Harris says she backs legalizing marijuana, going further than Biden
thehill.com
As a medical user, I really hope she will stick to this if elected. Trump is doing more "leave it up to the states" bullshit except specifically for Florida and no other state.
I mean, this won Trudeau 3 elections, so I'd say it's a worth it campaigning point.
Best way to get the young male vote to be honest. Isn't this part of what made Ron Paul popular?
Ron Paul wass popular becausue of his racist newsletter back in the 80's. Everything else was just whitewash.
Ron Paul wasn't popular because of a racist newsletter. He was popular because the libertarian ideals he espoused were appealing to internet dwellers that hadn't experienced real life yet.
Man, I'm happy someone else might remember that time on Reddit which I could only call "peak cringe". Everyone and their mother seemed to love Ron Paul on that site
Wasn't that really the days of Digg? I can't even remember such eons ago...
I sadly was one of those duped, hot off of reading Atlas Shrugged no less at a more impressionable time in my life. Thank fuck I crawled my way out.
Bit easy to dismiss millions of people because they aren't cynical or bitter and then equating that to basically being young and dumb. Perhaps reality is what it is because it's always the Bush' and Clinton's, who only marginally affect the status quo, and never the Ron Paul's, who see inherent issues with the system, or 'reality', and at least have somewhat of an inclination to improve it.
To me, a European, he was one of the very few, if any, candidates that made sense and seemed consistent in how he voted and spoke. And I consider myself to be quite libertarian.
I don't really understand your remark to be honest, other than shoehorning the "he made a racist remark" thing into the conversation. Perhaps you could elaborate.
The point is that Ron Paul was a true, modern, libertarian in that his "freedom" and "liberty" shtick was always about freedom to do segregation via "freedom of association" and other such nonsense. Ron Paul created the libertarian to fascist pipeline because libertarianism has mever been anything but veiled racism
Your entire theory hinges on a racist remark that he didn't even write and was possibly unaware of. Unless I'm missing something groundbreaking on page 2 and 3 of that article which I can't read because it's paywalled.
Is there anything Ron Paul did politically that would suggest fascist ideologies? The word is thrown around a lot these days.
His company, his newsletter, his name on it. Often tomes racist shot was directly attributes to him. So either he believed in that, condoned it, or felt that racism was a great vehicle to sell his ideology. I'm not sure whoch of those makes him a good person, or makes his ideology not about racism.
So he was a fascist/racist who spent his entire life in politics without ever showing a sign of that ideology, was he waiting to spring his trap?
I'm not here to vouch for the guy, I'm just on the outside looking in, but this seems like a bunch of conjecture in its purest form.
Also, am I reading you correctly that you think racism is a great vehicle to sell the idea of libertarianism?
In before it gets legalized federally and then some republican states start spouting states rights and continue to arrest people that are following the law.
That is actually the current argument being made for weed legalization. “This isn’t a federal issue, California has every right to make the consumption of canabis legal in their state!” Harris’ legalization would make it legal in states that do not have a set restriction, as well as allow federal employees, such as soldiers, to consume it in legal states.
You can already see this with legalization in Germany and right-wing controlled Bavaria. I am not sure right now how far they are going, but they are not happy with this and at least try to make consumption as uncomfortable as possible.
Been waiting a long time for this.
boy if i had rights and benefits for every right and benefit Joe Biden "said he backed"
Boy, if you had basic civics knowledge as to how a president in the executive branch cannot pass laws himself but requires the legislative branch (Congress) to pass said laws that he would back.
Actually the power of executive orders are very broad, and as of 2024, are beyond any limits of law. Official acts of a sitting president cannot be criminalized. He can absolutely order the FDA to immediately remove Marijuana from schedule 1 status, but he won't. What carrot would Harris have to dangle in front of us at that point?
For context, yes, I'm a dem, and yes, I'm voting for Harris, but fuck me I'm tired of such transparent posturing.
I'm voting for Harris since she's below the age of 65 and a Democrat, that's all I want.
What I need is a president who uses the powers given to them by a corrupt SCOTUS to just say "you gave me this loaded gun, make sure you know where I'm going to point it" and then give us more rights than ever before.
Ensured abortion. Better union rights. Prohibiting book bannings. Better protections for BIPOC and LGBTQ people. Ensuring voting doesn't get limited due to state lines. Healthcare. Education. Taxing the rich.
