You said "no moves." Corey Booker has written the bill and they are waiting for the optimal moment to submit so that is not "no moves."
Ok, I see. Trying to use weed legalization as their metaphorical carrot on the stick for the midterms. I guess that to some degree counts as a move.
Well, the black vote is not monolithic but I don't think any institution represents the constituency more comprehensively than the NAACP.
As a former smoker who voted for every tax increase on tobacco that came along, I think the psychology of addiction may be more complicated than you suppose. Still, I think your point is worthy from an electoral stand point. The ALCU argues that now is not the time to give cops another reason to target black people and Al Sharpton points out the hypocrisy of legalizing weed once it is popular with white people while criminalizing tobacco products popular with the black community. The CDC says such a ban could save 45,000 lives a year but black smokers already smoke less than white smokers and nevertheless die from smoking at higher rates, demonstrating that quality of healthcare and lifestyle are probably way more significant than menthol vs non-menthol. Even so, I can't see Sharpton voting Republican anytime soon.
Yes, I certainly don't think it will turn anyone into Republicans. This is just the kind of typical discouragement that keeps people home during election-time. Nobody is likely to switch parties in order to get mint-flavored cigarettes back.
I definitely support the ban because it will save people. I support tobacco taxes as well (although I do complain about the cost of my ~1 cigar per quarter). I can see there being a vast increase in illegal menthol sales and related incarceration (or fines. I didn't look at the punishment for the sales yet), which won't be a good look.
The NAACP is generally pretty representative of the black vote, but I think in this case, it is just an example of an unpopular policy that stands to do a lot of good. It would be nice if more unpopular, principled positions would be taken, but they aren't for a reason. Do enough unpopular things and your enemies get elected, and they will do much worse things for the communities you wish to help.
I think Biden should be proceeding as if he is past his expiration date because statistically he is. That means taking the unpopular moves onto his reputation while burnishing Harris with the popular shit (that's assuming that BIden likes Harris for 2024 which may be quite presumptious). To that end, giving Harris the lead on infrastructure is a good move but giving Harris border policy oversight was a mistake.
I definitely agree. Since he is projected to not run again, the VP and President roles should be reversed. Normally the VP needs to take the heat for everything. Since the border policy is not as big of a concern for democrats, I don't see that issue in particular hurting her chances for reelection unless it is horrendously botched (which it may be, based on the current state of the border)
