Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
bobandtorey

Poll: Half Of Michigan Would Legalize Pot

Recommended Posts

Half of Michigan voters in a new poll say they’d vote to legalize and tax marijuana.

 

But it if was a vote, it would be a close one. While 50% of those polled through it was a good idea, 46% did not.

Four percent remained undecided.

The December poll surveyed 600 people and has an error rate of 4%.

The poll was commissioned by NORML, a group that advocates for loosening restrictions on marijuana laws. It was conducted by EPIC-MRA, a respected Lansing polling

firm.

The question asked whether people would support a plan to let people 21 and older grow and possess limited amounts of pot and let licensed stores well it.

 

The phrasing of the question seemed to suggest NORML may be considering some sort of ballot initiative. The set up question says “voters may circulate petitions to

place a proposal on a future election ballot” and asks “If this proposal were to appear on a future election ballot, if the election were held today, would you vote yes to

approve of the proposal, or would you vote no to oppose it?”

 

http://wlns.com/2015/01/12/half-of-michigan-would-legalize-pot/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LANSING, MI — Michigan voters remain divided on the prospects of statewide marijuana legalization, but with recreational use already allowed in Colorado and Washington state, advocates say momentum is on their side.

A new poll conducted by EPIC-MRA of Lansing shows that 50 percent of Michigan voters would be likely to support a future ballot proposal to legalize the possession or cultivation of marijuana by adults 21 years of age or older and allow taxable sales at state-licensed stores.

A similar poll from a year earlier had pegged voter support for legalizing marijuana by taxing it and regulating it like alcohol at 47 percent.

The new survey of 600 likely voters, conducted December 10 through 14 with 20 percent of calls to cell phones, has a margin of error of plus or minus four percentage points. The legalization question was commissioned by the Michigan chapter of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws.

Forty six percent of respondents said they would vote against a future marijuana legalization ballot proposal, while four percent were undecided.

Matthew Abel, an attorney with the Cannabis Counsel in Detroit and executive director of MiNORML, said the latest numbers show that the public is “continuing to move in favor” of legalization.

MARIJUANA POLL RESULTS
On another topic, voters may circulate petitions to place a proposal on a future election ballot relating to the issue of marijuana. The proposal would make the possession and cultivation of limited amounts marijuana legal in the State of Michigan for adults age 21 or older. Also, it would allow the sale of marijuana to adults age 21 or older only by stores that would be licensed by the state, and finally, it would tax the sale of marijuana by these state licensed stores. If this proposal were to appear on a future election ballot, if the election were held today, would you vote yes to approve of the proposal, or would you vote no to oppose it?

39% Definitely vote yes
9% Probably vote yes
2% Lean toward voting yes
50% TOTAL VOTE YES
46% TOTAL VOTE NO
35% Definitely vote no
8% Probably vote no
3% Lean toward voting no
4% Undecided/Refused

Source: EPIC-MRA survey December 10-14, 2014

“Once people understand the effect that it’s had and analyze the statistics, they generally agree it’s a net win for society,” said Abel. “…Everybody knows you can get marijuana anywhere, so it’s time that we remove the taint of prohibition and the ill effects.”

A statewide ballot proposal remains a hypothetical at this point. National funders usually want to see support at closer to 60 percent before backing what would surely be an expensive campaign, Abel said.

In the meantime, Abel said he’s hopeful the poll results will influence nontraditional funders or policy makers in Lansing, where bipartisan decriminalization legislation was introduced last session but did not advance.

Results of the Michigan poll appear consistent with national numbers. Fifty-one percent of Americans support legalization, according to an October Gallup poll, but that was down from a one-time peak of 58 percent in 2013.

The Gallup poll showed “that legalization is far from inevitable and the fight to stop it is far from over,” Kevin A. Sabet, the president of a group called Smart Approaches to Marijuana, said at the time. He noted that support appeared to drop at the same time marijuana stores opened in Colorado and Washington.

