Declared U.S. Presidential Field and their Vaping Positions

[BrotherBob]

Looks like "Most Likely Against and unknown" wins my vote. There was only one candidate that disappointed me with their "no" position. Seriously, it could be worst.
re: Declared U.S. Presidential Field and their Vaping Positions | Vaping Post

 

[Rossum]

I think the "No" rating for President Trump is inaccurate. I do not think we could have done much better than his appointment of FDA commissioner Scott Gotlieb, who tried to punt the PMTA deadine into 2022.

Then there's this: "He is also expected to ban most vaping flavors nationwide." That's clearly dated info. We know Trump came to the realization that this was a mistake.

But of course the bottom line is that none of the people who have a snowball's chance of occupying the White House is firmly in our corner. So even if a person was willing to be a single-issue voter, with the single issue being vaping, there is no clear choice.

 

[LoveVanilla]

I believe Sanders campaign would support the public health advantage of vaping. And has no problem modeling off successful programs from other countries (e.g. UK). If Trump and Sanders are both on our side, believe we have a win.

 

[BrotherBob]

"Most Likely Against" rating is better than "No". I went ahead and sent:
Nicotine science and policy Q & A
to a few of my "Most Likely Against" favorable candidates. Would hope they read it.

 

[sonicbomb]

The assumption that any politicians pre-election promise will be honoured once in office is insanely optimistic.