- The Weed Blog https://www.theweedblog.com

Does Hillary Clinton Support Marijuana Legalization?


hillary clinton marijuanaIt wasn’t that long ago that Hillary Clinton was clearly opposed to marijuana legalization. In 2007, then Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton said that she was against marijuana decriminalization. In 2012 Hillary Clinton stated that she didn’t believe legalization was the answer to fixing the failed war on drugs. Her reasoning at the time was that cartels would figure out other ways to make money, such as through kidnapping or extortion. Her logic at the time was clearly flawed, but I’ll save that for another article.

In an interview this week with CNN, it appears that Hillary Clinton has changed her tune a bit. She stated that she is ‘open to trying marijuana legalization at the state level.’ In the same interview she expressed concerns about medical marijuana, claiming that she wants to see more research first. If the interviewer had more brain power, she would have pointed out that the reason there isn’t more research is because the federal government will not allow it. It was a poorly played political tactic to say the least.

Medical marijuana supporters agree with Hillary Clinton – we would LOVE to see more research. Does this mean that we can expect Hillary Clinton to help us fight for rescheduling so that the research she is referring to can happen? Or was that just a not-so-clever way of dodging the question? I don’t think it takes a genius to figure out which it is.

Even Hillary Clinton’s answer about state legalization is a duck and dodge maneuver. If Hillary Clinton truly supported marijuana legalization, she would directly state so. The fact of the matter is Hillary Clinton is gearing up for yet another run at the White House, and kind of supporting marijuana legalization while not fully supporting marijuana legalization is a convenient way to stay on the fence. Then, when there is a landslide victory in 2016 for marijuana reform, she can state that she was in support of it and try to look like a genius. But in the meantime when she gets criticized for marijuana comments, she can say she didn’t support it. Don’t believe the hype. Hillary Clinton doesn’t support anything except war mongering and doing whatever it takes to be elected President of the United States in 2016.


About Author

Johnny Green


  1. If he wins the nomination I’ll vote for him but he’ll lose the general election, you want Bush3 as President then go ahead and vote with your heart in the primary instead of your head.

  2. “Friendly with wall street ” is putting it a little too softly. How about owned by wall street? That is a more realistic statement. What exactly is it about Sanders that you are so afraid of? This minority consensus about Sanders having zero per cent chance of being elected is wholly unrealistic. Have you not noticed that 80 per cent of comments in articles speaking about Bernie and Hillary (ones that still allow comments that is) are favoring Bernie? Do you really think all those people are twenty somethings? As of right now you really have to see that support is shifting to Bernie. As for cannabis reform, Hillary will not do much, that would not be good for big pharma, insurance companies of federal law enforcement looking for easy work. Hildabeast is on the wrong side of history. Don’t be afraid to vote for Bernie!!!!

  3. Who do you think elects these people? You think a bunch of 20 year olds who can’t be bothered to vote more than once every 4 years will push him over the edge? Yeah, Hillary is friendly with wall street so is the GOP, but at least Hillary will do most of what Bernie talks about. I’d rather get 80% of promises from Hillary cause she’s President than 0% from Bernie cause he’ll lose.

  4. 68 year old corporate boot lick…….74 year old socialist, hmmmmm
    68 year old zero point one per center…..74 year old socialist ninety per center, ummm
    68 year old who gets “often confused”…..74 year old socialist who is sharp as a tack, well, uhhh
    68 year old square who says she will be so gracious as to possibly, maybe change cannabis from schedule one to schedule two…….
    74 year old rebel who wants to remove cannabis from the schedule altogether, yeh, OK give me the socialist!!! GO BERNIE!!!!!!!

  5. Bernie Sanders is the only one I know that may support legalization. He doesn’t think anyone should be thrown in jail for a small amount of marijuana. He is pro medical marijuana. He is viewing Colorado as a test state for total legalization. If things go well in Colorado he wouldn’t be opposed to national legalization for recreational. He may be the only hope we have. On the Republican side Rand Paul is the only one that has said he is in favor of medical marijuana. Some of the others have said let the states decide which means nothing at the national level. And no hope for poor schmucks like me in Indiana (Republican controlled state)

  6. Bernie Sanders is pro medical legalization and looking to Colorado as a test state as far as recreational use nationwide. I agree with this article. Hilary will say whatever will get her elected. Right now she doesn’t think marijuana legalization will help her. I don’t even think it’s because she thinks it will lose her votes if she says she is pro marijuana. Honestly I think it’s big pharma donors. I don’t trust her at all. I don’t like any of the Republicans. Rand Paul at least is pro medical marijuana and not such a war monger but he’ll never get the republican nomination. Chris Christie has promised enforce marijuana laws in states like Colorado. Why he is taking such a hard line I don’t know. Did not expect to hear that from a Jersey Gov. I thought he was more progressive but wow he actually said that in the debate last night…

  7. I just don’t think a 74 year old white socialist from Vermont is going to win, he’ll get the youth vote but you think Latinos and African Americans will be waiting hours in line to vote for him cause he sure won’t get the 30-50 year old white vote? And while seniors might save him he’s as liberal as they come and the majority of voting seniors are conservative. Make him VP or give him a high level cabinet position.

