Public Policy Polling: "Prop. 19 is in a lot of trouble"

[RonPaulFanInGA]

Also started in California last night and we're seeing, like others, that Prop 19 is in a lot of trouble


The downward support for Prop 19 is curious because there is not a conservative shift in the other races coinciding with it

http://twitter.com/ppppolls/status/28430209199

http://twitter.com/ppppolls/status/28430538488

[specsaregood]

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-mew-prop19-poll-20101023,0,2940971.story



Prop. 19 would legalize marijuana in California. But the Los Angeles Times/USC Poll found that voters oppose the measure 51% to 39%. The poll found that the measure is far behind in Southern California.


Looks like those darn california hippies are gonna drop the frisbee.

[fj45lvr]

I can see where many of them don't want the possibility they would take a serious "cut in pay"...

[libertybrewcity]

My votes not wavering. I'm going to send them a few dollars to help out.

[Indy Vidual]

I would think there has been much propaganda against it, can anyone in CA comment please?

[RonPaulCult]

I would think there has been much propaganda against it, can anyone in CA comment please?

I'm seeing a lot of political ads - but very few having to do with prop 19.

The saddest thing I'm seeing is a lot of pro-pot people voting against it because it's not good enough. They want the perfect bill.

It's sad actually - that people aren't willing to give a little to gain a lot.

[Indy Vidual]

OK, thanks
Better luck with something else.

[DjLoTi]

It's sad actually - that people aren't willing to give a little to gain a lot.

grr

[MRoCkEd]

Yeah it looks like Prop 19 won't make it unfortunately... Next time.

[MozoVote]

What we may see in CA with cannabis regulation, is that the existing "medical" framework just keeps getting watered down, to the point that obtaining a "license to smoke" is about as hard as buying a fitness club membership.

Follow the alcohol analogy. "Dry counties" have slowly been disappearing, and exceptions to serving alcohol and the lenient rules for what constitutes a "private club" have blurred the line in many places.

[klamath]

The finial straw is the stupid clause they put in prop 19 that gave special anti discrimination rights to users. They tried to give special rights to 30% while taking rights away from the other 70%.

[silentshout]

The vote hasn't even happened yet, so i just ignore polls anyway. But the fact that Arnold decriminalized it recently, effective Jan 1, probably changed some people's minds on both sides. My support of it hasn't wavered.

[Brett85]

Prop 19 started losing ground in the polls when the federal government made it clear that they would prosecute people in California for smoking weed regardless of whether Prop 19 passed or not. The federal government is basically bullying people into voting against Prop 19.

[AdamT]

...I'm seeing is a lot of pro-pot people voting against it because it's not good enough. They want the perfect bill.

Yep, I've seen this with friends in CA. They think it should pass with no taxes or regs associated to it, unlike alcohol. There's no way it would be allowed to go through if the state doesn't get revenue out of it.

I want it to pass though, if anything to see if CA will stick up for itself (10th) when the Feds try to come in and bust people.

[Meatwasp]

I thought the Feds were just going to continue arresting people who raise pot in the national forests. I may be wrong

[Kregisen]

Damn....it used to be like a 8-point lead for passing.

[CaseyJones]

The saddest thing I'm seeing is a lot of pro-pot people voting against it because it's not good enough. They want the perfect bill.

The vote hasn't even happened yet, so i just ignore polls anyway. But the fact that Arnold decriminalized it recently, effective Jan 1, probably changed some people's minds on both sides. My support of it hasn't wavered.

Prop 19 started losing ground in the polls when the federal government made it clear that they would prosecute people in California for smoking weed regardless of whether Prop 19 passed or not. The federal government is basically bullying people into voting against Prop 19.

Looks like those darn california hippies are gonna drop the frisbee.
Yep

[parocks]

I can see where many of them don't want the possibility they would take a serious "cut in pay"...


They could be changing their likely voter screens. It may be that the 18-34s aren't going to be voting this year. it may be that prop 19 does much better with registered voters than likely voters.

[MozoVote]

It could also be said that putting Prop 19 on the ballot, and for it to be leading in the polls up until a few weeks ago, could have been what tipped the Governator into signing the reduced penalty bill. His hand was forced... So even if Prop 19 fails to pass, it was not a total loss.

