245
submitted 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by jeffw@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
top 28 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Ulrich_the_Old@lemmy.ca 25 points 2 months ago

trump is a liar it does not matter what he said.

[-] RagingRobot@lemmy.world 22 points 2 months ago

The article didn't mention harris' stance on the issue. Is she for legalization?

[-] Gerudo@lemm.ee 16 points 2 months ago

Nothing on record that I know of, but some people in her circle has said she's open to legalization

[-] Botzo@lemmy.world 21 points 2 months ago
[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 27 points 2 months ago

For legalization, but historically toed the party line

It's sadly a common theme with her: she claims to be progressive on many subjects, but when push comes to shove, she almost always toes the party line.

I hope she'll buck that trend when she's president, but I wouldn't bet on it.

[-] queue@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 2 months ago

Depends if the lobbyists want it legal.

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

Yeah, that's a given, since the owner donors decide where the party line is more than anyone else..

[-] nullroot@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

Yeah, my feelings exactly

[-] Wrench@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I wonder how many people she pursued possession charges on as a DA.

Edit:

But at different junctures of her time in office, she has been an enforcer of cannabis laws and an opponent of legalized use for adults in California.

Though she defended marijuana’s use for medicinal purposes as district attorney, her prosecutors in San Francisco convicted more than 1,900 people on cannabis-related offenses.

[-] LovingHippieCat@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

1900 people were convicted, but only 45 of them went to prison. The rest were referred to addiction services and work release programs.

[-] johannesvanderwhales@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

It's also not really a prosecutor's job to decide what the law should be.

[-] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

That's a bit of a cop out. Was she "just following orders"?

Anyone enforcing laws they don't believe in is IMO a bigger ethical issue than agreeing with controversial laws.

People's willingness to follow through on what the government decides should absolutely be a check and balance on government power IMO.

Edit: she's still a far better choice than Trump and would have to have a lot more issues to change that, just to be clear.

[-] johannesvanderwhales@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

It's literally a prosecutor's job to enforce the law. I'm sure she had many opinions on whether the laws were just or not...and that's probably something that moved her to want to go into politics, where she can help shape the law. It's fine if you object to someone having been a prosecutor but I don't think you can accept that she was a prosecutor and then object to the fact that she...did her job.

[-] Wrench@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

That's still a lot of people with criminal records whose lives are much more difficult for it, for something she's now antagonizing her opponent for flip flopping on as well.

Don't get me wrong, I'm voting Harris and donating to get campaign. But I find this particular attack vector to be massively hypocritical.

[-] LovingHippieCat@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

Oh, those people have definitely had a conviction on their records impact them. Although I'm fairly sure the ones that didn't go to prison were misdemeanors, so not felonies. But regardless, I just think it's important context to know more about the 1900 number. Is it still not the best? Yeah. But it's also not as black and white as she sent 1900 people to prison for weed.

[-] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 20 points 2 months ago

I hate accusations of flip floping in politics... Trump absolutely is an unreliable asshole but it is reasonable and good for people's views on different topics to evolve following receiving new information.

[-] Nougat@fedia.io 88 points 2 months ago

There’s a big difference between an evolving view and just saying whatever you think the people in front of you want to hear and pretending you’ve always thought that.

[-] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 20 points 2 months ago

I don't disagree, I just loathe that term after the bullshit usage against Kerry.

[-] CaliforniaSober@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

But why so desperate to give trump air cover? There’s what’s obvious and then Kerry?

[-] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago

Sorry, I can't quite parse your comment?

[-] CaliforniaSober@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 months ago

Please explain why Kerry has anything to do with giving trump leverage.

[-] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 months ago

Oh, I just hate critizing people for changing their minds... there are so many things wrong with Trump that I'd rather see more of the other angles. Trump is also extremely inconsistent from day to day so calling him a flip flopper just seems like a weak attack - he holds whatever position is politically expedient (see abortion)... so his "stance" on an issue (other than the bizarre ones he fabricates like building a wall or excessive tariffs) don't really mean anything.

So the TL;DR I'd prefer the campaign focus on their own policies and just let the weird senile old man shout at the wind without giving him any media attention.

[-] SteveFromMySpace@lemmy.blahaj.zone 15 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Yeah dude cracked down on marijuana usage during his 4 years. AG Colonel Sanders went on a little crusade.

[-] Volkditty@lemmy.world 26 points 2 months ago

I think we're safely past the point of having to give Trump and any of his views the benefit of the doubt.

[-] HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com 17 points 2 months ago

thing is he does not really flip flop as much as talk out of both sides of his mouth.

[-] braindefragger@lemmy.world 12 points 2 months ago

But we aren’t talking about “people”, we are specifically talking about Trump. Trump didn’t “evolve”, he’s a swindler who will say whatever to whoever when it benefits him.

So let’s not take normal people finding out more info on a topic and pretend like that has anything to do with nonsense he happened to say one day or another.

[-] Lightor@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

In general, I agree. But if someone is saying different things every other week, going back and forth, it shows that they really have no stance. Flip flopping isn't evolving your understanding, it's constantly changing your "view" to appeal to whatever crowd you're in front of.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 12 points 2 months ago

I noticed he didn't call for an abolition of federal anti-cannabis law.

this post was submitted on 03 Sep 2024
245 points (97.7% liked)

News

23296 readers
1289 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS