Will Obama's Cocaine and Drug use be an issue in the 2012 election?

[milhouse24]

Liberals attacked GW Bush for using cocaine during his wild party days. 
Should conservatives highlight Obama's cocaine use and affinity for marijuana during his high school and college years?

Obama got a pass for his illegal drug use in 2008 because the country was focused on the Iraq War, and McCain was not a viable alternative.

Now that Romney is seen as a viable and competent alternative in a close election, will Christian conservatives make an attack ad about Obama's illegal drug use? 

[Maxwell]

I don't see why either of them should be attacked for drug use. It's their life choices. I'm staunchly against the fact that Obama now is one of the worst administration on drug policies even though there is this history of his drug use. It is utterly despicable and hypocritical. If more people had my thoughts on the issue, and if Mitt Romney had a sane thought on the issue, I think it would be a strong attack on the President's ideology and policies, but unfortunately, neither are the case.

[Orion0]

It's a viable tactic. Obama's campaign has been picking apart every facet of Romney's remarkably clean past, why not go after the obvious in Obama? Only seems fair. Whether or not it affects anything would remain to be seen, as I don't think it really hurt Bush in the long run except giving snl some more easy fodder.

If anything exposing the hypocrisy of his drug use vs admin policies could depress dem turnout and is a more attractive narrative approach in my opinion.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

No.
/thread

[Yank2133]

Wasn't in 2008, why would it be in 2012?

[milhouse24]

Wasn't in 2008, why would it be in 2012?

It wasn't an issue in 2008, because the media was focused on Bush-bashing and anti-Iraq war activism with the Code Pinkers.  Also, McCain had some personal issues as well with divorce and other personal baggage, that the media over-looked Obama's fallacies in order to boost his historic campaign. 

Now that the "anti-war movement" has subsided, and voters care more about small issues like Jobs and Economy; and Romney as a clean-living viable and competent candidate, Religious groups should be able to make a strong case against illegal drug use and supporting a candidate that does not have a history of illegal drug use over several years during high school and college.

[Yank2133]

Wasn't in 2008, why would it be in 2012?

It wasn't an issue in 2008, because the media was focused on Bush-bashing and anti-Iraq war activism with the Code Pinkers.  Also, McCain had some personal issues as well with divorce and other personal baggage, that the media over-looked Obama's fallacies in order to boost his historic campaign. 

Now that the "anti-war movement" has subsided, and voters care more about small issues like Jobs and Economy; and Romney as a clean-living viable and competent candidate, Religious groups should be able to make a strong case against illegal drug use and supporting a candidate that does not have a history of illegal drug use over several years during high school and college.

Obama's past is no secret to anyone and dude has been president for four years. For better or worse, people know who he is.

If Mitt brings this up, he might as well concede because he would look like a desperate man.

[milhouse24]

Wasn't in 2008, why would it be in 2012?

It wasn't an issue in 2008, because the media was focused on Bush-bashing and anti-Iraq war activism with the Code Pinkers.  Also, McCain had some personal issues as well with divorce and other personal baggage, that the media over-looked Obama's fallacies in order to boost his historic campaign. 

Now that the "anti-war movement" has subsided, and voters care more about small issues like Jobs and Economy; and Romney as a clean-living viable and competent candidate, Religious groups should be able to make a strong case against illegal drug use and supporting a candidate that does not have a history of illegal drug use over several years during high school and college.

Obama's past is no secret to anyone and dude has been president for four years. For better or worse, people know who he is.

If Mitt brings this up, he might as well concede because he would look like a desperate man.

Romney won't bring it up, but PAC's can bring it up.  Dobson can bring it up.  Limbaugh can bring it up.  Pat Robertson can bring it up.  We can have a real discussion about the Drug Culture in America, and the effects of drugs on mental accuity. 

Obama shouldn't blame his failed presidency on the effects of drug use, but voters will see that a person who uses or abuses drugs is not a reliable person to serve as president, and because of the effects of cocaine use, we can say it proved to be the moral and intellectual failings of Bush's presidency and now Obama's presidency.  Someone who abuses illegal drugs cannot be trusted to carry out the presidential duties, and now we've seen the past 2 presidents who have both used cocaine fail to perform at above-average levels. 

[renegadedemocrat]

I can't see why it would be. Most of his drug use is forgotten by the American public. Outside of politically informed people, his drug use isn't as well documented and known as one would think. I haven't heard anything regarding it this year, even though it was brought up a few times in 2008. It's a life choice, and while obviously wrong, has nothing to do with his ability to govern the country. On top of that, he was in high school/college. There's not going to be a ton of people who don't have a few mistakes on their record from that era in their lives.

[Lincoln Republican]

Obviously, neither Romney nor his campaign themselves will bring up this issue, but this is an issue that could viably be raised and indeed should be raised by others who support Romney.

Obama and his Chicago style politics pals, his dirty liar friend Harry Reid, and the entire Obama smut machine have ran a sleaze  campaign from the beginning.

Obama's pot head past, and his pot innovator accomplishments, should be discussed in detail.

For all we know, he may have moved his pot parties to the Oval Office.    

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Obviously, neither Romney nor his campaign themselves will bring up this issue, but this is an issue that could viably be raised and indeed should be raised by one of the PACs who support Romney.

Obama and his Chicago style politics pals, his dirty liar friend Harry Reid, and the entire Obama smut machine have ran a sleaze  campaign from the beginning.

Obama's pot head past, and his pot innovator accomplishments, should be discussed in detail.