“The lesson here is that legalization in theory does not look like legalization in practice,” Sabet said in a statement.

Oregon will become the third state in the country to legalize recreational marijuana after voters approved a ballot proposal in November, but Florida voters rejected a medical marijuana proposal the same month.

Michigan voters approved the state’s medical marijuana law in 2008, and at least 17 communities have since decriminalized marijuana, including six in November. However, voters in five other communities rejected local proposals last fall.

State and national polls have pointed to significant support for legalization by young voters. In Michigan, 69 percent of respondents between the age of 18 and 34 said they would likely vote for a legalization proposal.

Support for Michigan legalization was highest amongst men, particularly Democrats, and strongest in Metro Detroit. Tea party supporters, Republican women and voters in the Bay area were among the demographics strongly opposed.

 

http://www.mlive.com/lansing-news/index.ssf/2015/01/poll_marijuana_legalization_ta.html

Edited by bobandtorey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I guess there's just two kinds of people Miss Sandstone, my kind of people and  as*holes." - Connie Marble (Pink Flamingos)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

State and national polls have pointed to significant support for legalization by young voters. In Michigan, 69 percent of respondents between the age of 18 and 34 said they would likely vote for a legalization proposal.

Support for Michigan legalization was highest amongst men, particularly Democrats, and strongest in Metro Detroit. Tea party supporters, Republican women and voters in the Bay area were among the demographics strongly opposed.

 

http://www.mlive.com/lansing-news/index.ssf/2015/01/poll_marijuana_legalization_ta.html

God! Who'd of thunk that it would be these people who oppose marijuana legalization!? I am going to have to do some thinking about the people I hang out with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

God! Who'd of thunk that it would be these people who oppose marijuana legalization!? I am going to have to do some thinking about the people I hang out with.

The Gallup poll showed “that legalization is far from inevitable and the fight to stop it is far from over,” Kevin A. Sabet, the lead DB of a group called...

 

Sabet is a "liberal" Democrat (as shown elsewhere) getting the Tea Party faithful to full lather. Figure out those bedfellows and the end game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The Gallup poll showed “that legalization is far from inevitable and the fight to stop it is far from over,” Kevin A. Sabet, the lead DB of a group called...

 

Sabet is a "liberal" Democrat (as shown elsewhere) getting the Tea Party faithful to full lather. Figure out those bedfellows and the end game.

 

 

I still believe that, statistically, more conservative, right wing Republicans oppose pot than do Democrats. Sabet is somewhat of an anomaly in the liberal wing. It may have something to do with money and his making of such.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still believe that, statistically, more conservative, right wing Republicans oppose pot than do Democrats. Sabet is somewhat of an anomaly in the liberal wing. It may have something to do with money and his making of such.

 

I will agree with your statistics at the local level, I think both sides use smoke and mirrors in the national debate to avoid making a stand either way.

 

You would have thought Clinton would have eased restrictions...nope...Obama? He found and appointed Sabet so they were obviously of like mind.

 

Tools of control. Left and Right want them. The "War" is too tempting and lucrative. Social engineering is not a uniquely conservative Republican concept.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sabet is somewhat of an anomaly in the liberal wing. It may have something to do with money and his making of such.

Sabet is little more than a carney huckster. Traveling around the country selling lecture tickets to the above mentioned morons is his bread and butter.

 

He has a vested interest in keeping the drug war up and running.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i wouldnt worry about sabet. he isnt a big concern. someone like mitt romney, jeb bush , chris christie or another nancy reagan is more of a threat.

 

worry about the guy who dropped 2.5million on florida to kill medical mj.

 

money like that is scary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i wouldnt worry about sabet. he isnt a big concern. someone like mitt romney, jeb bush , chris christie or another nancy reagan is more of a threat.

 

worry about the guy who dropped 2.5million on florida to kill medical mj.

 

money like that is scary.

