Trump MIGHT be set on dismantling the War On Drugs....

Recently I saw the big hubub over what Trump is going to do about crime (and inherently the blacks pissed at cops), but wouldn't answer it specifically. Today I read again Trump's War On Drugs (WOD) positions, and then how on O'Reilly this year he dodged answering with specificity the Marijuana Prohibition issue. And it got me thinking about him dodging answering the policing issue. Correlation?

First consider how Trump 'was' a libertarian, like how Ron Paul 'was' but had to switch to Republican to ever have a shot at becoming POTUS. Do note you can count on that Trump observed how the Media (specifically the Media) SCREWED Ron Paul in '08 AND '12:

@RonPaul has some serious ideas which deserve serious consideration. Wrong for media to ignore him. twitter.com...

He was ready for this thing thanks to what Ron Paul had to endure.

Now note that Ron & Rand Paul are against the WOD, and that there's a Real Decent chance at least one of them will be appointed to Trump's Cabinet.

Then there's how back in the 90's Trump was against the WOD. But now running GOP, with things already over the top dicey enough already, if he came right out and said all this stuff he'd be screwed. The US populace (GOP in particular) just hasn't been deprogrammed enough (from a generations long propaganda war) to hear all such noise out of the clear blue during the POTUS election cycle.

My third case study is the news bit I just saw on here that Trump intends to build The Wall with drug trafficker cash seizures. Well guess what, the cops usually depend on that stuff to fund their WOD and overblown police presence, etc.



Now of course Trump couldn't end the entire WOD overnight, BUT, he could decriminalize Marijuana real quick (note how he always says he can solve the policing snafu "FAST!"), thus freeing up all that jam up across the system, meaning more meaningful policing and high profile hardcore-drug busts (more cash to build The Wall), less hassling minority commoners over petty pot, cut the US prison population by 1/4-1/3 (meaning budget boost), etc.

Just this act alone would change just about everything. If 'all' the pot is USA homegrown then 'no more' fervor for Mexican imported pot, meaning less wasted border policing to be able to focus on the hardcore drug imports. Lastly, 'all' the US pot consumption becoming USA homegrown, that's jobs and Social Mobility enhancement for hundreds of thousands of at home DIY citizens & local contractors (electricians etc etc), all the new business model angles, and so much more. That WOULD Make America Great Again!

DISCUSS!!!

The War on Drugs could probably have paid the current national debt.

While this seems to be speculation at this time I'll weigh both sides.

Side one, he may dodge so that he doesn't isolate an electoral group.

Side two, he sees how it's a waste of government money to regulate weed. Problem is, getting past big pharma and the DEA to deregulate. Big pharma makes a killing on drugs with side affects. And the DEA would lose alot of jobs.

Trump says he has never drank or taken drugs.

I have never seen a guy needing to smoke a joint more than Trump.

Of course, we don't sanction drug use around here.

Just Saying...

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Trump is very anti drugs and Gov Christi ran on a anti pot platform when he was running for president. I think this is very unlikely.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Of course wild speculation on what Trump will do is well received.
The guy had done nothing but talk about how drugs are ruining cities, which isn't wrong persey, but he hasn't really said much that makes me think the way you are.
Him waffling and then ending with hearing very negative things about Colorado also seems to go against it.

a reply to: WilburnRoach

Yeah it's more likely that we'll be watching the daily show next year, toking a totally legal fatty and laughing at president Hillary jokes.

a reply to: EmmanuelGoldstein

Hillary WONT legalize. She wants to reschedule it to Schedule II, thus putting it in the FDA's / Big Pharma's GMO hands. The FDA will be able to bust shops etc like the DEA can (potentially militarizing the FDA!!!). FACT: she's a War On Drugs Warrior through & through.

It's only a war when one side hasnt won yet. I am pretty sure we can call this one.

a reply to: Sremmos80

Full on Legalization isn't needed for my above scenario. Setting the Federal Take On It to something like how they have it in Michigan, allowing states/local governments to decide from there, is about enough to get most my talking points up there rolling in the right direction (including the jobs/social mobility/etc).

Cities/counties/states could then opt to 'legalize it' (say for tourism), or pass ordinances to 'ban' it.

In Michigan essentially all of the domestic usage is from in state. Less money flowing to the drug cartels, more money for little guys to invest in their project (meaning pumping money into the economy).

Trump says he's "basically for med marijuana". Well there's 2 ways to do it, basically, (that ensures patients get their meds): Big Pharma Mega GMO Farms, or like how its done in Michigan.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

he seems more in favor than against... It seems pretty obvious over time marijuana will be legal. 10 years ago it was VERY obvious it would never be legal.. This is a massive change and I think anyone running for office has to take notice of this and even if DEA and Cops and other groups who profit for marijuana being illegal like gangs even if you know by speaking in favor of marijuana legalization you are losing their vote.. Well, those are the voters you want to lose.. If I was voting to keep marijuana illegal because my job depended on it? # that.. Then you're wrong twice and the mistakes compound... How about cops fill in their time with community events rather than hunting 20 year olds with attack dogs and choppers and all the rest.

I LOLed at the last part of that video.

The girl 2:00-2:216

hahaha so true.

Why stop at pot?

How about prostitution? Lots of money there.

a reply to: burgerbuddy

Keeping majority of the 'hooker' population on the streets and hooked on & distributing crack/coke/opiates/meth is a vital demographic in the War On Drugs Racket. Without this WOD notion, most of the industry could come off the diseased streets and into a more professional niche, disease testing certificates, discrete in home consultations, etc. Just sayin'!

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

And he has a birth certificate!

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

It is for the ending if the war in drugs, as long as the feds have that it doesn't matter what the state does. Medical or anything else doesn't change that.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: EmmanuelGoldstein

Hillary WONT legalize. She wants to reschedule it to Schedule II, thus putting it in the FDA's / Big Pharma's GMO hands. The FDA will be able to bust shops etc like the DEA can (potentially militarizing the FDA!!!). FACT: she's a War On Drugs Warrior through & through.

That's for sure. Remember, Hillary Clinton, during her husband's administration, fully supported the DEA going into California, and other states that had legalized MMJ, letting them raid and bust dispensaries. She is every bit the fascist cow Reno was.

I remember several of my friends thinking Hillary win meant marijuana was safe, and I had to smack them upside their noggins and point them to the 90's and Hillary Clinton's track record on the subject.

Has everyone lost their memory pre-2015?!?!?!?!?!

originally posted by: 123143
The War on Drugs could probably have paid the current national debt.

Responsible governance would have prevented much of a national debt in the first place.