Let’s talk about a new approach

9 Responses to Let’s talk about a new approach

1. Dano says:

   August 7, 2012 at 12:23 am

   I really hope somebody takes the next step. California ditched their legalization drive this year, just 2 days after I donated to their campaigns.
   I wish Washington all the best, might even send them a few $ since we fizzled.
2. Francis says:

   August 7, 2012 at 7:18 am

   Does anyone else find it just a little depressing that 90% of the ad’s likely impact comes not from what is said, but from who is saying it, i.e., a white, conservatively-dressed “soccer mom”-type who “doesn’t like [marijuana] personally”? Just to be clear, I’m not criticizing the ad. I’m criticizing the electorate that made it necessary.
3. Duncan20903 says:

   August 7, 2012 at 7:49 am

   This one is from the “thud!” category:

   Olympic ouster brings marijuana issue to the forefront
   By Eric Prisbell, USA TODAY

   /snip/
   That was evidence that he does do that,” [Stephany] Lee said of Phelps during an interview with USA TODAY Sports on Monday. “And you’re still going to be able to achieve your dreams regardless. Look at him. He’s awesome. He’s the best athlete ever in the Olympics. It’s a double standard. If you already make a name for yourself, then what happens afterward really doesn’t matter. … I’d rather have my situation (of not going) than getting kicked out of the Olympic Village” like Delpopolo.

   Lee said she and other Olympic athletes exhibit “camaraderie” in discussing with one another when best to stop marijuana use before expected testing. Lee estimated that at least “a good 50 Olympic athletes” use marijuana regularly before they stop in time for testing.

   “We all regulate our consumption,” Lee said. “It’s not like we have to do a competition and we are continuously on this; that’s not how it works. We know when the tests are going to be because they come to the biggest events. A month before this I am not going to do this anymore, just for the simple fact that you’ll have to clean your system.

   “We party just as hard as we train, especially when it’s over. People are going to do what they are going to do regardless. Just because there is a test on it doesn’t mean people are going to stop it. It just means they will change how they are using it and their consumption of it. I’m pretty sure that if athletes were to all party together — who wouldn’t, you know?”
   /snip/

   Res ipsa loquitur
   • claygooding says:

     August 7, 2012 at 8:20 am

     Stories like that will blow the ONDCP propaganda that all users are addicts and need rehab.
     • Duncan20903 says:

       August 7, 2012 at 8:51 am

       .
       .

       Your theory is built on the basis that prohibitionists are able to apply reason and logic to a subject. Currently the officially approved hysterical rhetoric says that there is a small percentage of potheads who are able to achieve but are exceptions that prove the rule.

       Have you forgotten that the motto of the Know Nothing prohibitionist is “never let the facts get in the way of disseminating an effective piece of hysterical rhetoric”?
4. Servetus says:

   August 7, 2012 at 10:41 am

   Here is some politically useful data on Marijuana Use by Age from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health:

   http://tinyurl.com/8pe8a88

   The Washington state ad featuring a woman who appears to be in her thirties falls in a Gen-X age bracket of less likely pro-marijuana supporters.

   Targeting the youth vote in order to offset the geriatric vote would be more effective for adding voters in 2012 who favor legalized and regulated marijuana. Ads that appeal to the 18-25 age bracket are needed.

   Fear works for the 18-25 group. Ads featuring aspiring and talented college students getting busted for pot, their dogs shot, and having their lives irreparably disrupted might work to get more of them to the polls, sort of like the road-kill approach to driver safety training.
   • Duncan20903 says:

     August 8, 2012 at 9:47 am

     .
     .

     In 2010 there was a problem with the age restriction in Prop 19. You’re asking 18, 19, and 20 year olds to vote in favor while excluding themselves. Now it’s perfectly reasonable to argue that the youngsters who voted against Prop 19 on that basis are going to be 20, 21, and 22 and that it’s very short sighted thinking on the part of those young voters but I don’t have the impression that college age voters have much of a grasp of the future.
5. Bailey says:

   August 7, 2012 at 11:27 pm

   The ad isn’t tailored to the 18-25 age range, I agree. But New Approach has been pretty good about reaching out to campuses and online media.

   Colorado’s legalization measure has an ad of a twenty-something writing a note to his parents about the issue. I do think there’s an assumption that those under 25 know why this policy is failed, or at least are critical of it. Those over 30 need convincing, the basis of the I-502 ad.

   I don’t know if either will do a better job moving its audience. New Approach campaign director Alison Holcomb is very much the character in the ad, and she’d been leading an ACLU campaign to talk about marijuana laws before this initiative. The language of the ad is almost exactly to tone of that earlier campaign.

   I’m glad to see different approaches and tactics by these varying campaigns, it gives us chances to see what works and what doesn’t on the road to reform!
6. FlyingTooLow says:

   August 8, 2012 at 1:17 pm

   Finally!

Comments are closed.