 

So the prohibitionist that Obama appointed to head up his drug policy wasn't a threat?

 

Obama sanctioned a guy who is indistinguishable from Bouchard, for me that illuminates the lack of difference between the two parties regardless how much people want it to exist.

 

We disagree on what we worry about which is what makes for a great world. Another Republican attack means little, when the people who pretend they are liberal promote policies to continue the persecution makes me take notice and fascinates me a bit I'll admit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the ondcp has no power and is just a propaganda office. by law the ondcp cannot support marijuana descheduling.

 

DEA, FDA and NIDA have powers. focus on them, not on mr sabet who is no longer employed by ondcp...

 

but hey if you need a boogeyman , go for it. i'll be focused more on changing tangible things caused by active employees and appointees and elected officials.

Edited by t-pain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the ondcp has no power and is just a propaganda office. by law the ondcp cannot support marijuana descheduling.

 

DEA, FDA and NIDA have powers. focus on them, not on mr sabet who is no longer employed by ondcp...

 

but hey if you need a boogeyman , go for it. i'll be focused more on changing tangible things caused by active employees and appointees and elected officials.

 

I don't have any Sabet tendencies inside of me to permit what others want to believe or do. Didn't think that was the topic of the thread. You like Sabet, I understand, you will continue to vote for the people who appoint his kind to positions of power. It is a single topic of conversation and regardless of how glib or convincing we are there will be no change of national policy made from this or any thread. I don't pretend I'm making a difference by my disdain of Kevin Sabet, I'm wasting time in the middle of the day on a topic near and dear to me.

 

Seems you'll be focused on telling an idiot like me what you're focused on. To each their own and I support you 100%!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will someone explain to me how legalization is going to 'free the weed' because I don't think it will.

 

Interesting, I like the question and I think it is on point to the "Left" v. "Right" prohibitionist debate.

 

The Left's interest in "legalization" is based on large excise taxes (50% is the tax currently being put forth in Washington) to restrict usage and increase revenue.

 

The Right's interest in fighting any loosening of restrictions is because they feel they get more than 50% after the direct and indirect revenue of the "War" is calculated.

 

"Free the weed" for me happens when people aren't living their lives in fear for an innocuous activity. That there be ANY stigma on medicinal usages of the drug only proves how far behind even those who benefit from it are. Legalization means full acceptance as part of our society. It means hemp products that are cheaper than cotton. Paper that is cheaper than wood pulp. Protein sources and new variations of medicinal relief as the restrictions for research are eliminated.

 

At what cost? I feel is your question. I'm on record as saying one human life sacrificed on this altar of ignorance and intolerance is one too many. Legalization and taxation walk hand in hand unfortunately. It is the primary tool of prohibition today.

Edited by YesMichigan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will someone explain to me how legalization is going to 'free the weed' because I don't think it will.

 

 

If you mean will legalization " free the weed" As meaning someone could grow and use Cannabis freely   then No  legalization will not free the weed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the ondcp has no power and is just a propaganda office. by law the ondcp cannot support marijuana descheduling.

 

DEA, FDA and NIDA have powers. focus on them, not on mr sabet who is no longer employed by ondcp...

 

but hey if you need a boogeyman , go for it. i'll be focused more on changing tangible things caused by active employees and appointees and elected officials.

 

To ponder it further I'll say that a demagogue like Sabet is far more dangerous than elected officials. He has already been an appointed official fighting for prohibition under the direction of President Obama. Now he is free to organize rallies and go state to state getting grandmas and soccer moms afraid of medical marijuana patients. He doesn't have to worry about being re-elected or "popularity" in his district. Nope he gets to work 24/7 against what you fight for everyday. He is you just on the other side and with more resources and political backing.

 

However harmless you think Kevin Sabet is to you, you are magnitudes less on his significance scale as he fights to destroy all you want to create. I'm even less important than you to him as I have fewer posts.

