What is Digg?117 Comments
- synapz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+62Poll question: "Who do you think won the debate?"
Poll options: All the debate participants EXCEPT FOR RON PAUL.
HITF is this not biased? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -6/+57Not digging you down because you said Ron Paul sucks, I'm digging you down because you're a *****.
- greenlight2001, on 10/12/2007, -7/+41I just block your ass instead. Then I'll never have to partially read your comments ever again. Works like a charm... see ya!
- gldfshnpcklejar, on 10/12/2007, -8/+31You and your bias media make me sick to the stomach. If this next election goes down the drain it's going to be because of ***** like that, and I will lose what little hope I have left.
- kindrobot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+20Bravo! Not a huge Ron Paul fan, but it looks as though Republicans actually have a Republican, Conservative candidate for once. As liberal as I've been labeled, I'd still vote for this guy if the choices remained Clinton/Obama in the Democratic camp. He's smart, informed, has a deep respect for the constitution and seems genuine.
- bigdt87, on 10/12/2007, -4/+24Let this just be the beginning..with this and the hex event, we now see the power social networking sites can have. Digg...the pioneers of eProtests.
- borninda818, on 10/12/2007, -4/+24Nice article/blog post...Did ABC ever give a reason or comment on this business or did they just add the name and %. If they never commented i seriously think we (the rebellious Digg community) should continue to mess with ABC till they comment.
BTW i liked this post on this page.
"Main stream media is bought and paid for by the corporate heads that make their money off the military industrial complex. Ron Paul is the only viable threat to the machine. It's in their best interest to deny his very existence, as well as delete the very posts that may inspire the revolution... do they know how close we are? Now be a good little pawn and delete my post."
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/comments?type=story&id=3133938 - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+19Dr. Paul is going to have to rely on the internet to get his support. It's obvious the main stream media does not like him, in fact they fear him. Join his myspace, donate to his campaign, spread the word on other forums, and keep on digging articles.
- tehbored, on 10/12/2007, -0/+18Wow. They go to such great lengths to make sure no one finds out about a candidate who wants to protect their freedoms and improve their country. God bless America!
- pgm_01, on 10/12/2007, -5/+21@brundlefly76
I would say none. He is a Libertarian and despite the claims of the Conservatives, Digg is more Libertarian than Liberal so people tend to vote up Libertarians and Libertarian ideas. No conspiracy, just Digg. - Shadar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15The point of including 10 people in a debate is so people other than the front runners can get publicity. But as soon as the debate is over all we hear about is the front runners and the rest are barely discussed. What the hell? They should actively judge them all together. It doesn't matter if someone is at 1% or 30% in the polls... who wins a debate is based on how well they debated, not how many people liked the person before the debate.
- lieutenantmudd, on 10/12/2007, -4/+18Scientific polls use random samples. Web poll samples are limited to visitors at the site, or worse supporters directed to vote at the site. And you can often vote more than once on web polls.
- schroeder, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16Serious question: Why do so many people bash Ron Paul? Most of the anti Ron sentiment seems to revolve around the fact that he's less known and should stay that way. No one seems to bring up any valid reasons why they disagree with him and resort to name-calling. Anyone who agrees with specific things he's said are called "14 year-olds". If there are valid reasons for hating him so state them. And if there is a poll about a debate everyone involved in the debate should be listed, any thing less is bias.
- f0rTyLeGz, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15It is un-American that any of the news outlets tried to downplay Ron Paul's crushing victory. It is clear that Americans are sick and tired of 99% of the idiots who are our elected officials.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15beware ABC News; for we are Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday....
- nigmalg, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13Down with regurgitated political talking points! Ron Paul has every quality of the person I want representing this country.
- CourtesyFlush, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14ABC just showed us all the difference between a news outlet and a propaganda mill.
This is why I no longer rely on the MSM for accurate information. They omit or exclude whatever does not fit their own agenda. Quite frankly, I'm very tired of media outlets who attempt to shape my opinion by keeping vital information from me.
We should always question the media to the same degree as we question the government. - strOphe, on 10/12/2007, -5/+16So there's thirty thousand Ron Paul supporters who all voted positively for him on MSNBC because of digg?
