USA Politics

Interesting (and long) article about legal pot in California and why it has brought in less than half the revenue expected and not done one of the other benefits of legalizing (eliminating the black market). Leave it to California to make this as convoluted as possible.

2000


https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-marijuana-year-anniversary-review-20181227-story.html

Part of it

“The cannabis industry is being choked by California’s penchant for over-regulation,” said Dale Gieringer, director of California NORML, a pro-legalization group. “It’s impossible to solve all of the problems without a drastic rewrite of the law, which is not in the cards for the foreseeable future.”



“Because we are up against high taxes and the proliferation of illegal shops, it is difficult right now,” Montes said. “We expected lines out of our doors, but unfortunately the underground market was already conducting commercial cannabis activity and are continuing to do so.”

Montes, who received his city and state licenses in January, says his business faces a 15% state excise tax, a 10% recreational marijuana tax by the city of Los Angeles and 9.5% in sales tax by the county and state — a markup of more than 34%.

The other part ... many cities banning it.
 
His Excellency is threatening to close the US-Mexico border if Congress refuses to fund his wall. Can he shut an entire border without causing a serious diplomatic incident?
 
Depending on what shutting down the border entails. It could affect businesses with a lot of political clout, such as airlines. Also depending on the circumstances it could be unconstitutional and will be swiftly blocked in court.
 
That's what I was wondering. Does shut down mean no foot/vehicular traffic, but people can still fly... Does it mean no one in or out? I recently went to Tucson to take care of my diploma authentication and I thought the crossing would be a pain in the ass. I went by bus and it has to be the most stress free, chill crossing I have ever experienced. Even the Border Patrol was super nice and chill. So strange, but I'll take it. I don't have to go back for any reason any time soon, so I can weather it, but I'm still curious as to what that will entail.
 
https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/31/politics/elizabeth-warren-exploratory-committee-2020/index.html

Elizabeth Warren has formed an exploratory committee to run for President. For those who are unaware, an exploratory committee is a first step in declaring candidacy for the primary; this allows the person to legally fundraise for the purpose of becoming president. Exploratory committees also do things like run polling, set up events, etc, to see if there is interest.

Nobody forms an exploratory committee without having already explored whether or not they can run for president - she's running.
 
Wonder if corporate Democrats side with her candidacy or wait for a Kamala Harris, or H forbid, another Hillary Clinton candidacy.
 
Elizabeth Warren isn’t national candidate material. If the Democrats don’t realize this, they’re going to lose in 2020.
 
I don’t see the establishment/corporate Dems getting behind Warren. She is a weak candidate and doesn’t even really satisfy the party’s interests. She will be the Jeb of 2020: lots of star power and clout that will ultimately get her nowhere.
 
I hope this doesn't come out the wrong way... but is it really a good idea to have another female going against Trump that he can use the gender card against again?

And Elizabeth Warren is 69, and would be 71-75 as POTUS.

On the other hand, I like Kamala a lot.
 
It’s a fair argument but I think a woman can beat Trump. A ton of women were just elected to the House and women represent a large voting demographic. An appeal to suburban women in states where Hillary lost in 2016 but Democrats performed well in 2018 could win 2020.

It has to be the right candidate though. Elizabeth Warren will be successfully painted as Hillary 2.0 whether it’s fair or not.
 
Warren running really puts the knife in Bernie's side, too. They're competing for the same wing of the party, the ultra-progressive lefties. Warren got in before Bernie for a reason.

A woman can beat Donald Trump. I don't believe Elizabeth Warren can win a national election...other than in 2020, when things are going to be pretty savage for the GOP side. I think she's a weak candidate, and that the Democrats' best chance is to rebuild the Obama coalition.
 
Kamala Harris is probably the best possible option if you want the corporate Democrat support and still come up with a candidate that won't alienate the Bernie Bros.
 
I like Kamala Harris. I also like Tulsi Gabbard as a possible dark horse.

Also watch out for Beto. I like him as a candidate but he's severely underqualified. Then again, so is the current president. He might be a good VP pick for Bernie or Joe Biden if they got that far though.
 
She's apparently looking at a run. I don't think she has a Trump's chance at an American bank loan, but you know.
 
Jay Inslee, the Democratic governor of Washington, has announced a run for the Democratic nomination. According to an interview with The Atlantic, he will run on a single issue: combating climate change. This is an extremely longshot bid that seems designed not to win, but to drive the conversation and amass delegates in order to ensure climate change is being considered as an issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top