 

To summarize: Kevin Sabet is the voice of the politicians who can't organize their own hate rallies but love everything he says. He is the guy who unites the local organizations and gets them to vote for a particular candidate. If you, or others, don't appreciate the importance of these shills then they are doing their jobs better than I thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now he is free to organize rallies and go state to state getting grandmas and soccer moms afraid of medical marijuana patients.

ok, name me his largest rally, or one instance of him talking to grandmas and soccer moms.

 

googling for kevin sabet rally i get

https://twitter.com/asamorg/status/431228920500060160

ok, the ASAM gets about 200 attendees per year. wow.

 

http://mccaonline.com/mccas-annual-awards-dinner/

no numbers, looks small.

 

he did 6 cities in oregon in 2014 when they were voting for legalization. russ bellville made a big deal from it because he learned that the state was using state money and state employees to work on organizing it. state employees doing political activities is illegal in that state.

http://www.hightimes.com/read/kevin-sabet-conducts-scandal-plagued-oregon-educational-tour

so russ went to these political rallies with kevin sabet, where he was allowed in anyway.

he reports in the above article "I could determine no more than maybe twenty people were in attendance."

 

20 people!

this is your boogeyman? sounds more like the weird preacher guy yelling at students on the quad that they are going to hell.

 

 

am i defending kevin sabet? no way. i think hes scum peddling his snake oil addiction treatment programs. does he have the free speech right the same as us? of course. i'll defend any persons' free speech right (corporations arent people).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok, name me his largest rally, or one instance of him talking to grandmas and soccer moms.

 

googling for kevin sabet rally i get

https://twitter.com/asamorg/status/431228920500060160

ok, the ASAM gets about 200 attendees per year. wow.

 

http://mccaonline.com/mccas-annual-awards-dinner/

no numbers, looks small.

 

he did 6 cities in oregon in 2014 when they were voting for legalization. russ bellville made a big deal from it because he learned that the state was using state money and state employees to work on organizing it. state employees doing political activities is illegal in that state.

http://www.hightimes.com/read/kevin-sabet-conducts-scandal-plagued-oregon-educational-tour

so russ went to these political rallies with kevin sabet, where he was allowed in anyway.

he reports in the above article "I could determine no more than maybe twenty people were in attendance."

 

20 people!

this is your boogeyman? sounds more like the weird preacher guy yelling at students on the quad that they are going to hell.

 

 

am i defending kevin sabet? no way. i think hes scum peddling his snake oil addiction treatment programs. does he have the free speech right the same as us? of course. i'll defend any persons' free speech right (corporations arent people).

 

20 people, yet he got the same amount of ink as people who have thousands turn out for their rallies. Prohibition sells newspapers, Hearst knew this and it continues today.

 

You like loaded words like "boogeyman" and I admit I don't understand that. I say that vocal prohibitionists are the counter-balance to what we represent. I give no more or less credence to them though you seem determined to force my opinion to be that of a child. That is not conducive to useful conversation.

 

To defending their free speech. Yes. All day. To demean and ridicule every word that comes from their mouth yes to that also. When the newspaper no longer asks Kevin Sabet for his opinion we'll have turned a corner.

 

Missing is commentary on Kevin Sabet's direct connection to the heart of the Democrat party. I wonder how many card-carrying democrats there are here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hey like its only my opinion, dude.

 

so i cant use boogeyman?

 

dont sweat it. sometimes i argue too much. sorry about that.

 

It's all good, thank you.

 

For the record: I read everything you write and enjoy how thorough you are in your research. I think we have a fundamental sticking point in that (this is a guess as  you have not explicitly stated your support to me) I think you have allegiance to what I see as the other side of the same coin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's all good, thank you.

 

For the record: I read everything you write and enjoy how thorough you are in your research. I think we have a fundamental sticking point in that (this is a guess as  you have not explicitly stated your support to me) I think you have allegiance to what I see as the other side of the same coin.

 

 

And i would also agree i do read them Mr. t-pain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...