I think you're the one skewing things here. - Ricochet1269, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12Know that I Dugg you down mentally, but did not give you the pleasure of actually clicking the thumbs down button.
- strOphe, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12"Just because Ron Paul said things that people like to hear doesn't mean that those ideas are viable or that is it is reasonable to state that he "won" this debate."
Actually the "comforting platitudes" you speak of were in evidence far more from the other speakers than Mr. Paul. He flat out rejected the National ID card because he knew it was an invasion of privacy and against the constitution, this being after many of the other candidates had affirmed it in the name of "fighting terrorists" or putting a "lock-down on immigration." He was so definitive that many of them backpedaled to change their answers on the question because of his response.
If you think Mr. Paul was just telling people "what they wanted to hear" then you obviously don't understand very much about his voting record or the platform on which he's campaigning. - hagbard72, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11Some interesting reading:
HON. RON PAUL OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
July 10, 2003
Neo – CONNED !
http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2003/cr071003.htm - synapz, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12I'd have to say that omitting one of the debate participants in a poll asking the question, "Who was the best in the debate" goes quite a bit ***** farther than a few Ron Paul-happy diggers voting for Paul on a poll.
In other words: "Hey *****, you left your brain untied." - lieutenantmudd, on 10/12/2007, -4/+13I prefer the term social advertising.
- illt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9the internet is democratizing the world
- zeebusboy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10Dear Crappy, Lying, Soulless Republican Party:
I'm a diehard liberal and never pulled the lever for a Republican in my life, but if you run Ron Paul against Hillary or Obama in a general election, I will vote Republican. I am not alone.
You might want to consider it before we crush the living snot out of Giuliani, McCain or any other phony, blow-dried, more-of-the-same hack you're planning to put up against the Democrats in '08. This is the last piece of advice I plan on giving you dickhneads as you do not deserve it.
Best,
zee - damlie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9I'm a 23 year old military officer who loves Ron Paul. I will vote. I took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution and giving this man support is the best way that I know how. If you have a better suggestion on how I can do this, then let me know, but don't try to denigrate his supporters because of your own cowardice to stand up for what's right!
- jeanette3654, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11Do your research into who owns our media. Then look at which of the candidates (any of the parties, it doesn't matter) have made their obeisance to AIPAC etc. and you'll see why the MSM is TRYING to ignore Dr. Paul! He's the ONLY person who thinks the American President should work for the benefit of the American people. Weird I know, but true!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8i am SO teaching myself to avoid ANY major network for ANY thing: and boy, IT SURE FEELS GOOD!
- bryanedds, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9humptydank,
It seems to me that whenever a lot of people post something that the left favors (pro-Obama, pro-Environmentalism) to much applause, then nothing seems out of the ordinary to you. But when a lot of people post something that libertarians favor (Por-Paul or pro-Lassaiz Faire), you cry foul. You blithely assume that any time people hold opinions opposite of yours that they MUST BE corporate shills or some such nonsense. You assume the best about your side and the worst about the other side. This is a double-standard that is pervasive on digg. And it is really aggravating to people like me.
You're just going to have to accept that there are a lot of people who are simply dedicated to Ron Paul and lassaiz faire. The internet is wonderful because people can make an impact not through money and corporate backers, but through sheer individual _will_. Look, I'm a hardcore anarchist who is philosophically against voting. I have been a principled non-voter for almost a decade. But Ron Paul has inspired me to do something I thought I'd never do again - that is, vote. Now consider what that means. I feel incredibly strongly about Ron Paul. Why? Because he gives me something I thought was impossible and that I haven't felt for so long - hope. Consider what a little hope in a hopeless outlook can do for people. It inspires people to use whatever tool they can to take action to water the seeds of that hope the best they can. Digg, and the internet in general, are the best tools for working to turn that hope into reality. And he gives this hope to a LOT of people.
So you can keep having bad faith in everyone you disagree with. You can be so stuck in your own mindset that you can't even consider someone else's view without seeing them as evil or shills. Fine fine. But know how ineffective that will make you in the discussion America is having with itself.