  8. i love how she talks about cartel’s making money when they make money because weed is illegal here… well in the majority of states. if it were legalized the cartels would lose millions. if not billions all togethor. there would be less people in jail. and can be utilized for dozens of things. shes obviously not the right person to be in power first off but she will not do what is right when she gets elected which we all know she will. the opposition is jed bush com’mon now.

  9. I don’t think Paul is pro-choice, which is a strike against him in my book. And while he does seem to hold views against gay marriage he has not spoken about that lately and seems to accept that we’ve moved on. He is by far the strongest pro-cannabis candidate, despite his mild support it is still head and shoulders above any other contender. He has actually made a difference in cannabis policy and you will not find any other presidential candidate about whom you can say the same thing. I am uncomfortable with his views on abortion and same-sex marriage but he is not any worse than most of the other Republicans out there and in most ways he is way better. On managing government debt and on foreign relations he is the strongest candidate from either of the two main parties. That said he still does not hold a candle to his father, whose views never once required me to write a justification or disclaimer such as this paragraph. Even in the 1970’s, Ron Paul’s message was of tolerance for diversity and for freedom.

    Meanwhile you are wrong about Hillary. She is an authoritarian and would have no qualms about setting the clock back on federal cannabis policy if she could wring a political advantage from doing so. One thing in our favor: she probably cannot wring any political advantage from doing so. But she is not committed to rolling back the war on drugs at all, and she will probably try to avoid the issue throughout her presidency if she wins. (And so far she is the most likely to win.) It’s not like there is no precedence for this strategy!

    The feds have not stopped persecuting cannabis users; they’ve just taken a bit of a pause. There is nothing in the law that prevents them from resuming at any time except a spending bill provision that expires in September. A future president could roll back cannabis policy to pre-Obama levels immediately with an Executive Order. Contrarily, she could also de-schedule or re-schedule cannabis with an executive order since under the Controlled Substances Act the Attorney General is responsible for making drug scheduling decisions and that office reports to the President and is subject to Executive Orders.

  10. I think Rand wants to decriminalize at the federal level while leaving policy to the states. He’s already introduced legislation to down-schedule it.

  11. Tommy Gilchrist on

    I think it is an issue for 2020; looking at the states that have ballot initiatives coming up (Hawaii, Maine, Nevada, Arizona, California, to name but a few) between now and the November 2016 election, coupled with those states that will have ballot measures between the 2016 and 2020 elections, will push it up the federal agenda.

    This is a relatively well put-together summary of this option: Hillary’s High Stakes In 2020 | musingsofabrit.wordpress.com/2015/04/22/hillarys-high-stakes-in-2020 #weed

  12. I think he is just getting too old to want to bother anymore. But you are right; Ron is the real deal while Rand is just libertarian lite; he’s the margarine of libertarian.

  13. Leave it up to the states but keep it federally illegal? I like rand paul but when it come to marijuana legalization i like ron paul better. I wonder why he is not running?

  14. Ted cruz is on our side. And i wouldn’t throw Hickenlooper under the buss he is the governor of Colorado. But then again he didn’t agree with it at the beginning idk mayb

  15. He is a better choice than any other candidate which unfortunately is not a very high bar. If you could get Elizabeth Warren to run then you might have a chance at changing my mind. (That was a hint btw.)

  16. You don’t think Hillary will do that? She is a totalitarian. And for some reason there does not seem to be any other viable candidate from the Democratic side. So as long as Hillary is the only Democratic option, Rand Paul is clearly the better choice.

  17. She is an almost 70 year old Democrat. Her body language makes it clear that she is a hardcore prohibitionist.

  18. Midnight Toker on

    She is pretty much saying that because she’s dragging her feet. She doesn’t want to lose the voters who are against pot (which honestly, how many democrats are against pot these days?). Give her another 6 months to a year and her view will conveniently change.

  19. Midnight Toker on

    Dude, no, enough with Paul already. He is NOT a good choice. He will set social progression back 50 years.

  20. Midnight Toker on

    When has Warren been against pot? Honestly curious since I haven’t seen any news on the matter. Sanders would also be pro-weed, especially medical.

  21. Midnight Toker on

    I’m with Jake on this. She doesn’t buy into it. She’s only going with what her 90s politics is telling her to go with. Once she sees the numbers, her stance will change. Give her year. She’s a people pleaser and wants to come off looking progressive.

