Marijuana

On Marijuana Legalization, Most Presidential Candidates Agree With Fiorina, Not Christie

Cannabis federalism is popular among Republicans and Democrats.

|

CBS News

Chris Christie wants to stop states from legalizing marijuana, while Carly Fiorina says they should be free to do so. In my latest Forbes column, I note that Fiorina's position is more popular among presidential candidates and voters:

This week New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie reiterated his intention to crack down on marijuana in states that have legalized it if he is elected president. In an interview on Face the Nation last Sunday, Christie answered "yes" when asked whether he would "return the federal prosecutions in these states," "yes" when asked if he would "go after" marijuana, and "correct" when asked if legalization would be "turned off."

If he were president, Christie could make a lot of trouble for state-licensed growers and retailers, but he would not actually have the power to make Colorado, Washington, Alaska, and Oregon recriminalize marijuana. Furthermore, any attempt to override the decisions made by voters in those states would arouse strong objections—and not just from supporters of legalization. Illustrating that point, another Republican presidential contender, former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina, disagreed with Christie. "Colorado voters made a choice," she said in a Fox News interview on Tuesday. "I don't support their choice, but I do support their right to make that choice." 

Read the whole thing.

NEXT: Friday Funnies: No More Surveillance

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they 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 for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. You know who else planned to “go after” people for behavior he didn’t like….

    1. Charlamagne?

    2. Every authoritarian little shit ever?

      1. That is not a valid answer. That’s not how this game is played.

        1. Sure it is, you just can’t say “Hitler” “wood chipper”.

          1. You two seem to be a bit “Judgy” this morning….

            1. Now I’m feely threatened.
              Going to my safe place now.

              1. *offers Princess a soft fluffy teddy bear with big brown eyes and smiley face*

            2. Judgy? I’d say he’s downright chipper

      1. [REDACTED] woodchipper

    3. Lindsey Graham?

      1. Only if a peach pie with lots of crust is involved.

    4. A judge and an AUSA in the Southern District of New York?

    5. Your mother?

  2. He’s just got the munchies. Someone give him a Snickers or something

  3. Chris Christie would not fit in a ,well,,you know what.

    1. Bra and panties?

        1. Good heavens!

    2. Hitler?

      I was told the answer to these question is always “Hitler”

      1. I say the answer from now on is a certain fuckhead judge.

    3. Wool Hipper outfit?

      1. BTW, yes, I did read this as “Wood Chipper outfit”. [redacted]

    4. Mini Cooper?

    5. A well. He wouldn’t fit down a well.
      /I have no plans to put Gov. Christie in a well. This statement was only an observation of the dimensions of the Govenor and the average diameter of a pre-industrial well.


    6. Baseball uniform

      Oh, and trigger warning

    7. Seat at the ballpark

    8. A tanker truck?

    9. A canoe?

  4. What I admire most about Chris Christie is his desire to avoid the pitfalls of nuance and restraint by going full retard on every single one of his idiotic positions.

      1. If he does, just give him a

        *SLAP!*

        1. That would be a figurative slap of course, not a real-life slap, and the figurative slap would of course only be given with the consent of all parties after the appropriate trigger warnings had been articulated and discussed in an open, warm, and friendly setting.

          1. No – no one gets warned about the *SLAP!*

            Now, if we were going to stuff his fat ass in a woodchipper, sure, we’d warn him. Figuiratively.

      2. I heard someone say they’d seen a televised version of that movie where “special” was dubbed over the original “retard”. *facepalm* Pretty sure offensive can be taken no matter what word is used in that line so lets just get over it and enjoy the fucking movie.

        1. *offense

        2. You never wanna go full retard special

          1. Of course “special” will become the new pejorative after a while, and then that word will be verboten.

            1. Exactly! That was my point. The perpetually offended will just move the goal posts

            2. Can we go back to retard then?

              1. We’d be retarded not to

            3. Didn’t that already happen? People were ironically using “special” to mean retarded when I was in school.

              I’m fine with trying to avoid using “retard” to refer to actual retarded people. It is so commonly used as a pejorative that it’s kind of ruined as an actual designation for certain disabilities and isn’t very nice. But that doesn’t make it a dirty word that needs to be censored in every case.

