Seems Ron Paul is polling quite well after last Sundays Republican debate on the ABC.
Online poll right?
I'll give him one thing.. he has lots of online spammers(check digg.com out for that) but I still have a hunch that when the republican primaries come around that he wont even be considered.
I'm affraid our next president will be a Mrs. Not that I care shes a woman, I just dont like the fact that she is evil.
Checked around Digg and came up with the below regarding Ron Paul spammers.
What are you trying to show me with those links? They both go to a video with people cheering.
The youtube video quality is so bad I cant see what the pics at the end are supposed to be of.
Anyway I have to ask... do you vote in online polls for Ron Paul?
Ron Paul's voting record.
I have never voted to raise taxes.
I have never voted for an unbalanced budget.
I have never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.
I have never voted to raise congressional pay.
I have never taken a government-paid junket.
I have never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.
I voted against the Patriot Act.
I voted against regulating the Internet.
I voted against the Iraq war.
I do not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program.
I return a portion of my annual congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year.
As a congressman, I also introduce numerous pieces of substantive legislation each year, probably more than any single member of Congress.
My Issues Debt and Taxes
American Independence and Sovereignty
War and Foreign Policy
Border Security and Immigration Reform
Privacy and Personal Liberty
Property Rights and Eminent Domain
Do you vote in online polls?
The youtube video quality is so bad I cant see what the pics at the end are supposed to be of.
Really, um ok then.
So you can read this clearly?
Thanks for answering the question though.
Easy as pie!Hopefully some will realise how the mainstream media goes about their "fair and balanced" reporting!
Those are much clearer then what I see from the video on his site.
Anyway now I see what your point is.
Anyway I still think those online polls are worthless.
1. very small sample size compared to real election
2. People vote more than once
3. no way to see if the people voting can really vote in real life
Ron Paul supporters are spamming online polls/communities. Its not some big secret.
http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Swamp_th...ll_for_Ron_Paul
---------
http://flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=868063604&size=o
He also supports a couple of dumb things that will alienate himself from most people.
Seen both those sites and many more. Have you heard of tuning the polls.
And:
The most glaring example that this support for Dr Paul is real is the fact that "Ron Paul" is one of the most searched terms on Google. Search boxes cant be spammed. Think of the money Google would lose if they could. Secondly, what do the nay sayers make of the 10,000 Ron Paul Meetup members. Were their beings spammed here by some force of nature? How about the fact that the CNN poll after the last Republican debate forced voters to weigh in by comment. After 90 minutes their were 184 comments. 178 were Pro Ron Paul. CNN then took the message board down. Luckily people were able to copy the file before it was deleted. Full paragraph comments from voters with insightful commentary about the debate.
The cries continue to mount from the remaining GOP candidates about the spamming done in Pauls behalf. This begs one question: Where are all the spammers for the other guys. In one poll on ABC John McCain had 17 votes. Don't his own grandkids vote for him? Where are all the people singing the praises of Giuliani and Romney? What these clowns would have us believe to be spam is actually passion for a candidate who's history and message deserve such passion. Tell them that is what politics is all about. The loudest voice always gets heard.
The GOP ticket for 2008 is pretty awful. However, the Democratic ticket is also pretty poor. It's a shame that the two people I think would make decent presidents are such a minority. Mike Gravel and Ron Paul seem like they both would make great presidents but very few people know who they are.
The GOP ticket for 2008 is pretty awful. However, the Democratic ticket is also pretty poor. It's a shame that the two people I think would make decent presidents are such a minority. Mike Gravel and Ron Paul seem like they both would make great presidents but very few people know who they are.
Great "free" minds think alike Jago.
My dreamteam =
Ron Paul - President
Mike Gravel - Vice President
Even though I'm an Aussie our government has been a puppet of the neocons for far too long hence my interest in the US Presidential race.
I would like Ron Paul if he was not a non-interventionist which is far from being pragmatic.
His supporters are quite annoying, especially considering the notion that every word and deed of the messiah Dr. Paul (as if the fact of him having been an obstetrician/gynecologist f***ing mattered) must be protected from the heretic.
Mike Gravel will be fortunately buried under gravel after the 2008 Republican primaries. Considering their respective views it would be highly paradoxal to see them as running mates anyway.
My requests to Americans in two easy resolutions:
1 - Don't elect Clinton or Obama.
2 - Find a flaw in the constitution that would lead to the lynching of Nancy Pelosi.
3 - If #2 fails plan her assasination and hire an illegal immigrant to execute it. Give the man an honorary citizenship and Congressional Gold Medal of Honor after successful completion.
If we don't elect Clinton or Obama, where do we have to turn to? Mitt Romney? Guiliani? Neither of them have the capacity to make their own decisions, let alone make decisions that consider what most Americans want.
As stupid as it is, I would like to see Obama win on the basis that he's black, and I'd like to see Clinton win on the basis that she's a woman. Some sort of precedent to be set that relaxes our tradition of white male presidents. Now having said that, I don't want Clinton to win on the basis that she's too far moderate and too far concerned about the *next* election (2012) to be a decent president - to take action that will lead us to some sort of resolve. Obama... I don't know. He's inexperienced, but maybe since he's so young he'll be less jaded than his opponents. Perhaps he'll make decisions more abruptly, but ideally in [my] favor.
I can't see how it matters one way or the other. Even if some new blood gets in the White House, it won't happen, but even if it does the federal govt system is broke and utterly corrupt. Lobbiests and special intrest groups write our laws and legally bribe, coerce and pay off our elected officials. If you're not corrupt when you arrive in Washington, you soon will be. Corruption is the staus quo. If a 3rd party gains control of the White House the senate and house, assuming one or both are controlled by the Dems and/or the Repubs, will put up partisan roadblocks all along the way to prevent the 3rd party controlled White House from doing anything. Dems and Repubs both have long lost sight of bettering this country and helping the people and working together for a common good. Now their only goal is to win votes and gain control.
I didn't used to be so cynical. The last 8-10 years have soured me on national level politics. If it were up to me I'd sweep Washington DC right into the Atlantic Ocean and start all over. Move the Capital to the middle of the country somewhere, a president could only serve one six year term, congressman would have term limits as well, every man and woman would serve a stint in the military as soon as they turned 18, and if a lobbiest was caught within 100 miles of an elected official he or she'd be immediately shot.
Ahhhh, these little rants of mine are very cathartic
I don't think Obama would be able to represent a large majority of the American population, which are white. Concerning Clinton, she's to much feminine to be a head of state.As stupid as it is, I would like to see Obama win on the basis that he's black, and I'd like to see Clinton win on the basis that she's a woman.
Make sure you read the scrolling text at the bottom of the vid.
I don't think Obama would be able to represent a large majority of the American population, which are white. Concerning Clinton, she's to much feminine to be a head of state.
Race doesn't play a factor in who you can represent - it's about who you can relate to. Obama, I think, does have the capacity to relate to whites. I just don't have too much confidence in his capacity to be president :\.