digg

Join DiggAbout

How to Stop Vote Fraud - The ONLY Way Ron Paul Can Win watch!

youtube.com — This is the ONLY video that really matters if we have any chance of stopping the corruption and getting who we ACTUALLY vote for into office.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • tmak73, on 12/06/2007, -15/+38Lets dig this to the TOP Paulies, and anyone else who is concerned about thier vote REALLY counting!
    • unreg, on 12/06/2007, -5/+4God help the Ron Paul koolaid drinkers.

      And good job belittling everyone else

      Like how is wasn't made or endorsed by Ron Paul. Even he didn't want to associated with it.
  • Thanehand, on 12/06/2007, -26/+10No. This is presented in too much with too much of a "conspiracy theorist" slant.
    • tmak73, on 12/06/2007, -2/+16does not matter, voter fraud is real, and this video actually provides a SOLUTION, something other conspiracy theorists dont provide... Its hard to not come off as a conspiracy theory when talking openly about what is going on right now in our country... its not a conspiracy, its out in the open for every one to see, with supporting facts.
      • funhouse1970, on 12/06/2007, -0/+9Voter fraud is a conspiracy no matter how you approach it. That is, if you know what the word "conspiracy" means.

        Conspiracy Con*spir"a*cy, n.; pl. Conspiracies. [See Conspiration.]

        1. A combination of men for an evil purpose; an agreement, between two or more persons, to commit a crime in concert, as treason; a plot.

        2. A concurence or general tendency, as of circumstances, to one event, as if by agreement.

        3. (Law) An agreement, manifesting itself in words or deeds, by which two or more persons confederate to do an unlawful act, or to use unlawful to do an act which is lawful; confederacy.

        Syn: Combination; plot; cabal.

        Source: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913)

        Until honest criminal investigations ALL conjecture about the crime committed is THEORY.
      • JonForTheWin, on 12/07/2007, -1/+1That's some hardcore newspeak there.
    • dinsy, on 12/06/2007, -3/+3That word is quickly losing any meaning.
      • Misesean, on 12/06/2007, -1/+1It's the working version of "fnord"
  • jamaster5243, on 12/06/2007, -5/+29truley, all the money bombs in the world will not help out if we dont ensure fair voting practices.
  • jasqwerty, on 12/06/2007, -29/+10Ron Paul will lose his first primary in less than 650 hours now, BADLY, landslider into 6th place, the first of many. Get those tissues ready, you'll need them, and don't forget all the braindead trooferesque conspiracy theories.
  • jasqwerty, on 12/06/2007, -19/+8Good job proving my point so far there guys. Denial is the first stage, too bad most troofers never move past it. 649 hours now.
  • victrola, on 12/06/2007, -18/+16Stopping paulspam is a better way to not make People hate Ron Paul, except it's too late.
    • wakeup79, on 12/06/2007, -12/+14Those that hate Ron Paul are either misguided or uninformed about the issues at hand. If you are an American who believes in Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness, you might want to do yourself a favor and educate yourself on the subject before choosing hate.
      • Daniel591992, on 12/06/2007, -4/+10that's exactly what he was talking about.
      • Wahoo06, on 12/07/2007, -10/+2Try again. We recognize the problems with his campaign (myself, I think he would be incredibly weak on national defense mostly). We also recognize that most Ron Paul supporters are loud and irritating, with many of them being conspiracy theorists or anarchists, if not worse. Yes, yes, I know, you're all saying don't judge Ron Paul on that, but trust me, the #1 thing turning people off to the Ron Paul campaign are the Ron Paul supporters.

        You Ron Paul supporters are the ones who need to wake up. Even if, in the incredibly unlikely case, Ron Paul won the primary, he would get crushed in the general election, which is pretty sad because even the weakest of Republican candidates should be able to put up a strong fight against Hillary Clinton (quite simply, she is the most polarizing character in politics today). Ron Paul isolates the base of Republican voters because (1) he appears weak when it comes to foreign affairs and national defense and (2) though he says he is pro-life and against homosexual "marriage", he won't do anything to suggest that he is telling the truth. The Republican base, which normally would never consider voting third party, would abandon the Republican candidate Paul in droves, giving the Democrat an easy win, and labeling Paul the new Perot or Nader, despite his affiliation with the Republican party. Paul might seem like a good candidate against a big government Republican, but how would it feel if he lost to a bigger government Democrat?

        Make no mistake, Ron Paul could impact Republicans for years to come, but it will not be from the White House. Despite the large money he has brought in, he is not polling in double digits in any major poll (and do not cite the straw polls that he has won, which are so easily manipulated that they don't show how the American people in general feel about him). I suggest you all select another candidate to support, because Paul will only leave you disappointed when the Republican National Convention comes around.
    • tmak73, on 12/07/2007, -3/+6sorry, this isnt spam, just trying to get the growing movement of paul supporters to change direction and focus on the largest potential obstacle to getting him into office.
  • reduxien, on 12/06/2007, -8/+34Is it just me, or is Ron Paul the only Republican candidate who seems genuinely concerned for the well-being of the American people? There is just a 'natural aura' that he seems to have - all the other two-faced candidates either blatantly look sleazy or act like they are hiding something.

