Printable View
I'd like to start thinking about candidates for office that have shown (and voted) in favor of the mmj patient and small caregiver & dispensaries.
In general, in my opinion, favoring/voting for 1284 would be an obvious dis-qualifier.
I don't think party affiliation should be a consideration - just the candidates stance and history on mmj / legalization. We do hope for converts, so some consideration could be given to recent and outright good behavior.
what do you think?
I think Stan Garnett is a good candidate, even though he favors regulation and his opponent lobbied hard against H.B. 1284. Ditto Hickenlooper over McInnis. I'll most definitely be voting for Bennett over Norton/Buck, even though Bennett has no position at all on MJ and leaves me cold.
Gibbs isn't running again which is good because he voted for this bill.
Nice to see this topic being brought up.
I sure as hell will *NOT* vote for any incumbant.... Being a business owner, I don't need any more taxes, I don't need to be *FORCED* to buy health insurance for myself or my employees, I don't need anymore government regulation(I already had to hire an office manager to deal with all the paperwork).
I just want to be able to make a living for myself and my employees.
I just moved to Colorado "Grand Junction" so any insight on who to vote for in my district would be a great help.
A large number of Republicans voted against 1284 because they are strongly against dispensaries and they didn't want them legitimized by state statue. Just because a pol voted against, doesn't mean they favor mmj and our cause.
Also, some who voted against 1284 did so after placing ugly amendments to the bill. To me it reads like they took campaign donations for placing the amendment, even if they eventually voted against the bill. At best these pols are a draw and equally unworthy of support from the mmj community.
In total we have very few friends in the CO GA. You can probably count them on one hand.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HighPopalorum
Bennet--you've got to be joking right? This guy is the take everything you've got.
Yes a big SPENDING democrat--but has absolutely no history on voting on MMJ--and guaranteed will be a HUGE TAX DUDE, and would gladly vote to send this project to Kentucky to tobacco producers there--DA--DUH--DA--DUH.
Republicans are the answer--at least they believe in "free enterprise" they believe in the SMALL business--and not a freakin take-over of every industry in this country. Republicans believe in keeping JOBS here in Colorado.
Regarding mmj--it's not political parties--it's who is a believer versus who doesn't believe in the benefit of medical marjuana.
And if you haven't figured that out yet--DON'T VOTE.
parties don't matter, but I don't know that any R's were with us in the legislature this year. (though some did vote against)
Stan Garnett - I agree. He seemed to have a religious experience after the Lauve acquittal.
Morgan Carrol - On Our side. She Rocks. Not sure if she is up for re-election or not.
Clair Levey - I think she's not always sure HOW to be on our side, but her heart is in the right place, SHE was the one who asked for committee in order to hopefully derail 1284. She writes back!! She IS up for re-election.
Paul Weissman - we need to get him to run for something else! He is done due to term limits, but he understands and supports. I wish he would run for mayor of Louisville as Chuck Sisck (sp?) is on the way out, and Louisville is still afraid of the plant, about to re-affirm their moratorium.
I also think we need to DONATE MONEY to those who are favorable to patients, small caregivers, dispensaries, edible makers, seeds, genetics suppliers, and other industry members. We need to let them know WHY we are donating and voting for them!
The tide raises all ships! we need to remember this and consider everyone involved for the right reasons - with the line to remember being Patients First!
Quote:
Originally Posted by copobo
Then I have to assume that you call Romer and Ritter friends of this movement--when Republicans on the floor of the house were stating that 1284 was a constitutional violation of admendment 20 in this state?
I have to continually remind liberals or democrats that admendment 20 in this state passed in 2000 when this state was "solid red"--meaning that there is majority of republicans in this state that actually do believe in the medical benefits of marijuana.
The ONLY time that this state voted "blue" was for Barack Obama--which surpirsed the heck out of me. Me a 3 generation inhabitant of this state.
And we Republicans here in the State of Colorado have always liked our home grown weed.
Hell, if you don't like it here--move to New Jersey one of the bluest--supposedly the most liberal states in this country--but before you move you might want to look up what they just passed regarding mmj--:)
teach me then, who are the Republicans that are pro-mmj in the legislature?
I know some tried anything to avoid 1284 b/c they don't want it legit.
1284 was definitely a mistake that was started by Romer, a democrat, but 109 which violates the doctor patient relationship was sponsored by an R. Kind of surprising, but true.
As I stated, this is NOT about party for me. If you can show me a true mmj republican running for legislature, I'll have my $200 check in the mail for their candidacy.
Let's NOT make this about party. It's all about who is for MMJ.