For all we know, he may have moved his pot parties to the Oval Office.    

lulz

[milhouse24]

I can't see why it would be. Most of his drug use is forgotten by the American public. Outside of politically informed people, his drug use isn't as well documented and known as one would think. I haven't heard anything regarding it this year, even though it was brought up a few times in 2008. It's a life choice, and while obviously wrong, has nothing to do with his ability to govern the country. On top of that, he was in high school/college. There's not going to be a ton of people who don't have a few mistakes on their record from that era in their lives.

Since a lot of middle-class swing voters don't know about Obama's cocaine use, it would be precisely the reason to bring it up now.  Why would anyone want to vote again for another president who has abused Cocaine?  

Gore tried to use Bush's DUI arrest as his October surprise and it almost worked.

[Brittain33]

LOL at the idea that the Republicans are steering clear of this because they're "playing fair" or doing Obama a favor.

[Politico]

Only if we can leak a new video in which Obama talks excitedly, in contrast to his debate performance, about his affinity for cocaine and marijuana. All bets are off if that happens...

Obviously Romney's past is as squeaky clean as anybody can be, which is driving Obama and Co. nuts because, after failing to seal the deal on the "Romney is a Monster" meme,  they know their only hope left is finding a 2000-esque revelation like Bush's DUI...

[Biden 2024]

Because Republicans are rampant anti-drug fascists who want to dictate other peoples lives. So that is fair to attack a Republican President for drug use. Of course, Obama is not exactly drug friendly at all, but him and a lot of his party claim to be. Also, their are 30 days until the election. It is common knowledge he did drugs. It's not an issue.

[GMantis]

Wasn't in 2008, why would it be in 2012?

It wasn't an issue in 2008, because the media was focused on Bush-bashing and anti-Iraq war activism with the Code Pinkers.  Also, McCain had some personal issues as well with divorce and other personal baggage, that the media over-looked Obama's fallacies in order to boost his historic campaign. 

Now that the "anti-war movement" has subsided, and voters care more about small issues like Jobs and Economy; and Romney as a clean-living viable and competent candidate, Religious groups should be able to make a strong case against illegal drug use and supporting a candidate that does not have a history of illegal drug use over several years during high school and college.

Obama's past is no secret to anyone and dude has been president for four years. For better or worse, people know who he is.

If Mitt brings this up, he might as well concede because he would look like a desperate man.

Romney won't bring it up, but PAC's can bring it up.  Dobson can bring it up.  Limbaugh can bring it up.  Pat Robertson can bring it up.  We can have a real discussion about the Drug Culture in America, and the effects of drugs on mental accuity. 

Obama shouldn't blame his failed presidency on the effects of drug use, but voters will see that a person who uses or abuses drugs is not a reliable person to serve as president, and because of the effects of cocaine use, we can say it proved to be the moral and intellectual failings of Bush's presidency and now Obama's presidency.  Someone who abuses illegal drugs cannot be trusted to carry out the presidential duties, and now we've seen the past 2 presidents who have both used cocaine fail to perform at above-average levels. 

Obama never had much chance to win the vote of those who take Dobson and Limbaugh seriously. Also, attacking a candidate for what he did thirty years ago is not usually a winning tactic.

[Statesman]

I have an idea. Let's end the War on Drugs.

The past three Presidents have done drugs in their youth. A war on drugs is an unwinnable drain of resources costly in both lives and treasure, and legalizing and regulating substances and treating drug abuse as a health rather than a criminal issue would be better than what we have had for decades.

Besides, if you live in a country that will throw you in the slammer over a substance you decide to put into your own body to achieve some desired effect, but won't penalize bankers for ruining the economy, you aren't living in a free country.

So no, it isn't fair to attack Obama and say he's unfit for office because he did drugs a few times in the early 80s. That would be silly and I would frown upon it. If anything, you could use his and G. W.'s and Clinton's youthful drug experimentation to highlight the absurdity of continuing the War on Drugs, which all three of the presidents have continued to do.

Never, at any point in our history, are we gonna say, "Phew, got 'em all, there are no more drugs left, everybody's finally sober."

That's never, ever going to happen.

Milhouse, I'm a liberal. But I didn't attack George W. Bush for doing cocaine in the 60s or 70s. I think that would be ridiculous. So when you say "liberals attacked George W. Bush for cocaine", write a little asterisk next to it that says *except Statesman.

I attacked him for his policies (Iraq War was unnecessary and costly in blood and treasure, not going after bin Laden was a stupid decision, tax breaks for the wealthy did not help the economy recover long term and is a waste of money) while he was President, which, I think it's safe to say, got us to a worse place than where we when he took office. You might want to notice that Obama has a net gain of jobs, and George W. Bush had a net loss of jobs.

[Comrade Funk]

Another stupid millhouse thread about Obama and drugs. At least it's not about Paul Ryan's abs and sex appeal to the women demographic.

[Indy Texas]

I tend to think that short of murder or some kind of felony conviction, the things politicians (or anyone else, for that matter) do in their teens or early 20s aren't relevant.

I'd hate to imagine what political campaigns will be like in about 15 years or so, by which time a generation of people who cataloged all their youthful indiscretions on MySpace and Facebook will be having incriminating pictures and status updates dredged up from the annals of the Internet to be used against them.

[Torie]

Obama's drug history certainly proved to be a big issue in 2008 didn't it?  Now, four years farther away from his high times, folks are going to focus on that like a laser beam. The economy is just a distraction.

[Yelnoc]

I'm sure Drudge will jump on it, now that The Whitey Tape has been issued.

[J. J.]

Wasn't in 2008, why would it be in 2012?

This.  It's known and into the numbers.

[Lief 🗽]

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

No one votes on the drug issue, whether it's the legalization of it or a candidate's past usage of it.

[morgieb]