Are we going to get that? Never in a million years, we'll see the end of the Republic before we see any president use their power grabbing for anything meaningfully good and not taking away rights of citizens.
Harris could use it for good but probably won't. Trump will use it for evil. That's the honest truth.
If Biden turns the Oval Office into a grow room does that make it an official act?
We can give weapons to Israel without congressional approval, but not Ukraine.
We can build a border wall violating federal laws, but we can't have the DEA approve a plant.
Seems weird how being unabashedly evil is bipartisan and the patriotic duty of the president and anything good the Democratic candidate has to promise they'll try to work on Congress with, reaching across the isles of the literal actual fascists known as Republicans.
Say what you will about the Republicans, at least they get results on their absurd culture war bullshit. Best the Dems can do for the left is ignore us completely and give us Tim Walz as a VP like we should be soooo fucking grateful
“Results”
I don't think Tim Walz was chosen to attract left-wing voters. He's not center left or far left.
I agree with you that the Democrats tend to ignore the left, and it's incredible annoying, but at the same time in my opinion Harris is a better candidate than Hillary was. It's a small improvement, but it's an improvement. (Obviously this depends on your views on various issues, so you could disagree reasonably enough.)
Yeah I view these statements more as "I'm going to tell you what you want to hear so you'll elect me!"
This close to the election...
I will be sad if this means weed is corporatized though
Do you think buying it from a street dealer isn't corporatized? Cartels are basically just black market multinationals at this point. If anything, legalization would make it less corporate since you could grow it in your backyard.
It will seem more corporate once it's legal, but that's just because the business is being conducted in daylight.
Source: Canadian who grows a plant or 2 each summer
There's an in-between you haven't considered, which is my local mom and pop pot shop. Yes some of these dispensaries are corporations, eg Mr Nice Guy, but most are not able to be corporations due to issues with banking because it's not legal at the US federal level. If it became legal at the federal level, then there wouldn't be any barriers for Walmart or any other very very large corporation to take hold of the industry and capitalize on it.
As long as people are allowed to grow, I don't give a crap about Walmart or any other company selling weed. It's much easier to grow and process than tobacco, so there will always be a another market that offers quality.
Well, not everyone is a landowner or is allowed to grow a smelly weed plant in their apartment so
It's a plant that grows in the ground, it'll get about as corporatized as tomatoes. Meaning people will try, but they can't really stop you from growing legal plants in your garden.
Tobacco Industry: "Am I a joke to you?"
I am confused, tobacco is legal to grow for your own use.
It is but it doesn't stop a massive corporate industry from growing around it as the original comment implied would happen with cannabis.
I now see the angle you were taking in your comment.
I read it as no one can stop you from growing it,
And I believe you are saying corpos will mass commercialize it just.like tobacco.
Thanks!
Ah I see the confusion. I went back and edited my comment to hopefully make it more clear.
Not in Australia! You'll get a bigger fine for growing tobacco than cannabis. Reason: the government is losing taxes on the tobacco.
Australia is a failed police state
It's really easy to grow great weed in your closet, if you're not worried about getting busted it gets even easier and cheaper not having to go as hardcore on smell and security
Got a cheap LED board: 75
Got 4 bottles of nutrients that last me ~4 harvests: 75
Fabric pots: 15
Coco Coir (reusable and lasts a long ass time), enough for 20 pots: 30
Seeds: depends on your guy
So long as you water and react properly to any nutrient issues you encounter you'll get something better than a dispensary will sell you 9/10, and if you were to sell your plants proceeds for bottom-shelf prices you'd still make your money back with profit
I FIM train and use a basic water/nutrient schedule and a timer to control my lights, get almost an oz a plant of absolute quality green damn near every time. I must emphasize, too: I'm a fucking idiot who barely knows what he's doing, my brother is insane and gets RESULTS
How long does it take for it to grow? I want to get into it, I just want to make sure I can grow enough to supply my demands without having to wait on it to grow.
From seed to harvest it's about 90 days, if you get an autoflowering Type it'll likely tell you exactly how many days
From harvest to trim I do about a day, then 3 weeks to a month of drying, and then a month in a jar to stew before it's "ready to go"
4-5 months depending on how hardcore you do the after-harvest stuff, basically. I keep 2 sets in rotation, when one goes to flower I plant another, basically
Good it needs to be done.