    I hope, for their own sake, that the American people can see through these pieces of scum and finally vote for a decent individual who does not beget mockery from the rest of the world when he speaks.
    • Ulisses, on 12/06/2007, -16/+7It's just you.
    • staggerlee14760, on 12/08/2007, -1/+1 They are sleezy and do have something to hide for instance their memberships in the Council on Foreign Relations and the agenda to get rid of our national sovereignty.
  • Mdigg007, on 12/06/2007, -11/+6This Jim Condit seems to be a conspiracy nut and an anti-semite:
    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6759022809 ...
    I'm for Ron Paul, but I don't like to work with anti-semites.
  • jmpeagle, on 12/06/2007, -8/+2uhhh...doesn't vote fraud only matter in the general election. He has to be nominated first and even if he won 95% of the vote at the caucuses, the GOP is under no obligation to make him their nominee.
    • obe1kenobi, on 12/06/2007, -0/+7But I would assume they would be crucified for not nominating him if he wins with a vast majority.
  • shrimp1970, on 12/06/2007, -8/+1Come vote if this story is biased for or against Ron Paul. This is the only way to know if this is objective. http://www.skewz.com/link/link_details/2618
    • dinsy, on 12/07/2007, -0/+4The left/right paradigm is false. Its purpose is to divide the population against its own interests.
  • dgh1973, on 12/06/2007, -0/+13Yeah...

    I think the objective of stopping voter fraud kind of speaks for itself, we shouldn't be doing it specifically for Ron Paul.
    • tmak73, on 12/07/2007, -0/+4true, but you and I both know no one else stands a chance of winning against RP in a fair election. He has REAL support, not media inflated support, any fair and real poll would show this fact.
    • staggerlee14760, on 12/08/2007, -0/+1 One of the primary reasons we have a democratic republic is to vote so it is important that our votes count to any candidate now and in the future.
  • A11YND, on 12/06/2007, -7/+12Wow.. this guy uh.. seems like uh.. Idk, he seems like the kind of guy who thinks the moon landing was faked.
    • tmak73, on 12/07/2007, -0/+3yea, i agree, not the best video, but the message of stopping vote fraud from happening is the important thing.
    • RobTyree, on 12/08/2007, -0/+1You lost any respect from me you would ever have when you used 'IDK' in your post. You have a full keyboard at your disposal, don't be a lazy ass - use it.
  • Godlike, on 12/06/2007, -2/+18I really hate the RP spam... don't like reading something else or the same old comments about RP all the damn time.

    That said, credit where it's due: you are doing it exactly right. Scream as loud as you can and wake this sleepy ass nation up before it goes into a coma. Maybe it's already there.

    You assholes annoy me but you're doing a pretty good job. What you need to do next is get the mainstream media to start doing some real reporting, or anything the ***** at all besides skewing coverage and reports to what they erroneously think is popular.
  • VanD, on 12/06/2007, -6/+3We all know this stuff, but this guy is an idiot.
    He keeps talking about different matters and how they are too complex for people. The way he talks about them, they are too complex from him. Just cause he doesn't understand it doesn't mean I won't.
    With that being said, do what he says. Even though he sounds like an idiot when he says it
    • tmak73, on 12/07/2007, -0/+3I agree, but it was the only thing i could find on the subject that proposed a solution.
  • onetimer, on 12/06/2007, -7/+5So is this a sample of post-supertuesday ron paul spam? That Paul really did win but diebold rigged the election?
  • SuperMoses, on 12/06/2007, -0/+10In Venezuela, voting machines have paper trails and a random sample of the paper trails (54%) counted manually and compared to the electronic tally, making it virtually impossible for there to be fraud in the machines. The US, who constantly accuses Venezuela of being a dictatorship, should try implementing this... assuming they actually want fair elections.
  • Bobpaulson, on 12/06/2007, -7/+1Computerized vote counting = Bush/Clinton Dynasty? Why didn't the person/party rigging the computers just stay with one party.

    Wow. He's a bit paranoid.
    • tmak73, on 12/07/2007, -1/+4I dont agree with his theory of why its done, but it is a real threat... anyone who thinks a flawed system wont be taken advantage of is kidding themselves, and probably thinks everything is bubble gum and flowers... The fact is there needs to be a better system that isnt as susceptible to corruption.
    • dinsy, on 12/07/2007, -0/+3They are indeed staying with one party, its just hidden behind a wall of lies. The 2 parties are both compromised by the criminal military/industrial/pharma/banking cabal that controls the media and fakes elections. Its quite obvious if you pay attention. The reason it goes back & forth from bush to clinton is to give the appearance that we are actually electing a president. We are not. There is only one party and it does not give a ***** about you or me.
    • staggerlee14760, on 12/08/2007, -0/+1 WHY do we need these machines in the first place? Didn't we vote without these machines for 200 years. We need to go back to that system.
  • bingobongony, on 12/07/2007, -10/+5ey, you dumb *****...people are not actually going to vote for Ron Paul.

