I think yesterday's results

Sep 6, 2013
27,594
120
0
in Ohio and Kentucky are a bad sign for the presidential election next year. I hope I'm wrong but it looks like we'll have an R in the White House next time.

Kentucky just put a guy in office who wouldn't pay his taxes, would screw his own mother out of money but labels himself as a Conservative Christian. He's going to try to deny same sex couples of marriage licenses (screw the Constitution) and he's going to try to do away with portions of the ACA, resulting in loss of Medicaid dollars. I honestly think people would put anyone in office as long as they label themself "Conservative Christian".

Ohio said no to weed by a margin of 2-1. Yes, I know there were other "complications" associated with that part of the ballot but that's a pretty overwhelming majority.
 

DvlDog4WVU

Well-known member
Feb 2, 2008
46,604
1,483
113
in Ohio and Kentucky are a bad sign for the presidential election next year. I hope I'm wrong but it looks like we'll have an R in the White House next time.

Kentucky just put a guy in office who wouldn't pay his taxes, would screw his own mother out of money but labels himself as a Conservative Christian. He's going to try to deny same sex couples of marriage licenses (screw the Constitution) and he's going to try to do away with portions of the ACA, resulting in loss of Medicaid dollars. I honestly think people would put anyone in office as long as they label themself "Conservative Christian".

Ohio said no to weed by a margin of 2-1. Yes, I know there were other "complications" associated with that part of the ballot but that's a pretty overwhelming majority.
No, 2016 is going to be our Waterloo
 

moe

Active member
May 29, 2001
32,445
132
63
I didn't follow the KY election but the winner said that the state couldn't afford the Medicaid expansion, etc. associated with the ACA. Not sure if that was at the forefront of his platform. The prospective Ohio weed growers stepped on their weiners by getting greedy and seeking a monopoly on providing supply. I think the word got out on that as the other measure preventing a monopoly passed. So you had legal weed supporters and legal weed detractors voting against the legalization measure.
 

Keyser76

New member
Apr 7, 2010
11,912
58
0
Nah, low turnout vote. Heck, the GOP Governors association pulled all money and support from Bevans. I figured the AG was gonna win .I hope he kicks everyone off their health insurance before November 2016, lol.
 

WVPATX

Member
Jan 27, 2005
28,197
91
38
Nah, low turnout vote. Heck, the GOP Governors association pulled all money and support from Bevans. I figured the AG was gonna win .I hope he kicks everyone off their health insurance before November 2016, lol.

Bloomberg spent millions in Virginia to defeat the Republican senators and give the majority to the Dems and help McAuliffe during his last two years in office. They outspent the GOP 2-1. Yet, Republicans held the Senate and may even expand on their majority. Americans are angry and justifiably so. Bad government, bad economy, corruption.
 

COOL MAN

Member
Jun 19, 2001
34,647
86
48
The Kentucky gubernatorial results were generally considered an upset.

The Democrat, Jack Conway, had a relatively small but consistent lead in most every pre-election poll (though PPP, who I understand leans Left, actually had the Republican Matt Bevin leading by something like 6 points approaching the election). But Bevin ended up winning comfortably, as is seemingly always the case for Republicans in most low turnout elections where the race is thought to be close.

I think he proved to make good hay with undecideds by being the outsider.....even though current Governor Steve Beshear is fairly popular......and easily offset Conway's relentless attacks on his tax evasion problems (he's a hedge-fund millionaire) and his resulting unwillingness to release his tax returns). I also think he successfully linking Conway to Obama, who is hugely unpopular in Kentucky.

As for Ohio, the pre-election polls said the marijuana initiative was pick-em; which I myself didn't believe for a second. I figured it would largely track the history of casino gaming; something which was (and probably still is) despised by rural voters, and who will never be in favor of something like this. It took gaming several times on the ballot before finally passing (I think) in 2009 in something far less (as I recall) than a landslide.

But what separated this particular issue from gaming was that urban suburbs in Cincinnati, Cleveland, and Cincinnati......loaded with families with young kids......were against it. Add to that the fact that the pro-forces badly overplayed their hand by adding recreational (in addition to the more-common medicinal) use to the issue, and the issue was doomed to fail.

It also didn't help that the State Legislature doubled-down on their own opposition by placing that anti-monopoly issue (which is the way they characterized the specific and limited number of initially authorized growers) right ahead of marijuana on the ballot. And all that was before the low turnout.....
 