[Maximus]

The San Diego Union Tribune has been bashing prop 19 on the editorial page.

I don't know, I think this is one of those things that people will support when they are in the polling booth, rather than tell someone on the phone that they support legalizing it.

There's some sort of perception that if you support prop 19 you must be a pot head

[MozoVote]

I have not looked at the particulars of what Schwartzenegger signed, but usually fines are codified to be a maximum penalty. If Prop 19 fails, the next stage may be for county-level referendums to be put on the ballot to reduce the enforcement of the fine to $25... or $5. Keep throwing sand in the gears of the machine.

[DjLoTi]

Yep

+1

[FrankRep]

Prop 19 started losing ground in the polls when the federal government made it clear that they would prosecute people in California for smoking weed regardless of whether Prop 19 passed or not. The federal government is basically bullying people into voting against Prop 19.

That would make me vote FOR Prop 19 even if I disagreed with it.

Come on California. Stand up against the Government!

[jbuttell]

That would make me vote FOR Prop 19 even if I disagreed with it.

Come on California. Stand up against the Government!

Yeah, I've been mixed due to all the 'extra' bullshit that comes along with the primary goal - legalizing. However, if it will ruffle the feathers of those in power, I may just vote yes. Something has to change.

[devil21]

The finial straw is the stupid clause they put in prop 19 that gave special anti discrimination rights to users. They tried to give special rights to 30% while taking rights away from the other 70%.

Just because you keep repeating it doesn't make it true.

[TNforPaul45]

Like I've said before, if you think that the dark ops groups are going to let a bunch of sheeple waltz into a voting booth and take away their funding structure in the largest US state, you have another thing coming my friend...

[squarepusher]

marijuana is legal california already if you want it. It's just done medicinally. A lot of stoners and growers lately have, read the bill, and found that it would basically screw them and medical patients out of existing rights. Creates new marijuana felonies, so I know most of the people in California in the canabis communtiy are opposed to it. That being said, most of the cannabis community NOT in california is for it.

[klamath]

Just because you keep repeating it doesn't make it true.
Because you can't understand what a legal document means.

[Fredom101]

The vote hasn't even happened yet, so i just ignore polls anyway. But the fact that Arnold decriminalized it recently, effective Jan 1, probably changed some people's minds on both sides. My support of it hasn't wavered.

Arnold did not decriminalize it, he made it look like decriminalization with a slight of hand.

[silentshout]

Arnold did not decriminalize it, he made it look like decriminalization with a slight of hand.

Interesting..what do you mean?

[RonPaulCult]

marijuana is legal california already if you want it. It's just done medicinally. A lot of stoners and growers lately have, read the bill, and found that it would basically screw them and medical patients out of existing rights. Creates new marijuana felonies, so I know most of the people in California in the canabis communtiy are opposed to it. That being said, most of the cannabis community NOT in california is for it.

Why should people have to ask permission from a doctor and get a card from the government in order to use a plant? Yes, California has more freedom than other places, but there is need for more freedom.

The enemies of pot legalization are using scare tactics that are untrue and people are falling from them.

It says time and time again in Prop 19 that NOTHING will change in regard to medical marijuana. No patients will lose their right or ability to medicate.

In fact, they will have much more access and at lower prices. And no more permission slips needed for the rest of us.

[RonPaulCult]

Arnold did not decriminalize it, he made it look like decriminalization with a slight of hand.

Arnold has changed the seriousness of getting caught with up to one ounce. If you are caught, you will have to pay a fine but it will no longer require a court appearance and it will no longer go on your record. It will be like a parking ticket. This starts Jan. 1, 2011 unless prop 19 passes, in which case on November 3, 2010 there will be no fine for under 1 ounce. It will simply be LEGAL!

[devil21]

Because you can't understand what a legal document means.

That doesn't even make sense.

[klamath]

That doesn't even make sense. I read what the actual law says not what someone wants it to say.