I'm an Independent, btw :)
Quote:
Originally Posted by copobo
Again--the ENTIRE point I am trying to make. The overwhelming majority of Coloradoans are fiscally CONSERVATIVE. IOW we don't believe in big Federal Government. We voted for admendment 20 clear back in 2000. Directly after 1284 passed the senate--- Rasmussen polled Coloradoans--and a WHOPPING 49% stated that they want marijuana completely LEGAL and TAXED. The other % missing are those that are O.K. with medical marijuana--meaning that the overwhelming majority in this state believe in is some type of marijuana approval.
I don't know how long you have lived in the state of Colorado--but I am a 3rd generation native.
The point is--I think you will find that republicans in this state are more pro marijuana--than are democrats.
A good place in point: El Paso county--church group of this entire country--city council Colorado Springs--slammed dunked the Chanber of Commerce-literally calling the opposition the Chamber of "de commerce" and voting for the approval of medical marijauna dispensories. --(not a democrat in the bunch)
please show me to the mmj repub.
peace:jointsmile::thumbsup::jointsmile:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ottistoys
Listen--there's a-holes (democrats and republicans) on this issue--. But for crying out loud when you have the city council of the "nation's church council" in El Paso County--all Republicans--telling the Chamber of Commerce to take a freakin hike--what does that tell you?"
Republicans are all for the small business in this state--they love job creation in this state--they want the tax revenue and they are smart enough to know that if they overregulate it--it will go underground and they will not be able to tax it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ottistoys
Well, how about you showing me the democrat support of this?:)
Quote:
Originally Posted by rightwinger
Rommer, Govenor Ritter or haven't you been paying attention?
Both democrats
Again--this is a RED STATE. You do not live in California or New York city. You live in Colorado--and most Coloradoans are FISCALLY conservative people. They could give a rats ass about other social issues--such as gay marriage--they are mainly pro-life people--whom do not believe abortion is right--and you're lucky to be living in this state-because as a 3rd generation native--we do not like federal government intervention into our personal lives.Quote:
Originally Posted by copobo
Now for those that are NEW to this state--I am certain that our ways comes as a SURPRISE to you. We are not LIBERALS. If you want to go to a blue-state--Liberal mmj state-then go-New Jersey-the number one blue most liberal--democrat lead states in this country to do your business. But I would suggest that you look up their marijuana laws before you start packing your bags--:)
IOW--Welcome to Colorado
To add--Senators like Bennet really will have nothing to do with local state politics--and if you're thinking that the Federal Government is going to legalize marijuana in our life-times--forget it.Quote:
Originally Posted by HighPopalorum
Really this is a local state issue--and it's best to study the remarks of your local state representatives and candidates to see what their comments are on medical marijuana and dispensories in this state--"before you vote."
If you have to contact them to find out, do it. I think it may surprise you what type of responses you will receive and from whom.
Again conservative Republicans believe in smaller less intrusive government--meaning less regulation. They believe in less taxes--to promote business. Typically democrats believe in bigger government--meaning more regulation--and in my life-time as we are witnessing at the national level--big spending--always means higher taxation.
So check out your local state level candidates on this particular issue before you vote.
I don't see things changing much here in south Mississippi for a while. Living in the middle of the bible belt has advantages and disadvantages. For the time being, I would be happy for the county that I live in to change from a dry county to a wet one so I don't have to drive to the next county for alcohol. :wtf:
Rightwinger, you've posited that Republicans in this state are more supportive of medical marijuana than democrats. Now please prove it.
I would REALLY like to hear about specific candidates and not parties.
Who, specifically has shown they support the patient, caregiver, dispensary?
Who is FOR the patient - ie. they voted against 1284 because they are pro-patient.
it's useless arguing party politics here.
I'm at least 3rd generation and a liberal. Dont' tell me how to think or that Colorado is a red state and imply that we are all conservatives. If anything, Colorado is a purple state.Quote:
Originally Posted by rightwinger
While parts of the state are conservative, there's also places like DENVER and BOULDER that are liberal. And Denver was the first city in the US to legalize weed.
Fact is, it's REPUBLICANS that want to lock people up for smoking weed. It's you right wingers that started the whole "war on drugs" that has made millions of victims out of innocent people. Please don't deny this, it will destroy any credibility you have. Take responsibility for Regan and Nixon, the two presidents most influential in the prosecution of drug users.
You remember the conservative idol Ronnie "Zero Tolerance" Reagan, and his "successful" War on Drugs right? The guy that was telling us not to use drugs or else, meanwhile he was sending money to drug czar Manual Noriega in the Iran/Contra case.
You can make a case that libertarians are in favor of legalization, but law and order republicans want to fry people that smoke weed.
