Garbage, not worried about CO yet.

I would not worry about CO ... it's an Emerson Poll. Won't last more than a couple of days.

Silver does give them a 'B' rating, which is a little surprising. But their results are all over the place. They have Trump TIED with Clinton among Colorado women. In that same poll they polled Missouri and found Senator Bunt losing by 2% to the Democrat. No other poll has show that. It's hard for me to take them very seriously.

http://media.wix.com/ugd/3bebb2_b53ca6b673c14cdab9d68832bd7e74cb.pdf

for the states that want it or at the very least promise to re-schedule it so that the federal government will leave citizens alone who are in possession of it. Also, it would be very smart to break down barriers for cannabis sellers to use banks without penalty or government snooping into their accounts. That's probably the most important problem they're having in Colorado right now with legal weed. If people are selling a legal product, their business should be considered by the government as completely legitimate -- as if they're selling groceries, for instance.

have benefited from the Democratic party and Liberalism more than any other segments of the Democratic/Liberal coalition, yet their tendency towards Libertarianism makes them unreliable in voting Dem, unreliable in showing some gratitude, and unreliable in supporting the other segments of the coalition for *their* #1 Agenda item for those segments. I believe they are out only for themselves.

I think most of the Johnson voters are Democrats and practically all the. Stein voters are. A lot of people are very frustrated these days and a lot of them are lashing out at their potential allies. It's a mess. However, if all it takes is to be more lenient in the War on Drugs or to to be in favor of legal weed, why not accommodate them? I doubt our side would lose that many votes, and we would gain a lot more than we lost.

I don't believe that the Johnson or Stein suppjorters want to see Trump elected. They're just sick of being told that their issues would be addressed and seeing it ignored over and over again. I think that if the Democrats would adopt a couple more issues to support that these third party voters are in favor of, I think they would come back and help defeat Trump. At least most would. And it wouldn't cost us a thing.

a majority of Americans AND it's the right thing to do.

Criticizing voters for what they care about is not a particularly effective strategy to get them to support you. Yes, a lot of people -particularly in legal marijuana states- think it's an important issue. And why shouldn't we? The tax revenues and law enforcement savings are helping balance our state budgets already, as we speak.

And, by the way, it's worth noting that in states where the state Democratic party apparatus is firmly behind legal marijuana, like Oregon, the Democrats get good turnout, are motivated, and numerically trounce the CRAP out of the Libertarians.

care about" but precisely the ones who don't reciprocate voting with what other coalition groups care about. After they got theirs with everybody else's help. Good thing you weren't gonna smack me down. I wonder what that would have been like.

P.s., I rank the social justice side of (de-)criminalization higher than recreation.

I'm happy to do the same.

Okay, for starts, on the topic of gratitude and reciprocation: It is quite likely that CA will pass prop 64, which will mean the entire West Coast of the United States will be state-legal for recreational (that word!) marijuana.

And every 4 years, the West Coast of the United States reliably delivers SEVENTY-FUCKING-FOUR electoral college votes to the Democratic Candidate. Like clockwork. So--- you know what would be some gratitude? If the pompous beltway conventional wisdom crowd who are so busy patting themselves on their East Coast backs for shit like reducing mandatory minimum sentences for pot smoking from 2 years to 6 months, or thinking the absolute maximum height of enlightenment is making it a violation, something Oregon did in 1973- would purchase or rent a fucking clue as to which way the wind is blowing, because again, a majority of Americans favor legalization.

And whether or not they quite understand it in Manhattan, or still think it's a giant joke, it's actually an important issue to us, out here.

We heard this same shit about "single issues" and "gratitude" (and "wanting a pony", IIRC) from people who got all irritated with the LGBT community for "pushing too hard" on marriage equality, didn't we? Now that it's a reality, everyone on our side agrees that it is the morally correct stance. Of course.

As for the rationales; look, I happen to think true social justice demands a strong pro-freedom stance for individuals. You know, choice? And the fact is, it is the conceit that government should be throwing people in prison for making consenting adult decisions about their own bodies, that gave us millions of incarcerated non-violent drug users, mostly POC. So one can break it down however one wants, nevertheless, standing up for personal freedom isn't exactly incompatible with social justice.

On the topic of "recreation", frankly -speaking of pet peeves- I don't know why there is an element of the "left" that, HL Mencken Style, is deeply distrustful or outraged or wounded or whatever-the-fuck any time it appears that someone, somewhere, might be having a good time, but yes, if consenting adults want to get high because they like to get high because it makes them feel good, why the fuck is that supposedly some kind of lesser imperative if the question is their freedom to pursue happiness as they see fit?

