Possession of pot will lead to a lower domestic violence rate! It's all so simple!

[tarr]

I saw this in the Rocky Mountain News, and have to say I'm pretty disgusted:

Pot backers won't halt domestic violence ads

Comments

[no2ndtroy]

This really upsets me considering that I'm from the area AND it's something I'd like to support anyway--but now I feel like I can't in good conscience given their deceptive and manipulative presentation of the issue. Great. :P

[tarr]

That's exactly how I feel about it. They took an issue I support and have soured it for me through the idiocy. I don't know if I'll vote for it or not.

[booklington]

In fairness, they are not politicians. Just because some idiots agree with you, or in this case, some sexist jerks, it doesn't mean that you're wrong.

[pretzelsalt]

exactly.

like i think PETA is bullshit - but that doesn't mean i have changed my view on amimal rights.

[judith]

Why are you thinking about not voting for the measure just because some idiots use misleading advertising? Do you base your votes on advertising? Or on your own thoughtful analysis?

[no2ndtroy]

Because they'll connect the number of people who vote for it with the effectiveness of their (in my mind, highly offensive) advertising. Do I want them to think I voted for it because I saw the ads and thought I was voting for something else? Do I really want to be associated with a movement that blatantly lies to people to get their support? That's why it makes me ambivalent. I don't want to have anything to do with people who would do this, even if we both agree on a specific political measure. It comes down to whether I feel it's more important to legalize possession of marijuana or to not align myself with a group of sexist assholes. (And I know for some people, this is less of an issue. But I take my principles extremely seriously and don't want to do anything that feels to me like a compromise. And this does.) I'm not sure exactly which one is more important to me, although I'll probably end up voting for it anyway.

[judith]

The reason I asked is that I have been noticing in the last several elections that the electorate seems to feel they have to be convinced by advertising, and if they aren't, then they won't vote for a particular candidate or measure, even though it may be in their best interests to do so

[no2ndtroy]

Well, in this case, I was convinced before the advertising and the advertising itself is what made me unsure, but I don't think that was their intent. ;) I understand you were just asking, and I don't feel attacked or anything. It's a difficult issue.

If it were a candidate using these sorts of advertising tactics, even if I agreed with their platform, I would not vote for them, because that shows they are willing to use lies to further their agenda. So I do think the advertising used by politicians is an important factor in whether or not I would vote for them. When a person's campaign is advertised deceptively, it bears that person's implicit approval of that message. With this, it's a little harder, because it's not like marijuana is going out and paying these people to fight for it or anything, so while it may cloud the issue, it's really the actions of obnoxious individuals rather than the whole of a movement or one person.

[judith]

I certainly agree with you that if a candidate specifically approved ads that are hellishly misleading, I would give a close look at what that candidate is made of. Obviously, sometimes these things happen because a candidate is new at campaigning and makes mistakes. By the time they reach state or national levels, though, they should not be making that kind of mistake.

But in this case...yeah...ya gotta look at the legislation itself closely.

It's really too bad that there are so few really open public forums, where one can express a concern and have an actual conversation about it. That is, you can't go to that campaign manager and discuss this issue publicly, so that others know of your discussion. That doesn't mean you can't write letters or speak to these folks but I think the public would be well served if they saw it all, saw unvarnished real answers to questions, and follow questions.

Ah, but I'm dreaming again.

[lyngen]

exactly what I was thinking.