Would you be more likely to vote for someone if they admitted past marijuana use

[The Hack Hater]

A non-issue. I really could care less. They're politicians, and politicians have problems with telling the truth.

[Eraserhead]

Wouldn't matter (normal)

[Robespierre's Jaw]

Wouldn't matter (normal)

[perdedor]

No difference.  However if they were for legalization they would have my enthusiastic support.

[Frodo]

As long as they are no longer taking drugs, I wouldn't really care about their past use of marijuana.

[Verily]

I'd be more likely to vote for someone who admitted marijuana use than someone who denied marijuana use but had used it. I'd be more likely to vote for someone who had never used marijuana than someone who had used it, but only marginally.

[minionofmidas]

I'd be more likely to vote for someone who admitted marijuana use than someone who denied marijuana use but had used it. I'd not be ready to take a politician's word for it if they claimed that they had never used marijuana.

[Keystone Phil]

Wouldn't matter (R)

Rick smoked some pot back in the day. Disappointing but true.

[Nym90]

Wouldn't matter, though if they were open about it and brought it up rather than letting the media dig it up, I could give them some points for honesty.

[Ban my account ffs!]

I would be more likely to vote for someone that admitted past marijuana use than someone who didn't admit to past marijuana use.

I might slightly prefer someone who hadn't used marijuana at all, however.

[Јas]

I don't really care whether they used it or not. I would very possibly have issues with a candidate who admitted using it but was against legalisation (or at least decriminalisation) as I'd view that as hypocritical.