Last edited:

Airport

Well-known member
Dec 12, 2001
80,875
959
113
in Ohio and Kentucky are a bad sign for the presidential election next year. I hope I'm wrong but it looks like we'll have an R in the White House next time.

Kentucky just put a guy in office who wouldn't pay his taxes, would screw his own mother out of money but labels himself as a Conservative Christian. He's going to try to deny same sex couples of marriage licenses (screw the Constitution) and he's going to try to do away with portions of the ACA, resulting in loss of Medicaid dollars. I honestly think people would put anyone in office as long as they label themself "Conservative Christian".

Ohio said no to weed by a margin of 2-1. Yes, I know there were other "complications" associated with that part of the ballot but that's a pretty overwhelming majority.

Do you honestly think that the govt will be able to live up to it's obligation to continue to pay it's share of Medicaid? Only a complete idiot would believe that. You don't expand unless you want to pay the whole damn bill in the future. The trouble with socialism, sooner or later, you run out of other people's money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: eerphone

Airport

Well-known member
Dec 12, 2001
80,875
959
113
in Ohio and Kentucky are a bad sign for the presidential election next year. I hope I'm wrong but it looks like we'll have an R in the White House next time.

Kentucky just put a guy in office who wouldn't pay his taxes, would screw his own mother out of money but labels himself as a Conservative Christian. He's going to try to deny same sex couples of marriage licenses (screw the Constitution) and he's going to try to do away with portions of the ACA, resulting in loss of Medicaid dollars. I honestly think people would put anyone in office as long as they label themself "Conservative Christian".

Ohio said no to weed by a margin of 2-1. Yes, I know there were other "complications" associated with that part of the ballot but that's a pretty overwhelming majority.

All of us who have lost children to drugs or have them incarcerated because of that, feel different.
 

COOL MAN

Member
Jun 19, 2001
34,647
86
48
The prospective Ohio weed growers stepped on their weiners by getting greedy and seeking a monopoly on providing supply. I think the word got out on that as the other measure preventing a monopoly passed. So you had legal weed supporters and legal weed detractors voting against the legalization measure.

The anti-monopoly (Issue 2) results in Ohio were far closer (52 to 48 in favor) than I myself expected......while marijuana Issue 3 (64 to 36 against) got downright *****-slapped. Again, that's just like gaming when it first began hitting our ballots upwards of 2 decades ago.

What was particularly hysterical about the pot issue to me was how much the anti-forces.....who I myself believe, though I can't prove it, were predominantly Republican.....came out in full-scale attack of the out-of-state money supporting the issue (which is absolutely true). Of course, those same folks mysteriously love it when, for example, Koch money (from just a little west of Ohio) flows like flood water into State campaigns and TV stations in attack of anything opposed to their views.

But hey, that is what politics is all about, isn't it; attack the opposition with this hand.....and sinply ignore the other when it's out doing the exact same thing.
 

Airport

Well-known member
Dec 12, 2001
80,875
959
113
The anti-monopoly (Issue 2) results in Ohio were far closer (52 to 48 in favor) than I myself expected......while marijuana Issue 3 (64 to 36 against) got downright *****-slapped. Again, that's just like gaming when it first began hitting our ballots upwards of 2 decades ago.

What was particularly hysterical about the pot issue to me was how much the anti-forces.....who I myself believe, though I can't prove it, were predominantly Republican.....came out in full-scale attack of the out-of-state money supporting the issue (which is absolutely true). Of course, those same folks mysteriously love it when, for example, Koch money (from just a little west of Ohio) flows like flood water into State campaigns and TV stations in attack of anything opposed to their views.

But hey, that is what politics is all about, isn't it; attack the opposition with this hand.....and sinply ignore the other when it's out doing the exact same thing.

I would imagine that the Koch brothers do legitimate business in the state of Ohio. They, therefore, have an interest in seeing that said business in the state prospers. I would also bet that the Koch brothers business interests involve something more legitimate than a bunch of pot heads trying to get stoned.
 

COOL MAN

Member
Jun 19, 2001
34,647
86
48
I would imagine that the Koch brothers do legitimate business in the state of Ohio. They, therefore, have an interest in seeing that said business in the state prospers. I would also bet that the Koch brothers business interests involve something more legitimate than a bunch of pot heads trying to get stoned.

I absolutely stand by my comments.....just as I presume you stand by yours.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KTeer

Airport

Well-known member
Dec 12, 2001
80,875
959
113
Somehow, I don't find it the same. Koch supporting legitimate business and somebody supporting something that isn't good for our youth.
 
