What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
$52 and Up—Airlines Slash Fares On Peak Holiday Flights. view!
travelzoo.com - This year, waiting until the last minute is NOT the best strategy. See why.
24 Comments
- joechip, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15Raimondo's analysis of Ron Paul's candidacy within the context of the mess that is the Republican Party is worth reading, especially by those who are still wary of Paul, his intentions and the rabid nature of his supporters. That Raimondo has begun to see Paul's campaign in these terms is quite a switch from how he felt a couple of months ago when Chuck Hagel was making noise about running for the Republican Nomination. A Hagel candidacy would have more effect with the rank and file GOP voter because he's got much higher standing within the party itself.
With Hagel showing so little backbone and Paul's strong showing last week at the debate in California it now makes sense for the foremost libertarian political commentator on war issues and long-time friend of Paul's to finally analyze his campaign in a serious way.
He is btw, very right about trying to organize libertarians into anything resembling a political force and why I'm so jazzed about Paul's candidacy. He truly does have the ability to begin a groundswell of support within the established framework of the GOP at a local level to effect change away from neoconservatism.
Ta, - Cutkomp, on 10/11/2007, -1/+11@gmason
Go to Digg Spy, Upcoming stories, then opt out of all but the buries. You can sit and watch just what people are burying. It's blatantly obvious when some folks go on Ron Paul burying sprees. Many times through the day he accounts for a quarter of the buries shown on Spy. If you can find the story on Swarm it's also possible to see who might be doing the burying. If three users are swarmed around an article at the same time three buries come through, ya might have the culprits. It takes a little time to sit and watch it all unfold but oh well. I can understand some stories getting buried, as some are spam, inaccurate or lame, but sometimes it goes way beyond that. I've was defamed and impersonated for supporting Dr. Paul before I ever even knew what Digg was, so to see certain things happen on here intrigues me enough to where I have to keep an eye on it. If I'd known Digg had those tools I would've been a member long before I was. It gives the user at least a bit of power. When I see some systematic burying of an article that isn't spam and is correctly placed I enjoy calling them out on it, however futile the effort may be. I figure someone has to watch 'em. Sometimes I'll sit and watch every story I've submitted over the past few days get buried at the same time my profile count goes up, so I know someone or something has just went and buried my submissions regardless of what they were. - PeppermintPig, on 10/11/2007, -2/+12Excellent article.
The author's Cato observation is spot-on. While the Libertarian ideology should not be diluted, there's no room for Libertarian elitism either: Libertarians should branch out to others when the goals are agreeable or provide reasonable opportunities for success. It is amusing that someone from the Cato organization would put time and effort into slamming the least offensive individual campaigning under the Republican ticket rather than praising his virtues. Granted, there are Libertarians out there who shun the 'Hollywood for ugly people' scene, but this doesn't appear to be one of those cases. In a perfect world, we'd have perfect candidates. Until then...
With conventional media's blackout on Paul and his popularity, his unique offerings will not matter to the general public, though one could certainly argue there are enough people who are willfully ignorant and will vote on party lines anyhow, which brings us to the opposition: Despite the popularity that Obama may be receiving, he is no different than any of the others from the perspective that their platforms are all about growing and reform-growing government: government-based solutions are what got us into this mess in the first place. - Cutkomp, on 10/11/2007, -3/+11The wimps are fast and furious in burying this one as spam, three times on the screenshot right now.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11The CIA orchestrated MSM ( AKA "Grand Wurlitzer" ) is on a mission to Talk Down the exploding popularity of Ron Paul. This article records for history the names of these Traitors to the Constitution.
- Cutkomp, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8@gmason
Another thing to watch for is when already buried Ron Paul submissions get buried some more. I see that happen sometimes days after a story has been buried. - gmason08, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6Thanks cutkomp. Long time no chat, hope all is well.
Two other comments:
1. Seems that step 1, while continuing and will likely remain so, I'm getting a sense that step 2. is getting cranked up. Somewhat annoying but also a positive sign.
2. While it is funny to those of us that know better, that some think we are a well coordinated and funded RP campaign operation, the fact of not being able to communicate with each other(except for in the threads) is less than ideal. I do like communication through threads, all out in the open for all to see, but I think it would be beneficial if perhaps we had some regular crosstell/feedback of any issues, etc. I thought we might have an informal and recurring/scheduled chat in a dead thread for instance for anyone interested. Just a thought, not wedded to the idea. - vguard, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5In a weird way, the "IRS, ATF, DEA, FCC, FDA, FBI, CIA, DOD" have the most to gain. They get their souls back!
- prettyjenny, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5There is a restoration happening in America. Dr. Paul is a clarion voicing our concerns for our future, to be sure.
