One Last Buzz for Prop 19
Field poll now has Proposition 19 trailing badly, and I am now taking cold comfort in the Pauline Kael delusion: Everybody I know is voting for Prop 19.
Well, not everybody. Here's my old taskmaster at the L.A. Times, author, affable amoralist and editor without portfolio Jim Newton, talking about how "badly written" and confusing Prop 19 is. By the way, if you are among the one in every ten California voters still undecided on the ballot initiative to legalize the naturally occuring plant cannabis, please avail yourself of one of the great advantages California affords its citizens: The full text [pdf] of Prop 19 is available in the Voter Information Guide that was mailed to your home address. Please read the thing and see for yourself whether you object -- legally, textually, stylistically or in any other way -- to the writing.
Here's a last money blow by the Drug Policy Action Committee to Tax and Regulate Marijuana:
Many of the off-the-shelf anti-19 editorials Matt Welch has been cataloging all autumn forefront their Jim-Netownian mediocrity with the "Sophomoric pot joke" laid into the headline. I've been happy to oblige with the title of this post.
But the Yes On 19 campaign was broad and effective. While I hope wiser heads will prevail between today and tomorrow, it has been encouraging that Prop 19 supporters waged a serious campaign, against the arrayed power of all major Republocrat seat holders, virtually the entire legacy media, public sector unions, both candidates for California attorney general, both candidates for governor, and assorted other Houyhnhnms.
Update: By "money blow" I mean about $300,000, which is the going rate for a wraparound A section ad like this one. I am skeptical that there is any value left in print advertising, let alone $300,000 print advertising. At the Times' current circulation of 600,449, that's 25 cents per eyeball, not counting one-eyed readers (whose numbers may be substantial given the very-old-skewing subscriber base). But there may still be some value in showing people you can afford it, and this is the fire-whatever-ammo's-left stage of the campaign.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
About damn time
"wiser heads" -- not a bad sophomoric pot joke yourself 🙂
Son of bitch.
I suspect there's a lot (unfortunately, in this instance) of "Be careful what you wish for" involved.
And, of course, a lot of the befuddled detritus of the public school system will assume pot-smoking will now be somehow mandatory if it is not prohibited.
All your bronchioles are belong to us!
At least the private sector employees union endorsed it.
Still no word from OC Register. Time to edit their editorial philosophy statement:
The board's political philosophy is guided by libertarian/social conservative principles and dedicated to promoting and preserving individual liberty.
Pull their card. Fucking pussies.
When are you cosmotarian martini-set Libertarians gonna get it? Liberals with newspaper jobs are all in favor of freedom, as long as the government gets to choose who can participate in it.
Oh, and the CA Med Marijuana law is just as poorly written. Yes, having your MMJ license allows you to possess and smoke. Unless of course law enforcement decides otherwise.
However, certain folks who work within the current system are against prop 19 (they appear to be afraid of increased competition if it passes). If it fails, I think it will be due to opposition from this area.
Look, all of those poor newspaper editors are scared shitless that they'll soon be out of a career, much less a job. Do you really think they're going to endorse something that will piss off a majority of their advertisers?
It's got to be hard for them - being journo's and all. We all know they smoke pot, and that they would've loved to sing 19's praises. Instead they had to hide their support, but at least they stuck to the old, easily disproven talking points of the drug war cronies.
The last hope is the 12 point spread on the robo polls vs. the human pollsters.
When did robots get the vote?
Kiss my shiny metal ass, that's when.
Agreed. Saying you support P19 carries real stigma. Polling people on land lines also slants the poll to an older demographic, most likely to oppose P19.
It will be close, but I still think P19 will win.
I disagree. Because logically, this suggests that supporters weren't afraid to say they supported prop 19 a few months ago, but now are.
Plus, all hyperbole aside, we're not a third world dictatorship... mentioning you're for Prop 19 to a stranger isn't going to result in reprisals against your family. I see no reason why people wouldn't be truthful on this issue. It's not like you're suggesting "Draw Muhammed Day" or something.
There's always been the idea that the people who would vote Yes are not getting off their couches tomorrow.
I see your point.
However, recall the Bradley effect where polls showed Tom Bradley winning the governorship of CA years ago. He lost that race. The interpretation of the result was that people were ashamed to say they would not vote for him (Bradley was African American), but in the privacy of the voting booth they did vote against him. I trust live polling on the other propositions because I don't see any stigma associated with them, but prop 19 is a different animal. Robo polling on 19 shows it to have much wider support than live polling, and in my opinion even Robo polls might not accurately reflect P19's appeal.
As to Jabotinsky's point, I would point out that support for 19 amongst the younger set is MUCH higher than amongst older folks, this land-line polling ignores (mostly) the youngsters.
Maybe I am just clicking my Ruby slippered heels together on this, but I think the actual voting on 19 is going to be much closer than these polls suggest.
I certainly hope you're right.
I certainy hope so, as well.
Re: landlines vs. cellphones.
This is what the head-in-the-send Democrats who deny the existence of a coming Republican wave are saying about the polls that show them losing: "oh, they're not counting the cell-phone-only Millenial generation!"
It's just a hunch, but I have trouble believing the pollsters could be that wrong.
This would be a good time to be able to insert a picture in the comments.