Sep 6, 2013
27,594
120
0
Somehow, I don't find it the same. Koch supporting legitimate business and somebody supporting something that isn't good for our youth.

Youth? They don't pass out marijuana like candy. You probably believe marijuana is a "gateway" drug too? The youth (especially the parents) with epilepsy, cancer and other medical conditions disagree with your claim that it isn't good for them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mtneerinraleigh

dolemitebmf

New member
May 29, 2001
29,976
319
0
Youth? They don't pass out marijuana like candy. You probably believe marijuana is a "gateway" drug too? The youth (especially the parents) with epilepsy, cancer and other medical conditions disagree with your claim that it isn't good for them.
If Marijuana is a gateway drug, then so is alcohol...
 

moe

Active member
May 29, 2001
32,445
132
63
Youth? They don't pass out marijuana like candy. You probably believe marijuana is a "gateway" drug too? The youth (especially the parents) with epilepsy, cancer and other medical conditions disagree with your claim that it isn't good for them.
There are varieties of weed that have very low THC that won't get you high but will reduce seizures, etc.
 

DvlDog4WVU

Well-known member
Feb 2, 2008
46,604
1,483
113
Youth? They don't pass out marijuana like candy. You probably believe marijuana is a "gateway" drug too? The youth (especially the parents) with epilepsy, cancer and other medical conditions disagree with your claim that it isn't good for them.
You a pothead Focker?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Airport

COOL MAN

Member
Jun 19, 2001
34,647
86
48
Somehow, I don't find it the same. Koch supporting legitimate business and somebody supporting something that isn't good for our youth.

That's OK with me......I support your right to view the Kochs in any way your politics dictate.
 

mneilmont

New member
Jan 23, 2008
20,883
166
0
Do you honestly think that the govt will be able to live up to it's obligation to continue to pay it's share of Medicaid? Only a complete idiot would believe that. You don't expand unless you want to pay the whole damn bill in the future. The trouble with socialism, sooner or later, you run out of other people's money.
State is different from Fed in that they have to balance their budget annually. States are not allowed to run up $19 trillion debt for later generations to pay. Some states are going to accept billions in Medicaid when dust is finally settled. Admin has no choice but to raise taxes of those who pay taxes to subsidize those who cannot pay their own insurance as required by Obamacare.
 

DvlDog4WVU

Well-known member
Feb 2, 2008
46,604
1,483
113
No doubt pot is a gateway drug
I just disagree with this whole premise. Alcohol is the true gateway. I just don't see pot as being that big of a deal. Almost every person I know occasionally smokes from time to time. Some even do it as an alternative to a nightly glass of wine or cocktail. These aren't shitheads either. These are all 6 figure income people.
 

Mntneer

New member
Oct 7, 2001
438,167
196
0
I just disagree with this whole premise. Alcohol is the true gateway. I just don't see pot as being that big of a deal. Almost every person I know occasionally smokes from time to time. Some even do it as an alternative to a nightly glass of wine or cocktail. These aren't shitheads either. These are all 6 figure income people.

Every single hard core drug user I've ever known started with alcohol.

Also, prescription drugs are the real gateway drugs.
 

WhiteTailEER

New member
Jun 17, 2005
11,534
170
0
I just disagree with this whole premise. Alcohol is the true gateway. I just don't see pot as being that big of a deal. Almost every person I know occasionally smokes from time to time. Some even do it as an alternative to a nightly glass of wine or cocktail. These aren't shitheads either. These are all 6 figure income people.

The only way I see pot as a gateway drug is just because it's illegal. In order to get it, you are entering the "criminal" underground where they most likely have other drugs as well. I haven't done weed in over 20 years because every 5 or 7 I need to honestly answer "no" to the question of illegal drug use.

However, it seems ridiculous to me that weed is illegal and cigarettes and alcohol are not.
 

mneilmont

New member
Jan 23, 2008
20,883
166
0
I just disagree with this whole premise. Alcohol is the true gateway. I just don't see pot as being that big of a deal. Almost every person I know occasionally smokes from time to time. Some even do it as an alternative to a nightly glass of wine or cocktail. These aren't shitheads either. These are all 6 figure income people.
Hmmm? "Alcohol is the true gateway." I would definitely have been the exception. Have been a committed user of alcohol in substantive quantities for 60 years, there abouts, but have never used illegal drugs. However, the day after the night before the last long lasting party may have given me reason to be a candidate to smoke a joint, or three, in lieu of Scotch by water glassful.
 

