Before I get caught up in the race for President, I've got to know----who is going to legalize the weed?
Printable View
Before I get caught up in the race for President, I've got to know----who is going to legalize the weed?
I don't think anyone who has announced there running so far is a supporter. It may sound odd but I think Kerry would be the best bet for medical pot if he were to run. But I would not vote for him just for that one issue. Kerry and Kennedy have fought with the DEA in the past to try and get permission for UMass to grow and test marijuana.
I am sure no one. They would feel that it would hurt their position and lose votes from middle America.
Obama(spelling) maybe I heard on FOX he was once believed to do cocaine, so that means he probly did weed. I think we should work on decriminalizing before legalizing.
take a look at the libritarian party. Libritarian doesnt mean libril.
Libritarians want to legalize, they believe to each his own and that government should stay out pof personal lives.
A Libertarian doesn't stand a chance of winning. It would be up to the congress to initiate such a bill and if offered to the pres, I think Obama would be most likely, maybe edwards, but the rest including Hillary are too uptight!Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatekeeper777
I doubt Edwards would. Obama is the best bet.
I agree that Obama probably is the best bet of the current crop of mainstream candidates, but he's not going to touch that hot potato. Too controversial. Too much propaganda and misunderstanding out there. If you look at it from a standpoint of whether a Democrat or a Republican is more likely to make a decision like that, though, generally a trend toward change away from the status quo is much more likely to originate from a Democrat, most likely a liberal Democrat. (Obama's not exactly liberal, although arch-conservatives like to say he is.)
The legalization issue isn't something that's likely to be a decided on a national level anyway or with some sort of constitutional amendment, IMO. Most of the organized pro-cannabis movement, like NORML, for instance, knows that it'll be a gradual process that starts on the state level with a.) legalization for medical use, b.) decriminalization, and c.) legalization for recreational use.
it would take an overwhelming majority of states decriminalizing and/or legalizing before the feds would even consider thinking about reversing their stance on weed. no viable presidential candidate will even speak in whispers about it until the states have made it obvious to them that the people are steadfastly behind the idea. the stakes are far too high and the price of failure far too costly for anyone to even bring up the notion an a national scale.
for those of you who still believe that we can regain any form of control in this matter through democratic means, local and state legislation is probably your only logical venue.
i'm getting tired of being the spoiler on this subject, but i can only call 'em like i see 'em
No politician would ever think of doing that. It would spell political suicide. The government has spent the past 70 years in an intensive propaganda campaign against weed, and they've convinced most of the ignorant masses that it is an evil deadly narcotic that destroys the fabric of society.
While some of the smaller parties like the Green Party and the Libertarian Party have legalization on their platforms, they don't stand a chance of getting elected to high office (no pun intended) and even if they did all the Republicrats would stop them long before they actually got a chance to legalize it.
Which ever candidate you pay lots of money to will legalize it. It's not an issue unless you can afford to make it an issue. And before you write the check, be sure you're paying more money than Merck will pay to NOT legalize it...and I have a feeling that Merck can pay ALOT.
Dboy