I'm not taking much comfort in my prediction on this issue coming true. Fucking Californians.
Your only hope at this point is that Prop 19 voters don't answer polls.
California, I am disappoint.
California is pain in my asshole.
I feel so disillusioned.
As far as I know, the yes on prop 19 folks ran no television commercials (neither did the other side). If they actually had money, they would buy some TV time, instead of this sort of thing.
Especially during Adult Swim on the Cartoon Network. How much could ad time even cost then?
Yeah, the signaling effect of buying a worthless ad in the newspaper may be dwarfed by the actual effect of buying some TV time.
If the print ad is "worthless," how could it possibly command a $300,000 fee? Are print ad rates a big scam that continues to fool advertisers? Newspaper sales departments must be full of evil geniuses.
If the signaling effect dwarfs the actual effect, which is Tim's argument, I'd call the ad pretty worthless.
Newspaper sales dept's aren't geniuses, evil or otherwise, but advertisers are idiots.
Zach Galifianakis smokes weed on Bill Maher.
Video.
Holy shit! Bill Maher still has a show!
Prop 19, you are my only hope. Don't let me down, California.
Fuck, as for my latino brethren, their retardation and catholic roots dont allow them to think clearly (that and the piss poor education received and low social status where they came from) to think clearly on issues. Anyone with a little brain power could figure out the terrible effects prohibition has on Latin America, yet they dont get it. Although legalizing pot would have little effect on drug cartels (cocaine and to a lesser extent heroin are the money makers) but it certainly is a start to ending prohibition in general.
I agree with your main point. From what I read sales of marijuana generate ~60% of the cartels' revenue. Losing that money HAS to hurt them a lot.
Hmm, i read it was only 25%.
Most Americans alive today, regardless of race, were born into drug prohibition. It's a natural state for them. They see all the violence and think drugs themselves cause it. It doesn't occur to them to take a look back in history to see the parallels with alcohol prohibition and organized crime. Many are not philosophically equipped to make the connection; they are easy prey for government propagandists and other prohibitionists.
For a state that seriously loves them some government, it's surprising how conservative Californians often vote on social policy ballot initiatives. Maybe it shouldn't be so surprising.
California: Land of the Socially Conservative and Fiscally Liberal.
Didn't they vote against legalizing gay marriage? and are largely anti-abortion?
Ha ha. DC is like this too. I was told this place is very liberal. Huh? I don't see it. It's VERY conservative, socially speaking. Very restrictive in damned near everything you do. It's fiscally liberal, meaning they liberate your money from you and then spend it liberally.
One more point about P19. Read all the editorials in the California papers urging readers to vote against 19. Now, go and read all the readers' comments. I have not tallied the results, but it looks like 90% (literally) of the comments are pro P19.
Maybe the anti-19 folks are just too lethargic to comment and it means nothing, or maybe it reflects the actual general sentiment about P19? It is ironic that the "too lazy to get off the couch" label is usually applied to the pro 19 side, while in the readers comments section it is certainly the other way round.
Im sure the fact that the editorials of largely liberal papers are so against P19, I guess they are not so socially liberal as they think or for individual rights!
Prediction:
Prop 19 loses by 10%
Governor Moonbeam wins by 10%
Boxer squeaks one out
Dem's retain control of California legislature
California will continue the spiral down the cosmic shitter, and individuals/businesses will accelerate their exodus. The percentage of Californians working for the government will overtake private sector employees in 10 years and at that point the decline will be impossible to reverse until it completely blows up.
I agree with your predictions, except I see prop 19 winning with 51% of the vote.
How is it that in a huge state, with a huge population, the best the republicans can do for governor are the Terminator and Meg DoubleSpeak Whitman? And where the hell is the Libertarian party? I'm going nuts living in a one-party state. As bad as the two-party state was, at least there was the potential of gridlock.
It's funny the media is supposed to be impartial when reporting on controversial issues but everywhere I look there are reports and interviews with individuals who believe this bill will not pass or "this is not an economically sound idea" etc. It would be great if one of the big networks could get a proper debate going on this issue with some expert testimony from some academics who actually know what they are talking about. This topic has been fueled way too much by scare mongering from political activist groups who have been completely misinformed or government officials who want to maintain the status quo. The real fact of this matter is law enforcement is big business. Think of the amount of drug money that is seized and put back into public funding and programs. Much of state and federal law enforcement spend most of their time tracking organized crime groups and busting grow ops specifically for this reason. If jobs were created by legalizing cannabis there would definitely be jobs lost from law enforcement as well. This is an unfortunate situation but companies are dissolved and workers laid off everyday and prohibition should not be a reason to continue to criminally convict individuals for something that is personally affecting themselves good or bad.
I would love to hear your comments on my blog at:
http://www.sinsemillabible.blogspot.com
Expert testimony from some academics =/= ratings.
Scare tactics = ratings.
If you're going to spend $300K on a wrap-around like this, at least get "YES" and PROP 19" above the damn fold so it is easily viewed from the window of the newspaper box on the street. As it is, folks passing by just see "N PROP 19" from 10 feet away. Not exactly the right message.
Also, if you're the LA times, try not to obscure the date on your newspaper because customers may hesitate to put their 75c in the box if they don't know if this is today's paper.
Too bad. Freedom loving folks worldwide were looking forward to this.