  22. Midnight Toker on

    Is your choice to put all your faith in Paul solely only because of his stance on pot? Or do you actually stand behind his anti-gay, anti-poor, anti-trans, anti-social progression, anti-gov’t ways of thinking? He is NOT a good choice to run this country.

  23. Midnight Toker on

    Yeah, let’s vote for Paul who is pro-choice, anti-gay, anti-transgender.. Great idea. Clinton can’t do much about pot. Whatever she believes is moot. Its a state by state choice and the federal gov’t has already stopped most raids because of another law that was pushed forward. That was thanks to Obama going through Congress. Paul is a terrible choice if you are just going to vote for him because he is pro-weed or at least he pretends to be.

  24. Allen Robinson on

    Hillary is one of those people who truely scares me. This is because I think she worships power. I believe her goal is total control over as many folks as possible.
    That being said, if she wants to take credit for allowing or supporting legalization at the state level and telling the feds to turn a blind eye then so be it.
    I would much prefer a more libritarian candidate. In our defacto two party system I teeter back and forth party to party depending on issue.

  25. It is saving lives candidates need to support this because it is new jobs new health care new taxes,ect thats hoo i vote for ………..

  26. Don’t get too excited. These people have advanced skills in foot-dragging. The last time they “considered” rescheduling cannabis they literally spent years and years “doing” it only to eventually decide to not do anything. We need legislation because these administrators are all part of the prohibition economy and won’t budge unless nudged.

  27. Plus…get this (from the Woodpile Report):
    Hillary’s book bombs – Between us, they are nervous at Simon & Schuster. Sales were well below expectations and the media was a disaster. They sold 60,000 hard covers first week and 24,000 ebooks. Simon & Schuster hoping and praying for 150,000 print first week. The 60k represents a less than 10% sell thru based on what they shipped. They will be lucky to sell 150,000 total lifetime. It’s a bomb but it will be interesting to see how they spin it.”Veteran publishing source”, to Daniel Halper at weeklystandard.com

  28. You could switch parties long enough to vote for Rand Paul. He would be incredibly way less disastrous then Christie on “other” issues and he is the best available pres candidate right now wrt cannabis. (But even he has not come out solidly for legalization but instead says he is ‘personally against’ cannabis use and would leave it to the states.)

  29. Hillary has had strong convictions against any form of marijuana until just recently where she admitted to a wait another 75 years and see approach.

  30. Hillary is more anti-pot than Obama, that is why Obama won and Hillary lost. Eight years later after watching Obama’s dismal record on pot, Hillary’s wait another 75 years and see approach is not going to go well.

  31. Hillary absolutely buys into the whole anti-pot moral panic, she has been part of it for all of her adult life.

    While pro-pot may be better politically, especially for the Democrats, Hillary is recently on record as being against any form of marijuana legalization. That is why the people who follow her closely are in disbelief.

  32. Just thinking outloud on

    Yeah because we would never vote for a candidate that offered nothing more than Hope and Change with nothing or substance to back it up – twice. Sorry I am really tired of the lesser of evils approach to representation.
    Paul is the only one that offers us anything but more of the same failed policies and laws that have served us ‘so well’ for the last 30 years. Status quo is not progress but stagnation and since I have been of voting age all I have seen is stagnation or screw-ups. The only way to win against a system so stacked against you is to be willing to give up everything for a cause and our candidates are willing to give up nothing or take a solid stand for their beliefs.
    I saw you referred to Paul as a simpleton above. Maybe its time to get back to basics and a more simple approach to government. The simple path may be the most economical path to improving the country. So far this complex, convoluted, compulsive, corrupt and incorrigible government we have allowed to take over so completely has failed on more fronts than the they have been successful on. Maybe the fix is so simple it is overlooked. Just a thought.

  33. Jake Stevens on

    I’m confused.
    Step one: stop voting for people who make too many promises
    Step two: states are less likely to decriminalize or allow medical use of pot. Why?
    Step three: Federal government submits to will of the states… by doing what?

  34. Jake Stevens on

    Why not? I very much doubt that she actually buys into the whole anti-pot moral panic. Most likely she is determining her position on this issue the same way she does all other issues: cold political calculus. And these days being pro-pot is looking like a smarter and smarter move.

  35. Jake Stevens on

    The best and worst thing about the Clintons is that they don’t really have any strong convictions – they’ll just follow public opinion. This seems like a pure insult, but the fact is that public opinion is way out in front of government policy on almost every issue.

  36. That is true. No other candidate has made such a promise. I hope we wouldn’t elect a President on that basis alone. And his fixation with Ms Rand’s simplistic ideas is a huge red flag, sorry.

  37. He is the only candidate who has promised to leave marijuana policy to the states. Your Ayn Rand bashing is way off topic.

  38. At least he has introduced legislation to defund raids on medical marijuana dispensaries that are operating according to the law in their respective states. That is more than any Clinton has ever done.