DvlDog4WVU

Well-known member
Feb 2, 2008
46,604
1,483
113
Hmmm? "Alcohol is the true gateway." I would definitely have been the exception. Have been a committed user of alcohol in substantive quantities for 60 years, there abouts, but have never used illegal drugs. However, the day after the night before the last long lasting party may have given me reason to be a candidate to smoke a joint, or three, in lieu of Scotch by water glassful.
The way I understand it the term "gateway" is it is the first drug you use for recreational purposes. Most people drink before they smoke the devil's lettuce. Granted, most people smoke pot before they try other harder stuff but i'm willing to bet 90% do alcohol before they do anything. In your case, there was no gateway because you didn't take it any further than alcohol.
 

DvlDog4WVU

Well-known member
Feb 2, 2008
46,604
1,483
113
TI haven't done weed in over 20 years because every 5 or 7 I need to honestly answer "no" to the question of illegal drug use.
I'm in the same boat.

With that said, if it was ever legalized and or I switched careers, I probably would. As it stands, I definitely enjoy copious amounts of bourbon as an alternative.
 

bornaneer

Active member
Jan 23, 2014
29,804
457
83
Youth? They don't pass out marijuana like candy.

What planet do you live on? You really need to get out more. You ever go to any high school sporting events, especially Friday night ones? AND for the record, I think they should legalize it.
 

Airport

Well-known member
Dec 12, 2001
80,875
959
113
Youth? They don't pass out marijuana like candy. You probably believe marijuana is a "gateway" drug too? The youth (especially the parents) with epilepsy, cancer and other medical conditions disagree with your claim that it isn't good for them.

I'm for legitimate medical uses. However, when govt gets involved it gets screwed up. How many true medical users are there vs how many abusers. Pot is a gateway drug and so is alcohol. I've lost a 26 year old son to cocaine, he started with good ole mary jane. I just don't think it should be handed out like in Calif or Colorado. When long term studies are finally finished, very few in those two states will be able to read it much less comprehend it.
 

DvlDog4WVU

Well-known member
Feb 2, 2008
46,604
1,483
113
You are making it legal for people to go from user to abuser. I wish there was a happy medium. For the really sick, it's great.
I agree. How is this different than alcohol though? I mean other than being a hell of a lot safer and less addictive.
 

COOL MAN

Member
Jun 19, 2001
34,647
86
48
I'm for legitimate medical uses. However, when govt gets involved it gets screwed up. How many true medical users are there vs how many abusers. Pot is a gateway drug and so is alcohol. I've lost a 26 year old son to cocaine, he started with good ole mary jane. I just don't think it should be handed out like in Calif or Colorado. When long term studies are finally finished, very few in those two states will be able to read it much less comprehend it.

I assumed that might have been the case; and is/was the reason I responded to you in the manner I did. I simply felt there was nothing I could say to reasonably extend the discussion with you in a respectful way.

Incidentally, I was in favor of the issue solely because of my personal belief in the medicinal benefits of weed; I also freely admit the issue indeed left open at least the possibility for abuse on the recreational side (though I myself don't believe a properly-managed State program of this type makes recreational abuse significantly more likely than it is today).

Of course, "properly-managed" is obviously the trick.......
 

WVUBRU

New member
Aug 7, 2001
24,731
62
0
I disagree with the notion that there can only be one gateway drugs. There could be many. I agree alcohol and prescription drugs could be as well. That is why I used the word "a" in front of "gateway" in my comment. It isn't exclusive.

I am 100% against legalized pot use outside of medical purposes. And that is one position I will never flip-flop on.
 

moe

Active member
May 29, 2001
32,445
132
63
I just disagree with this whole premise. Alcohol is the true gateway. I just don't see pot as being that big of a deal. Almost every person I know occasionally smokes from time to time. Some even do it as an alternative to a nightly glass of wine or cocktail. These aren't shitheads either. These are all 6 figure income people.
Agree about not buying the premise. A curious young person will smoke weed, this just keeps them from being a criminal.
 

DvlDog4WVU

Well-known member
Feb 2, 2008
46,604
1,483
113
I disagree with the notion that there can only be one gateway drugs. There could be many. I agree alcohol and prescription drugs could be as well. That is why I used the word "a" in front of "gateway" in my comment. It isn't exclusive.

I am 100% against legalized pot use outside of medical purposes. And that is one position I will never flip-flop on.
Ok, I understand what you are saying. I agree about the gateway part, there probably isn't an exclusive gateway.