Know what? Gay people like to have sex with other gay people not just because they are challenging heteronormative societal expectations, but also because they enjoy it and it feels good. Does that make it any less important that they be free to do so? Does that make the case decided in Lawrence v. Texas any less meaningful?

Do you remember the 1992 election? I do. Vividly. Remember the conventions? One reason Bill Clinton and Al Gore won that year, was they represented vitality. Optimism. Dare I say it, FUN. The GOP, by contrast, came off looking like a bunch of prunella prunefaces, tired old scolds frowning and wagging crooked old fingers at the whippersnappers to get off their lawn.

We win elections by appealing to new voters and broadening our coalitions. And no one - no one- likes a fucking scold.

patronizing. Talk about your, "criticizing voters for what they care about," your reducing my point to a "pet peeve" is part of your Colonialist, paternalistic talking-down. And besides remembering the '92 election, I go back to remembering the one of 1956 watching my mother and sister cry over Adlai. Thanks for more paternalism.

And just my uninformed impression, pot isn't the one or only reason that "the West Coast of the United States reliably delivers SEVENTY-FUCKING-FOUR electoral college votes to the Democratic Candidate". What's telling is the personal *distance* you put between you and the disembodied-Other "the Democratic Candidate." You would seem distant and impersonal if not for your vehement facility in excoriating various Dems.

Save your high handed Jeremiads - and your F-words - for somebody else. Yea, unleashing F-words is another one of those "not particularly effective" strategies to get others to support you.

And pot legalization is already supported by a majority of Americans. It's actually much more popular than any candidate out there.

Sorry if swearing offends you. The internet must be really hard to take.

But everything I say is true. And in places -like I said- where the state Democratic party supports legal cannabis, Democrats trounce libertarians numerically and have good and enthusiastic turnout.

Beyond that, in that vein, you said, up there "recreationalists don't show gratitude" for all that "has been done for them". Um, ahem, on the topic of pot legalization, when the everloving fuck have upper level elected officials moved the fucking ball forward on that issue on their own? They haven't. Pot legalization has come about pretty much ENTIRELY from citizen-pushed ballot initiatives. Elected party officials - particularly as one gets further east- have been awol profiles in non-courage. Now we have some good ones standing up, like Merkley and Newsom, but let's not delude ourselves into thinking that there has been so much done for the pot legalization people by the powers-that-be, and as such why aren't they showing "gratitude".. that's absurd.

If it wasn't for citizen-backed state initiatives pushing the matter, would we even be having this conversation? No fucking way.

As for "colonialist" and the rest of it.. Okay, now you're just making shit up and throwing it at the wall to see if it sticks. That's the funniest fucking thing I've read all week. Thanks.

Libertarians have long supported drug legalization but the legalization has passed in mostly liberal states. It's on the ballot here in Arizona where Independent s make up a third of registered voters. I think this is one issue that has more bipartisan support but the GOP is against it. I can't find anything on how marijuana voters vote but think most vote Dem based on states like Oregon and Washington. Turnout was higher in Colorado when it was on the ballot and believe it favored the Dems.

On edit: I did find some numbers

According to the Pew Research Center, 63% of Republican millennials, and 77% of their Democratic-leaning counterparts, support the legalization of marijuana. And while Democrats across generations are largely in favor of legalization, 47% of Republican gen. Xers, 38% of baby boomers and 17% of the silent generation support the cause.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/can-2016-marijuana-ballot-initiatives-ignite-a-fire-under-millennial-voters-2016-09-15

I don't know who they are, but they won't get off my lawn.

...you can't get up every morning, turn on the computer and become obsessed with the polls.

Polls always go up and down. And they typically do get closer as the election gets nearer.

The roller coaster will drive you insane if you don't get off once in awhile.

Does this look like a toss-up to you?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/pa/pennsylvania_trump_vs_clinton-5633.html

Trying what?

Or at least make some kind of statement on the issue. It's the primary reason why she's losing voters to Johnson. People don't really trust her on the cannabis issue and think she might have been bought off by big pharma interests or something. I mean why else would she be so hesitant about an issue which is supported by around 60% of the public? The only voters she'd lose would be ignorant old people who were probably voting R anyway.

I still think that Trump is a bad enough candidate that it won't ultimately matter, but Hillary is falling into some of the same pitfalls that Gore did. Afraid to be perceived as being too liberal. Trying to appeal to moderates on the right.

Especially after the convention when she adopted Bernie's view on college tuition and corporate taxation. Not to worry, she's going to crush Don the Con. Or I should say, he's going to continue to shoot himself in his little...feet.

that Trump is self-destructing, and he was for a while.

But in the past few weeks it's started to backfire.

She needs to get her message out there, I think, and it needs to be more proactive than it has been lately.