And about republicans wanting "NO federal government intervention", that's a lie. What happened with the BP oil spill? All of a sudden all the republicans that were so against gov. intervention now want the gov. to come save their ass. You have Jindle saying a few months ago he wouldn't take fed money, now he's crying for the gov to help him. Then the wack-job Michelle Malkin, that stout "anti socialist" starts yapping about how the gov should commandeer private citizens' boats. Seriously? She can say this with a straight face? No gov intervention? Marshall law? Really?
Yep, you're a conservative until you're in court or need someone to save your ass, then everyone is a liberal...Even Rush turned liberal when his addicted butt was in court. "Please have mercy on my drug using butt. I only want the death penalty for OTHER drug users". Yes, Rush has said he supported the death penalty for drug users, of course this was before he went to court himself.
Plus who cares about politicians? The obvious way to beat this thing is to have the citizens vote, just like we did the first time. Sure, continue to fight the recent legislation, but this "medical marjuana" isn't what most of us here want anyway and favor full legalization.
Here's what I believe to be a fact...More than 50% of the population is for the legalization of weed in Colorado. The problem is that 50% of the voters aren't, and that's a big difference. We either need to get the 18-30 year olds to vote, or wait for them to get a little older when they will vote.
Instead of driving a wedge between conservatives and liberals by getting on a soap box, preaching and wagging your finger in everyone's faces, pretending to speak for all Coloradans, I suggest you try to find ways to unite both sides. You don't speak for me. So don't.
Framing the discussion around support or non-support for 1284 is also self-defeating. Ritter, Hickenlooper, even Romer are on our side. There's no need for a purity test, and particularly not one based on a very mixed piece of regulatory legislation. This cause is a big tent, and you shouldn't exclude MMJ-friendly candidates who favor the "tax and regulate" approach.
PS...Here's a link to all the governors of Colorado over the years to see how Colorado actually voted:
Colorado Governors
Note that the R party was the liberal party from 1850's - about 1919.
In my lifetime, Colorado has had a D for gov 32 years and an R for gov 20 years. Hardly proof for saying Colorado is a "red" state. Seems a lot of "red" voters have been voting "blue" when it actually matters.
Not sure who I should quote here, as left/right, or Dem -VS- Rep is a closed minded subject from both sides. THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE!!
Republicans are SUPPOSED to be for small government and VERY FEW LAWS!
Leading to actual freedom.
But they are not. (because they are not republicans, they are NEO-conservatives,(better called a socialist Democrat))
Dems are for throwing money at issues and regulating them to death. (this is what the neo-conservatives (republicans??) are ALSO doing).
However NOW both sides are aiming at the same goal. SOCIALISM!!
Although not ALL politicians are like this 99.8% ARE! They switch sides on issues after elections because their long term plans are the same on BOTH sides.
This is because they are bought and paid for by the SAME banks that are currently robbing us of our Country and human rights.
If your a DEM and think this is bull, OR if your a REP and think this is bull. Investigate your politicians, I guarantee they have VERY close friends who supposedly believe the opposite as they do. (depending on WHO is in control at the time)
THEN, find an issue/bill that failed under one party(opposed by the other party) a few years back. In most cases the opposing party will pass the bill a few years later! While the original party opposes the bill THEY first introduced. It's happened THOUSANDS of times.
Point is,... This is not a right or left issue, It's not a Republican-vs-Democrat issue!
EVERY issue is a,.. "World banks" against the people issue! Via the paid minions (politicians).
They don't vote on ANYTHING because they read or actually understand what they are voting on. They vote based on either who paid the most FOR the vote,... OR they vote because they discover their vote might cost them their career. NOTHING ELSE!!
I say,... Vote out ALL INCUMBENTS!!
Whenever a Liberal utters the term "Common Sense approach"....grab your
wallet, your ass, and your guns because the sombitch is about to do
something damned nasty to all three of them.
*shrug*Quote:
Originally Posted by Mississippi Steve
I grew up in NOLA and Bham. Out here I grow my own and distill my own, and not once has a "common sense" liberal tried to deprive me of any of dozens of firearms I own. You'd be surprised how well the "common sense" approach works in the [still] wild west.
rightwinger,
are you a third generation native?
I am only 2nd generation in the US.Quote:
Originally Posted by pfunk211
how about all you red people and all you blue people
all you this people and all you that people
come together and create a cohesive list of PEOPLE that CAN make a difference?
seems like one or two dedicated folk should be able to put together a few hours of exhaustive research and find out what's what.
wasn't that the threads intention?
i'm no third-generation (smug) coloradoan, but my vote counts just the same....
thanks for the thread, copbo
he supported adding ptsd as a condition that would be allowed.