the legalization side as well.

fine. i dont expect people i vote for to keep the status quo and act like they're doing me a favor

 

[Copy Ninja]

Because they think if they go too far left or too liberal they'll scare off "reasonable republicans" or some shyte. Only issue is "reasonable republicans" don't actually exist.


That and a lot of democrats are weak pieces of shyt who are bought and paid for by corporations.

They're fighting for trans rights and yet they think supporting marijuana is too far left?

 

[NkrumahWasRight Is Wrong]

Legalize weed and sports gambling

 

[Dr. Acula]

They're fighting for trans rights and yet they think supporting marijuana is too far left?

Obama was probably the most progressive candidate on the issue in the way he spoke about it and scaled back federal enforcement of federal law related to the matter relative to other administrations. So there is that



However, he still takes, an understandable to some degree, paternalistic concern angle about it which keep him from going "LEGALIZE MARY JANE!!". Unfortunately, many other prominent democrats don't seem to have the guts to be blunt about it.

But on one hand, this isn't the most pressing issue I think. On the other hand its such a free gimme and I don't think a lot of the older politicians we have in office can appreciate that.