California 2012: How do we get the No voters to vote yes?

Ernst

Ernst

Well-Known Member
This topic has come up. I would believe our best chance to pass cannabis legalization is to get the No voters to vote yes in 2012 and keep all the Yes voters on the yes side as well.

I have a plan but I'll save that and simply add my ideas to the tread rather than announcing it as the topic of the tread.

The Question is how do we get No voters to vote yes.
 
Ernst

Ernst

Well-Known Member
jesus of Cannabis said:
:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:
Click to expand...
Care to share your opinion?


The reality of California vote history is that California has had three Initiatives that dealt with the issue of Cannabis.

As I understand it two times initiatives with commerce language in it has been voted down and one initiative was approved that did not have commerce.

What is your take on this?
 
Ernst

Ernst

Well-Known Member
Do you think that black market people are a large portion of the Yes for Cannabis voters?
 
Dan Kone

Dan Kone

Well-Known Member
Ernst said:
I would believe our best chance to pass cannabis legalization is to get the No voters to vote yes in 2012 and keep all the Yes voters on the yes side as well.
Click to expand...
:shock::shock::shock::shock::shock::shock:

wow. That's some brilliant insight. You should be a political strategist.
 
Ernst

Ernst

Well-Known Member
Since there are a few posts now I'll toss out what I believe will make a difference.

Simplify the choice.

Make the vote about rights for citizens.
Skip the Commerce portions. Focus on rights for people.
If the no voters trust that this will allow more control over drug-dealing in their communities are they not more likely to vote yes?

If they believe it will take away from the Cartels are they not more likely to vote yes?

On the Yes side we are in favor of cannabis for the private citizen as part of the bigger picture so why would we be against establishing rights for the people separately?

The idea is to split the issues up so if one fails in 2012 another might pass.
Any that passes helps us all.

I just don't have faith in the numbers. I am more on the side of emotional voting where no voters are offered a chance to stop cannabis commerce in their areas by supporting cannabis freedom for the people.

That is my reasoning. My fear is we will lose again because of an all in one approach since that has failed twice.
 
Kevin A

Kevin A

Active Member
Ernst said:
Do you think that black market people are a large portion of the Yes for Cannabis voters?
Click to expand...
The Black Market people thrive off there sells of cannabis. If you go to one of these guys and buy you a bag, your helping support them gain money and power. If voters say YES to CANNABIS, then that is one step towards reducing the epicdemic gang violence and restoring peace in america. I imaigine the illegal sales of Cannabis that gangs profit from is a OUTSTANDING number.

Black Market people want cannabis to remain illegel so people HAVE to go to them and get there medicine and what not.
 
Dan Kone

Dan Kone

Well-Known Member
Ernst said:
That is my reasoning. My fear is we will lose again because of an all in one approach since that has failed twice.
Click to expand...
My fear is that enough people will listen to people like you and it'll set legalization back decades.
 
Carne Seca

Carne Seca

Well-Known Member
Legalization has already been set back decades. It's called the Tea Party. Stupid ass people voted more stupid ass people into office that thrive on restricting rights. The damage they are doing will take years to set right.
 
Dan Kone

Dan Kone

Well-Known Member
Carne Seca said:
Legalization has already been set back decades. It's called the Tea Party. Stupid ass people voted more stupid ass people into office that thrive on restricting rights. The damage they are doing will take years to set right.
Click to expand...
In the end, I think the tea party movement will backfire and shoot themselves in the foot. I think they are so damn crazy eventually the average person will associate their craziness with the ideas they support, setting their own ideas back.

I think it's more likely they set the republican party back.
 
Ernst

Ernst

Well-Known Member
So are there any other suggestions? Am I the only one who has a plan?

Are there any people from California here that live in a Red County and can share their observations?
 
I

incognegro999

Well-Known Member
You have to give them an incentive to legalize. People who dont smoke or partake in cannabis could really give a shit about if its legal or not( at least until son/daughter gets pulled over with a couple joints in high school and has a hard time finding a decent job). What is the incentive you can offer them to change the way it is now?
 
canndo

canndo

Well-Known Member
You do not get the no voters to change their minds. They will not, they believe that this stuff is evil or will lead to evil things, you could as easily convince an anti-abortionist to vote for abortions. What you do is get more yes voters to the polls and you get the no voters to stay home.
 
undertheice

undertheice

Well-Known Member
Ernst said:
As I understand it two times initiatives with commerce language in it has been voted down and one initiative was approved that did not have commerce.
Click to expand...
the single greatest fallacy in your argument is that it was commerce that defeated any legislation. quite to the contrary, it was the very idea of new revenue sources that made 19 palatable to many who would have otherwise voted against legalization. there are a bunch of people out there who only see this as a way for some folks to have a bit of fun and don't feel that having fun is an important enough reason to change the course of the law. we might very well have squeaked by this last time if there hadn't been so many pro-legalization folks who were a bit too greedy and thought they deserved a bit more than they were being allowed. we essentially torpedoed ourselves.

the greatest hope for turning many of those nays into yeas is to clearly spell out what the pathway is to legal commerce, to show that there is a way for even the small grower, under the umbrella of co-ops and clearing houses, to engage in that marketplace and to make it clear that recreational legalization in no way interferes with the medical community. those three areas spread a great deal of confusion and, i believe, were the cause for 19's downfall. massive disinformation campaigns were started to paint 19 in the worst possible light and too many folks, especially in the medical community, fell for the lies of that song and dance.
 
bajafox

bajafox

Well-Known Member
I live in California and it's not about trying to get the no voters to say yes, it's like what canndo posted, how do you get the yes voters to get up off their ass and go vote? That, IMO, was the biggest blow to Prop 19. I know a lot of unregistered stoners who are of age that didn't fuckin bother to go vote.

Before trying to figure out how to convince the no's to yes'es, figure out how to get the lazy yes'es to register and go vote.
 
Dan Kone

Dan Kone

Well-Known Member
Ernst said:
Am I the only one who has a plan?
Click to expand...
no.

How about making it legal for everyone including people who buy their cannabis? How about a plan that doesn't involve everyone registering their personal garden with the government so the cops can inspect them? How about having the foresight to know that if commercial cannabis regulations are not passed through ballot initiative then corporate lobbyists will write those laws for us? Is that really what you want?
 
undertheice

undertheice

Well-Known Member
Carne Seca said:
Legalization has already been set back decades. It's called the Tea Party.
Click to expand...
Dan Kone said:
In the end, I think the tea party movement will backfire and shoot themselves in the foot.
Click to expand...
i find the liberal view of the tea party to be an amazing phenomenon. during the last election i asked a lot of people what their view on 19 was and found that those most aligned with tea party ideals were the most likely of the non-smokers to be on the pro side. at its most grass-roots level, the tea party is simply against the sort of rabid statism that seeks to regulate every portion of our lives and to grow itself beyond our capacity to control it. this is exactly the sort of ideology that demands prohibitions. that y'all see no connection between our problem and the fast food bans, the sugar-sweetened soda bans and the other "for the sake of the people" bans is absolutely amazing to me. this "totalitarianism in the guise of compassion" is precisely what got us to this point in the first place.

as for the demise of the tea party, that can only happen when we give up entirely on the idea of taking our country back from the corporate state. even as the movement is infested by religious fanatics and political animals, its roots in the belief in constitutional limits on the state are still strong. once enough of the citizenry has become anesthetized enough to accept authority's yoke, the last of the true individualists will finally go into hiding or simply leave.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top