Biden went somewhere on this?
I just want Hemp producers to not have to jump through all the legal redtape.. We need to make this an important crop again for the good of the planet.
TBF, "Leave it up to the states" in the context of recreational use is appropriate here. Extending that concept would necessarily include having extremely limited federal regulation, if any at all.
Medical use, in my opinion, should be federally protected, such that you can acquire medical use cannabis for a uniform set of medical purposes in all states.
100% disagree. First because it puts people in prison for spurious reasons and secondly because it's a plant. You can literally just grow it in your back yard. And it will grow really easily. It doesn't even take work.
You know what will totally fuck you up but is totally legal to own and grow and use? Salvia divinorum. You know what else? San Pedro cactus.
Even with shrooms, it's legal to own the spores when you're talking about psilocybin and Amanita Muscaria is 100% legal. It can literally kill you.
We don't even need to go into tobacco.
How does any of that make sense?
Salvia is fucking wild. I do not recommend it unless you want to lose your mind for ~10 minutes or so. Like, from sober to "holy shit I'm on the wheel of fortune right now" in an instant.
I only did it once. Apart from tasting absolutely horrible, the trip wasn't even fun. I was laying on the ground and suddenly I was standing upright and was a cowboy leaning against the porch post of a ranch house. And then I was me again. What was the point?
To become a cowboy, very momentarily, pardner
But I didn't want to be a cowboy. :(
Space cowboy? Spaced out cowboy?
Well... Some people call me the Space Cowboy...
Then again, some call me the gangster of love.
Some people call me Maurice and that's weird because it's just not my name.
Oh I didn't say it made sense, especially in comparison to other legally produced intoxicants. If things made sense, we wouldn't have gestures widely.
But in the nonsensical paradigm, relegating the legal status of a recreational drug to the state level would be appropriate, and most certainly a step in the right direction. More to the point, I don't see it being possible for the federal government to command nationwide legality of recreational cannabis. This is why I made a separate statement about medical use.
The federal government doesn't need to command that though. They can say that it is federally legal but still allow individual states or smaller governmental divisions to make it illegal. That's not how it should be, but that is how it works with alcohol, which is why there are dry counties and why Utah can regulate the amount of alcohol in its beer and wine.
That's kind of what I was saying. Recreational cannabis would be appropriately handled just like that, while preserving the right of all Americans to receive certain kinds of medical care (Roe) should be federally guaranteed, regardless of what state you live in.
While I complete and totally agree that it should be legalized, or at least federally rescheduled and completely decriminalized, I worry about what happens when it's federally regulated and taxed.
If it is federally legalized and taxed, it will likely become the domain of the ATF, who will
take overcontinue kicking in doors and doing raids on anyone who is not a huge corporate grower. Marlboro has already trademarked Marlboro Greens and I'm sure every other tobacco giant has their branding ready.Leaving regulation and taxation to each state is probably better long term, otherwise it's just going to be a corporate cash grab with established local growers and suppliers getting screwed.
Regardless, it should be completely legal to grow it in your back yard.
All these drugs you cite as negative examples have a really good safety profile. So no idea why you do that.
I agree on tobacco, maybe some DIY type of vaping is OK.
The rest is fine and if you consume any of these plants like fly agaric then you just have to know what you are doing.
Compared to alcohol anamita muscaria may have a better profile.
I mean I would appreciate it if it were federally legal. I live in a state where its legal but I'm employed by the federal government so I can't use it without putting my job at risk.
I remember Biden running on a promise to federally decriminalized Marijuana. Never happened. Don't expect it to happen under Harris either. Dumb cow laughs about locking up people for profit using less than a gram of weed.
I can’t wait for the suprise faces of all the people when they realize the cop is lying to them.
It would've been cool if she said this when she was actively putting people in cages for weed.
It would've been cool if she said this for the past 4 years while she was VP.
Now she's saying it for an election. I'm sure she's legit this time. lol.
She co-sponsored a bill to fully legalize it in 2018. Behind closed doors she was advocating for legalizing it as VP, but Biden doesn't support full legalization so it would've been a bad look for him if his VP was publicly going against him when he was still running
How dare someone change their mind! We should definitely teach her a lesson she won't forget and be amongst the 3000 people who who vote for Cornel West in November!