[LudwigVonMisoSoup]

I think it's going to pass and pass with a healthy margin. I'm out in California right now, and there are many, many people who have never voted or cared to vote until this issue is on the ballot. The grassroots has been pushing for this (especially the young voters). I've noticed that people who are passionate about 19 are passionate for it passing. People are constantly asking and making sure people are registered to vote and that they pledge to vote yes.

These human polls have been flawed from the jump. Nate over at fivethirtyeight calls this the 'Broadus effect' for Snoop Dogg. Essentially, when a human calls, people are less likely to support 19. But when a robot calls, it swings wildly in the other direction. I think people are either paranoid or worried about the stigma behind telling a human that they support the measure. But in the comfort of the voting booth, they will make the right decision.

http://justsaynow.firedoglake.com/2010/10/22/internal-polls-prop-19-winning-56-41-anti-marijuana-stigma-could-be-throwing-off-other-polling/

[specsaregood]

I've noticed that people who are passionate about 19 are passionate for it passing. People are constantly asking and making sure people are registered to vote and that they pledge to vote yes.


And come Nov. 2nd they will be too busy smoking joints and passing the pipe celebrating their victory that they will forget all about voting.

Sorry but somebody had to be:
http://jiveturkey.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/debbie_downer.jpg

[Meatwasp]

The pot growers in my neck of the woods don't want it to pass. They are raking in a lot of cash without paying taxes.

[erowe1]

And come Nov. 2nd they will be too busy smoking joints and passing the pipe celebrating their victory that they will forget all about voting.

Sorry but somebody had to be:
http://jiveturkey.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/debbie_downer.jpg

There's some truth to that. I remember in '08 noticing that some of the people who were among the most enthusiastic Ron Paul supporters I met were obvious stoners. Those people were also totally useless, if not detrimental, to our meetup group.

[squarepusher]

It says time and time again in Prop 19 that NOTHING will change in regard to medical marijuana. No patients will lose their right or ability to medicate.


not true, the actual proposition does not mention at all medical cannabis, and because the prop does specifically add new regulations in its wording that aren't mentioned in prop 215 (medical use prop), then it would supercede prop 215. Such as where you can medication, who you can associate with, how much you can grow, etc...

[dannno]

There's some truth to that. I remember in '08 noticing that some of the people who were among the most enthusiastic Ron Paul supporters I met were obvious stoners. Those people were also totally useless, if not detrimental, to our meetup group.

Booooooo

[RonPaulCult]

not true, the actual proposition does not mention at all medical cannabis, and because the prop does specifically add new regulations in its wording that aren't mentioned in prop 215 (medical use prop), then it would supercede prop 215. Such as where you can medication, who you can associate with, how much you can grow, etc...

This is post #1000 for me so I better make it count!

What you just said is the lie that is being spread around. But it is EASY to disprove. Don't listen to me or anybody else - break out the actual text of the proposition and read for yourself what I'm about to tell you.


Does Prop 19 propose to protect access to Medical marijuana? Yes Purpose 6

Does it protect California Prop 215 and SB420 possession, transportation rights? Yes, Purpose 7 [Note: This section refers to them as Health and Safety Code (HS) 11362.5 and 11362.7 through 11362.9.] Nowhere in the statute does it ever propose to modify the defined rights of designated protected medical status created by Prop 215 or SB420, such as HS 11362.775: "Qualified patients, persons with valid identification cards, and the designated primary caregivers of qualified patients and persons with identification cards, who associate within the State of California in order collectively or cooperatively to cultivate marijuana for medical purposes." Both the Pro and Con ballot arguments agree that medical marijuana is fully protected.

Does it protect Prop 215, SB 420 cultivation, transportation rights? Yes, Purpose 8 [Note: This section refers to them as HS 11362.5 and 11362.7 through 11362.9.]

Has the California Supreme Court talked about the effects that legalizing adult use would have on medical marijuana laws? Yes, in the People v Kelly decision, and the discussion indicates that medical use will enjoy any benefits but that their rights cannot be reduced.

Remember - if you see 11362.5 and 11362.7 through 11362 - that's 215 and SB420!

After you read the prop, please return to this thread and others that you may have spread this false rumor around to and correct yourself.