    But I love how you have already set up your delusional out clause. When he gets 1% of hte vote, instea of accepting how worthless your life has become, you will just bitch about vote fraud. Anything to stave off suicide for one more day I guess.
    • tmak73, on 12/07/2007, -0/+6correction- people you know would never vote for ron paul...
  • Hoodwink, on 12/07/2007, -0/+6I think this should be dugg by everyone, it's very important!
  • arkmtech, on 12/07/2007, -0/+5I think the most important question right now is... are the people of the United States of America too divided, or will they stand together enough to ensure that in 2008, each person's voice is heard regardless of whether that voice is in agreement or opposition?

    Ron Paul seems like a nice guy with very genuine intentions, and though I'm voting for Kucinich, I wouldn't be terribly angry if Paul happened to win. Regardless, who I'm voting for won't make a damn bit of difference if the election is a fraud, and we just end up with another tyrannic scumbag in office.
    • HendrikNL, on 12/10/2007, -0/+1If you dont mind Ron Paul winning instead of Kucinich, you're not voting for Kucinich with your whole heart and mind. Vote for someone who's views you can stand 100% behind.

      Don't vote for the man Ron Paul, vote for liberty and the constitution through Ron Paul!
  • Scira, on 12/07/2007, -3/+5for the sake of Ron Paul please bury this to avoid wrecking his image. That commercial was a joke, and while the guy in the video sounds serious, the "special effects" seem to be designed by a 13 year old.
  • oyflaaaayvin, on 12/07/2007, -0/+3why can't private funds be pooled together to start a new voting system - one that is more official, closely monitored, and properly administered than what we have now? is there a law against that or something? maybe if people had a choice of what vote to participate in that would prove a point, or even more, count for something...
  • Comatose51, on 12/07/2007, -4/+2Let me propose my own conspiracy theory: all these Ron Paul spam bots are out to tarnish his image. Bury all RP spam articles for Ron Paul!
    • aduzik, on 12/07/2007, -1/+2Or just bury all the RP articles period. None of them have ever been newsworthy.
  • JointVenture, on 12/07/2007, -4/+2Will someone with the skills please create a "Only @@ days left till we DONT have to hear from the Ronbots web page!

    ie. countdown to the Iowa caucus
  • buddamus, on 12/07/2007, -0/+5vote on Digg, if he gets enough thumbs up he wins
  • forgiste, on 12/07/2007, -0/+1How about we just get people to leak the real vote counts to digg and all over the internet like that HD-DVD code thingy...
  • eleraama, on 12/08/2007, -2/+1While I generally like Congressman Paul, I think his online popularity is extremely skewed. The simple fact is that, regardless of his positions, he is not going to be the candidate for one of the two major parties-- and thus will not win. As President Nixon called them, "the Silent Majority" are the ones who will determine the election, not a small subsection of the technologically savvy political elite. I would encourage Paul supporters to increase his exposure in popular media to give him a fighting chance at the Republican party ticket, otherwise he *might* get 3% of the popular vote like Ralph Nader. Unfortunately, the way our political system works more or less eliminates the chances of a third party candidate getting *anything*, much less winning.
  • RobTyree, on 12/08/2007, -0/+2First, Paul is already polling at between 6-8% nation-wide in the most recent polls. Because Paul's demographic consists of MANY voters who either have not ever voted, or are younger and have only a cell phone (no land line), I believe his polling skews downward to some degree (pollsters only call land line phones, and they only call "likely voters" who have voted in the past).

    As for the "silent majority" controlling the outcome of the election, I'll answer that with a quote from Samuel Adams:

    "It does not take a majority to prevail... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men."

    That is all.
    • tmak73, on 12/09/2007, -0/+1that samuel adams makes a good beer too.
  • daviddiaz, on 12/09/2007, -0/+1I don't know whether to digg this article or not. It makes a really good point about voter scam and provides a solution, but it was made by a guy who will simply make Ron Paul look like a bipolar nut, and it looks like a video that my 3-year-old niece could've made.

    I simply won't digg or bury it and leave this comment.
  • Trillion08, on 01/09/2008, -0/+1HERE ARE THE ARTICLES RELATING TO THE VOTE FRAUD IN SUTTON COUNTY:
    http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/january2008/0 ...
    http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e7a_1199900301
    http://www.product-reviews.net/2008/01/09/new-hamp ...
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.