One may not agree with his views completely, but we can all learn from what he has to say. - Cutkomp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5@gmason
I've been thinking the same thing. It's good to have a place to bounce ideas off of each other and such. I live 5 minutes from Iowa City, 10 from Cedar Rapids... so I'm sittin' in a key area for this upcoming election. I have some ideas for getting some certain demographics riled up for Dr. Paul. There is a rather large group of folks who would like Ron and have reason to vote for him, they just don't who he is yet. The establishment trembles with fear about this group as well, they've tried to keep them minimalized for a long, long time. We'll discuss that at another time though. What do you think would be a good idea? I can think of a few other folks from Digg that would be a good addition to any group formed. Dedicated folk, if you know what I mean. Heck a private blog to communicate with may work fine even. - gmason08, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Sounds good, particularly the blog to discuss matters. Did you have one in mind? I think we should begin circulating the idea to the others on Digg and get their feedback if you agree. Also, please take a look at the exchange I had with torifile here: http://www.digg.com/2008_us_elections/Ron_Paul_2_0_Link_to_Digg_Added_to_Front_Page_of_Campaign_Site#c6638146
He is a reasonable/fair/decent person, try to let others know not to screw with him. If he raises a concern it likely has validity worthy of a very civil discussion. - pfoote, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Ron Paul was not conned by the neoconservatives (neo-Trotskyites):
HON. RON PAUL OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
July 10, 2003
Neo – CONNED !
http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2003/cr071003.htm
How many candidates from all political parties can provide evidence that they have been fighting the neoconservatives from the beginning?
By contrast, the Republican Party has on the same stage Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo, a neoconservative chickenhawk who avoided military service in Vietnam using a mental excuse. Tancredo supports the totalitarian takeover of Iran by the Iranian Communist MEK (Rajavi Cult or Pol Pot of Iran). - Xevec, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4I feel that this online promotion of Ron Paul does not reflect the voting populace. That all of this support for Ron Paul is Minimal. I could be wrong...but I seriously hope that I am wrong on this feeling. There are many people who bash the libertarians because they don't do *****. Well, to those who don't believe us...that is *****. We are doing something. Ron Paul is running under the republican party(which is ***** brilliant.....gives him a better chance of being elected instead of running under libertarian). Ron Paul embraces the constitution. Even though some libertarians would say that he isn't doing enough......even I..an anarchist libertarian...can say this is a good move. Hell, if we followed our constitutional roots...our country would be TOTALLY transformed. It's a good start. The less government involved..the better.
- Nefelia, on 10/11/2007, -2/+6A good article, less...um...intense than some of his usual work.
Whether he wins the Republican nomination or not, I'd like to see Ron Paul get more exposure to the less net-savvy people. At the very least, the stark contrast between Ron Paul and the other Republican candidates should stir up debate and help people rethink their conventional views. - gmason08, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5cutkomp, please explain how you get that info. Thanks.
- acudoc, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Ron Paul is authentic. Name one other candidate who is...Mike Gravel is the only one to come to mind. Either of these men would scare the hell out of the power centers of both political parties, the State Department Israelites, and the banking cartel. They are like a double reincarnation of Andrew Jackson. We could luck out.
- Labsub, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4Yea, and he's the only candidate with an all american sounding name!
Vote ron paul in 2008, or die. - Jabbo, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3I voted for him when he ran as a Libertarian Party candidate and will be proud to vote for him again !!
- ctasker, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Hey. Is there a time limit to how long an article can remail up on this site? I'm new here. I had bookmarked the article on abc deleting posts in support of Ron Paul after the GOP debate. The last time i checked it had over 4000 diggs but now it seems to be gone. I found this while trying to ferret out the other. I also thought it strange that despite the high digg count it didn't appear on the 10 most popular list which had way lower scores.
Was the entire article burried or am i missing something? - jimcapo, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1When ABC tried to pass off the MSNBC post debate polling as having been hijacked by Internet savvy Paul supporters (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3165894&page=1) they forgot one little critical element of logic: There were over 73,000 votes cast in the BEFORE debate poll. These pre-debate voters only gave Paul 9% of their votes. In the post-debate polls Paul received 42% with over 80,000 votes cast.
What happened to the pre-Debate voters after the debate? Were they kidnapped by Paul supporters who swooped in with a viral attack or, did most of them simply change their minds when they discovered their was an honest, anti-war candidate in the pack?
That Paul could change people's minds is what the media overlords are most worried about. - MrCranky, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1The only presidential candidate that can bring hope back to this nation!
- ctasker, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0Good point.
Where are all the posters from the page that disappeared i'm wondering. Looks like there's been a boycott. - gmason08, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1my bad
- joechip, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2Yeah, I really like Raimondo when he's had his morning prozac.. :)
Ta,
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is