How do you have any idea what I believe? I rarely ever post itt lol. See this is the problem with the far left (and far right), you group an entire population of people- similarity: doesn't get in line with 100% of my beliefs- based on extremely limited info and brand them without even trying to understand them. Politics are complex and have levels upon levels of depth. It is not a battle of good vs evil nor is it some game that you win. The extreme polarized sides are very rarely in the right. Even if they are correct about some particular talking point.

I make a few posts, for the first time ever itt, questioning why the origin of wikileaks outweighs the content of the leaks, and all of a sudden I'm a dumbass racist Trump supporter when, fwiw, pre-election I called Trump "unvoteable" & expressed dismay at how anyone could vote for him. He's not who I wanted in office. I do, however, happen to think the answer is NOT creating this feeling of divisiveness and doom before anything has even happened. I think one positive that should come from this election is that it should help our country come together and realize that positive & open-minded discussion is a more effective way to reach solutions than burying your head in the sand and trying to convince the "opposition" how stupid they are. If that makes me a dumbass then so be it.

will be interesting to see how he squares his strong belief in states rights with his hatred of the ganja. My guess is that he pretends never to have given a **** about states rights.

Thayer got all the WOKE genes in the family

My guess is that he'll hew closely to Scalia's concurrence in Raich regarding his assessment and prosecutorial management of marijuana vis a vis the CSA.

Geoff, I assumed you had good intentions, so my assumptions about your beliefs were correct. The assumption I may have wrong is that you agree with your brother that both sides suck so you don't want any part of our current political system.

I think, the difference between you and me, is that I believe the evidence firmly shows its too late, "IT" is already happening. If we are lucky enough to have four (or eight) years without a major economic crisis, war, national security threat, etc. then "IT" will be bad but manageable. But if there is a shock then things can get moving and entrenched very quickly, and it will be too late then for any of us to object because no one will care about our voices when they have more visceral concerns. So to me, its now or never.

the saddest thing about that old WaPo article about Sessions is the reminder that Howard Kurtz used to be an actual journalist

This is quite the wishful thinking. Think about how many morons are in this country, and it's exactly how Trump got elected.

So you picked Hillary, supported Donna Brazille and the DNC, lost to the worst candidate of all time and the response is to laugh at non DNC supporters as woke racists and criticize them for not calling their local senators.

Someone should put a different name on the byline and have him comment on the media bias against Sessions.

I do agree with Thayer when he says the two-party system is a flawed one. I also, however, think that it's unreasonable to expect a revolution and a reset of said system, so when looking for answers we should look for them within the realm of the universe we exist in.

On your second point, idk, I guess I'm just an optimist, which is something I never thought would say. But I could totally foresee a scenario where in four years the worst things people have to say about Trump's presidency, aside from the few horrendous quotes which are a near guarantee, are some policy decisions that both sides disagree on. I would be pretty surprised if the more extreme stuff you mentioned- war, major economic crisis, etc- happens. Maybe that's ignorance idk, open to being wrong about that, hopeful I'm not though.

Maybe, but it's less likely to happen if the "smart" keep talking about how impossible reason & compromise are bc of how stupid the other side is. That's for sure.

Thayer you write a ton of words to say absolutely nothing.

It's possible to have voted for Hillary, support Trump, and question those he is appointing.

I didn't pick Hillary or Donna Brazille. Once Hillary was the nominee, I did strongly defend her against the hit job done on her.

Sessions as AG is really harshing my mellow

seriously if Trump wants he could 99% destroy the weed legalization that states have done (charge every licensed grower and seller with a federal felony). he's on record as it being a state issue but Sessions is an anti-weed hawk

home growers I guess would be ok but the industry would be destroyed

I'm a political pundit

Geoff, while I do think Trump increases the chances of a "shock" somewhat, my more major concern is that they are just bound to happen randomly. Bush had 9/11 and the financial crisis in 8 years. Look at the massive, previously unthinkable surveillance state set up in response to the former that has just been accepted by all but the Greenwald types, that fight has been lost. The frame has shifted to now making sure it's not "abused."

One of the things I learned from this election, which goes along with geoff's comment, is that we need to get back to discussing ideas. I may be able to persuade you why my feelings on one particular topic are correct through a logical and reasoned conversation. Over time, someone who is won over to your side on ideas can change their world view. I know I don't think the same way about a lot of things that I did 10 years ago, and much of that has been through gaining knowledge and discussion with others. If instead I attack a person or a party you support as a whole, it is too easy for the discussion to become blurred into a shifting discussion where we begin to equivocate different things that we view as wrong on different topics and walk away from the table frustrated with the other party.

In this spirit, both in discussions here and in real life I'm going to make a strong effort to elevate the discussion to be about ideas rather than people or parties. I will make an effort to break down single topics rather than getting into nebulous discussions that quickly spin out of control. I'd like to take a top down approach in this matter, starting with a couple big ideas and then working down into some of the finer details.

I plan to get into more of this later, but just felt like that was a good starting point and didn't feel like writing a Hoya word bomb quite yet.

Bring it on. It's blatantly unconstitutional for the Feds to interfere in states legalizing and regulating marijuana growth, sales, and use within their own borders. That's why the Feds haven't pushed on this aside from harassing a few people here and there even going back to the Bush administration when Congress and the entire Federal Government was GOP controlled. If the Feds push and lose it'll weaken the Federal Government tremendously in all kinds of areas they've over reached with their power. The GOP and Dems each have their own reasons for expanding Federal power and neither side really wants to roll it back.

This could be the greatest thing a Trump Presidency accomplishes if some bumbling idiot appointee pushes the issue and ends up restricting Federal power back towards what the Constitution actually allows. Likewise, Trump "screwing up" and nominating some Supreme Court Justices who actually recognize that the 9th and 10th Amendments exist would be amazing and not something a standard GOP or Dem President would do.

Errr that's sort of been decided already (special lol at Scalia slappies too). It's definitely at a delicate tipping point right now imo, an aggressive AG could easily make life difficult for those states in a number of ways.

Other things that fall into the "how will this affect me" category: I doubt I am gonna get to see Cuba anytime soon.

It's totally fine to think marijuana should be illegal. What isn't fine is saying stupid stuff like it's worse than alcohol, or stuff like that. I personally don't think it should be legal because of financial and social implications.

If u think weed should be illegal, I assume you feel the same about alcohol.

Financial implications means what exactly?

If you could make alcohol also illegal without creating a prohibition style backlash, would you?

What are the financial and social implications of it being legal?

One time Eddy thought about it maaaaan and made some bad stock picks.

Marijuana legalization really is the perfect storm issue where there's just no good argument against it whatsoever, and a good argument for it from almost every political angle (individual liberties, fiscal conservatism, racial justice, public health).