How can you make the claim that she changed her mind? Believe actions not words regardless of who it's coming from.
Actions she can't take until after January 20th? How do you expect people to do that? Or are you really trying to claim that since she hasn't issued a public apology, she's definitely lying and hasn't changed her mind?
I didn't say I expected her to legalize it right now nor am i looking for an apology. You're mocking the other poster and claiming "she's changed her mind" without any evidence apart from a basic statement from her that could prove to be completely false for all we know (which was the whole point of their comment).
I'm not mocking anything. The person I responded to said:
That's what a different user said not the top-level commentor, which is who you were replying to when I replied to you here (though I made a separate reply to you in a different chain so I understand the confusion).
You're right. There is confusion. Because you quoted me saying something else in a different conversation thread and claimed that was when I was mocking the person. So you need to make up your mind.
Regardless, sarcasm is not the same as mocking someone. It's a criticism of what they said.
If a politician actually changes their mind that's fine. If they change their mind to become pro-cannabis legalization, that's great.
But they shouldnt try to gaslight the populace into believing that this was their stance all along.
If this was Kamala's position all along, then her actions as District Attorney are very hypocritical.
If she actually had a change of heart, she should apologize to the nonviolent victims she chose to prosecute and incarcerate.
Or you could not let the perfect be the enemy of the good and celebrate a candidate advocating for legalization.
This is such a ridiculous expression and I wish people would quit using it to shut down valid criticism and justify inaction from our leaders.
You see a homeless guy starving on the sidewalk and give him a penny to go buy food. It's obviously not enough to buy anything and he objects, but you tell him "don't let perfect be the enemy of good. You should be thankful for what I've given you."
Rapist Brock Turner rapes a girl behind a dumpster at school. He's given probation for the crime. "Don't let perfect be the enemy of good. Be thankful that he's being punished for his crime."
Trump passes his tax bill in 2018 giving permanent cuts to wealthy individuals while middle and lower classes get a temporary cut along with the removal of some credits and caps on SALT deductions. This widens the income inequality in our country but since we got a couple of years of lower tax bills, "don't let perfect be the enemy of good..."
Just stop it.
I'm sorry, but if you can't accept legalization of cannabis without a public apology, I would say "letting the perfect be the enemy of the good" is exactly the right phrase to use.
There's no indication that legalization is happening. What we've gotten is a simple statement that may or may not be true.
That's because she hasn't been elected yet.
You know she's just the vice president, right?
Yes, this is quite obvious.
Here you, in an incredibly condescending tone, are stating that legalization is a forgone conclusion based on nothing more than a campaign promise. People are pointing out examples where her actions contradict said campaign promise, which is why they have a hard time believing it. Candidates make false campaign promises all the time, so I can't see why you're attacking people for not falling for it the 100th time. Talk is cheap.
You can tell what tone someone is using from text?
Do you think it might be possible that you might be misinterpreting me?
You're right, no one really cares about a public apology. Just like this entire story, it's only words.
What really matters is advocacy for those nonviolent drug "offenders". They deserve release from jail, an end to probation, an expungement of criminal records, and reparations for the losses they suffered.
Kamala issuing a pro-legalization press release is the path of least resistance for her. If she actually stood on principle she would advocate to expunge the criminal records of all nonviolent drug offenders that her DA office prosecuted. But even that is just the words of a politician- what really matters is policy change.
You literally said:
Do you care about a public apology or not?
Policy is what matters. A public apology is just optics, and I only care about optics insofar as it affects policy.
I was offering up a public apology as one way to help resolve her current hypocrisy on this issue. Harris' current position seems to be something like "allow current and future cannabis consumption, but continue to brutally punish those who consumed cannabis in the past" and I find this deeply schizophrenic.
Okay, well she can't set policy until she's the president. So is your argument here that we shouldn't be hopeful that she'll do what she says she'll do because she hasn't done it yet even though it's not in her power? Otherwise I don't understand what the deal is here.
If you are getting your hopes up from a press release, and ignoring her entire work history as district attorney, then you are being duped. Actions speak louder than words.
You've convinced me. Never hope for anything good to ever happen.