    1. Her;s a former U.S.A.G ,he’s used to throwing everything against the wall and see what sticks.The man has a god complex.

  5. Apparently Christie wanted cake.

    1. He can have one in hell. Hyperbolically speaking.

      1. No frosting.

        Due to the excessive heat.

    2. They all want cake

  6. “But, c’mon you guys, look how CONCERNED he looks!”

    1. Concerned? He looks drowsy and/or hungover

    2. “If elected I vow to send a personalized bereavement card to the parents of every child whose symptoms could have been treated with marijuana.”

      1. Right now, I regard anyone who casually dismisses the medicinal properties of marijuana as I would a flat-earther. The drug warrior camp is that disconnected from reality. But really, it should come as no surprise that CC’s default position is that of an authoritarian nanny-statist. It’s what he is, and that’s who he panders to.

        1. Yeah, at this point you just can’t deny that whole-herb cannabis is definitely effective and extremely safe for treating certain things.

          But I suppose if the FDA and DEA can completely ignore all the evidence then it’s not too hard for some asshole like Christie to do it too.

  7. Christie, Rubio, and Graham are your opposition.

    So a Hippo a snake and a puffer fish. Throw in a couple of polar bears and you’ve got yourself a zoo. Alternatively throw in a couple of cartoon segments about the alphabet and you have yourself a children’s show so vapid that the children actually get dumber as they watch.

      1. CRAGletown – Hop right in and get your fascist on.

        Also something about a wood chipper.

        1. CRaGgle Rock was a great show back in the ’80s

  8. Damn he sucks.

    The really sad thing is that he is the best Governor we’ve had in the 20 years I’ve lived in NJ.

  9. Rubio’s response: “Yes. Yes, I think, well, I think we need to enforce our federal laws. Now do states have a right to do what they want? They don’t agree with it, but they have their rights. But they don’t have a right to write federal policy as well.”

    He may not be blustering into big government central control of the issue like Christie, but Rubio is, in essence, also negating federalism here.

    1. Well, under the Supremacy Clause, it doesn’t really matter whether states legalize because it’s still illegal under Federal law. And the Supreme Court has already held (nonsensically) that regulating it can fall under “interstate” commerce, even if it is grown and consumed locally.

      1. Well, it matters if states legalize. That is obviously true given the situation on the ground. Doesn’t make it completely legal, but it matters and is a real change.

        1. I think the “turning a blind eye” approach at the Federal level is dangerous, though, since it basically gives the Obama administration discretion to go after disfavored groups completely arbitrarily.

          It matters in the sense that it’s no longer political suicide for a legislator to try to change existing law, and that attitudes are changing about the drug war, but from a legal standpoint, it’s still a crime.

      2. It does matter a great deal. Most marijuana prosecutions are in state courts, not federal courts. Further, federal appeals court has ruled that state laws decriminalizing cannabis do not conflict with federal law because state laws do not interfere with federal prosecution and state LEO are under no obligation to enforce federal law. Federal prosecutions will become increasingly difficult when jurors just say no to federal interference in state affairs. Juries saying no to alcohol prohibition were a huge part in ending that foolish attempt to stop Americans from enjoying that popular substance.

  10. is there any issue regarding which CC is not an utterly revolting moron?

  11. Early on, I had picked Christie as most likely to get the nomination. Between this and his response to the NSA spying (which was, essentially, to pound the table and repeatedly shout “9/11”), it looks like he decided to go full fascist right out the gate.

  12. Do people on Forbes not comment very much? Or is it that nobody actually reads Jacob’s writing on Forbes?

    1. “There’s not enough money in it.”

  13. It’s too bad Jackie Gleason is not around anymore. I bet he could do a great Christie.

    “Carly, do you want to go to the moon?”

  14. My best friend’s step-mother makes $85 hourly on the computer . She has been fired from work for nine months but last month her pay check was $17089 just working on the computer for a few hours. see it here
    LINK HERE?????? http://www.BuzzReport20.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.