  39. ahem ahem legalize this shit… we do it every tym.. illegally though… legalizing it will just allow us to get it freely but we do it daily basis

  40. stellarvoyager on

    This is true. He is free to back his words with action and introduce legislation to deschedule MJ. I am still waiting.

  41. If you read all of Ayn Rand (like he did at age 17,) believed every word, then stopped thinking, he’s your man.

  42. Oh give the old broad a break. You don’t know how hard she had it after leaving the white house, trying to scrape together enough pennies to pay for her multiple mansions and what not. The poor thing!

  43. Rand Paul has clearly stated that he believes in leaving marijuana policy up to the states.

  44. stellarvoyager on

    OK, for all of the critics of Hillary’s stated position on cannabis: which other major 2016 presidential candidate has a position that is *friendlier* to our side? Elizabeth Warren? Nope. Hickenlooper? Nope. Cuomo? Not a chance. Chris Christie or Jeb Bush? Good heavens no! So before you criticize, consider the alternatives, who are at best no better than she is on cannabis policy. There is NO major candidate for 2016 who has expressed a friendlier cannabis policy than she has! She basically came out and said that she would let states move forward with their own legalization, and not challenge states who do. At worst, that is no different from the current administration. Her position in the past was bad, I agree, but at least she appears to have “evolved” somewhat, and we should welcome that in any politician. Besides, think about this: wouldn’t having a figure with as much clout and stature as Hillary Clinton on our side be a GOOD thing for the movement? Shouldn’t we be *appreciative* instead of *scornful* when someone takes the political risk of standing with us? Or do we tell them “f*ck you” when they lend us even qualified support? You can see the glass being half full, or half empty, and in this case, it’s better to stand with politicians who are taking the risk (and it is a risk) of coming around and supporting our position. If we don’t, then who in their right mind would take the risk to support us, when all we do is criticize?

  45. *I don’t think any of that proves the federal government “never” deals in good faith*

    hillary is just one in a multitude of examples of an incompetent, untrustworthy government in action.

    Her history of unethical behavior as a public servant stretches back to the Watergate committee, where as a junior staffer, she was fired for lying. Her supervisor, Jerry Zeifman, even refused to provide her with a reference. She’s been no good from day one.

    No cannabis legalization advocate should trust her to champion our cause.

  46. She has become smooth at answering a question that wasn’t asked, or giving an answer that basically means nothing. This interview exposed her true feelings about legalization and the failed war on drugs, she would shut down the state programs if given the opportunity, or at best make things as difficult for them as possible by authorizing more frequent federal raids on dispensaries and producers. She couldn’t care less about people suffering with legitimate pain or those dealing with the horrors of PTSD even though ample data exists that medical cannabis gives relief for these and other diagnosed medical issues. She is far too ingrained in the Washington politician mentality of being better than those supposedly represented, it’s all about her.

  47. Hillary never has and never will support marijuana, medical or otherwise. Her wait another 75 years and see approach is only fooling her mindless followers.

  48. Most high-level politicians (and other public figures, such as actors, sports stars, etc) seem to grow enormous egos sooner or later. She probably thinks of “average Americans” in a very abstract way, not as actual human beings. Who in the top levels of government doesn’t? I don’t think any of that proves the federal government “never” deals in good faith, or that we should trust her less than any other politician. I think I’d take my chances with Hillary rather than someone like Rand Paul, who appears to be a simpleton. All that being said, Hillary’s comments about marijuana are obviously cynical and totally political.

  49. Once we stop voting for people who promise everything under the sun, the states will feel less pressure to open up to medical and decriminalization. Then federal policy will finally submit to the will of the states. Falling for campaign promises gets us a stagnant economy, drone strikes, and chaos at the southern border.

  50. For the Clinton’s that’s ALWAYS depended on which way the….political winds were blowing. Just look at Bill’s dustup with the NRA and how long it took him to come back to his political senses once he saw which way that political wind was blowing on that Democratic losing position. How many Dem’s lost re-election because of that?? As I recall that wasn’t long considering again this was Bill Clinton. And even Hillary can remember that. Anyway, I’ve already decided that IF it’s Hillary on the left versus Christy on the right I will stop voting for President if that’s the establishment choices. I can’t stand either of them.

  51. Mrs. Clinton is a political opportunist of the worst type. Her treatment of subordinates (including secret service agents) over the years has revealed that she has no regard for the average American.

    She is the perfect example of the rule that the federal government never deals in good faith.

    It would require a special kind of stupid to entrust any of our inalienable rights or hard won freedoms to a person of this sort.

  52. She has undoubtedly done a careful risk-benefit analysis and decided not to decide. She will probably be our next President, and we are overdue for a female President, but she is far from ideal. As a matter of fact, I can’t think of anyone, of any gender, who is ideal, although I’m confident others may have someone in mind.

Leave A Reply