Your choice. - hagbard72, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9At least, they didn't ban you for pointing out the facts. They did that to me just before the war on Iraq for posting "what middle eastern country known to have nukes and other WMD, known to threaten and invade its neighbors and repress its minorities?" I barely got my question posted before I was treated to a blank screen and a banishment notice.
- adrenaline33, on 10/12/2007, -0/+814 year olds don't ***** care about politics. While there are some high school kids on Digg, I'd say a heavy majority of the Ron Paul people are of voting age. And a 16 year-old supporter can do things that support a candidate much more than any single vote would.
- masamunecyrus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9The internet is much more informed about politics and the '08 candidates than the average American is. If Ron Paul was a household name like Rudy Giuliani, and if people offline were as informed as those of us online were about the hypocrisy of most of the candidates, Ron Paul would no longer be a "minor" candidate.
- dkm201, on 10/12/2007, -5/+13If you can't figure out the answer to that question, GTFO my internets.
- kindrobot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8I've been considered and consider myself a liberal on many issues, but I do not fear Ron Paul. I respect him. I'm fairly sure I'm not alone.
- kindrobot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7So, one vocal minority (religious conservatives) should be listened to with respect and another (Social Internet users) should be ignored? That's really what a lot of people here are saying, really. There is only one really big difference (besides the obvious, but I don't want to be insulting) between the two groups. One is easy to identify and "squelch" , the other is more nebulous and harder to pin down. All I've been saying is that if one deserves a certain level of attention, the other should deserve it as well. Sure, they may be vocal, passionate minorities, but is it fair to single one out because one is easier to censor or ignore?
- damlie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7It's not Ron Paul who is skewing things on the internet, it's people of principle who have had enough B.S. shoved down their throat and feel it's time to act. You clearly aren't looking any deeper than the obvious for if you did, you would see that we (people who believe in freedom) need to be vocal to compensate for those who are censoring freedom (abc and the like)!. Vote Ron Paul in '08!
- kindrobot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7If revolts were the new wave, you'd be under the power of a Queen right now. (assuming you're a US citizen. If not, my apologies and thanks for your interest in our political goings-on.)
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8That's it: i just saw the linked page with all the deleted comments. ABC's no longer on my tv. As of now i'm deleting their ***** up programming from my tv romote: no more ABC channels for six months or so.
Good deal. I can't stand big media anymore anyway. - netdawg, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10You seem to have a preoccupation with sucking.
- thirdoffive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Ha ha Kevin Rose created a monster. If Digg were a place the SWAT team would have tear gassed the joint and blasted us with a fire hose already.
- kindrobot, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9Most motivated supporters FTW. Why is it somehow not as "scientific" if a candidate's supporters are zealous? If that were the case, then how do you explain Bush's wins? Unscientific just because he commanded a vocal minority? So what if this time the vocal minority are smart people? I prefer it, personally. If there's a single unifying principle that intelligent citizens can agree upon , it's our freedom, freedom from tyranny and respect for the constitution that guarantees them. Everyone talks about being the "uniter" instead of the "divider", but here's a guy who could do it instead of chin-wagging about it and then defecating on the constitution.
- CraigJ, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6in case ABC deletes this comment: http://x011.uploaderx.net/x/abcdeletedcomments.gif
A screen shot of some deleted comments... - gotamd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Also, who defines a "front-runner"? The media? Thought so.
- hagbard72, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Great speech, though I did post that already just a few posts up.
- kindrobot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6More people should read that.
- Tostones, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7I really like Ron Paul. He seems like a genuine candidate that respects the constitution and essentially the rights of the people in this country. I would be proud to vote for a candidate like him.
- Penta5, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7There's hardly a "News" source anywhere that shouldn't begin with a banner disclaimer, "Our stories are loosly based upon real events."
- hagbard72, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Here is something the musician Brian Eno wrote for the Observer in 2003 which is relievent:
----When I first visited Russia, in 1986, I made friends with a musician whose father had been Brezhnev's personal doctor. One day we were talking about life during 'the period of stagnation' - the Brezhnev era. 'It must have been strange being so completely immersed in propaganda,' I said.
'Ah, but there is the difference. We knew it was propaganda,' replied Sacha.
That is the difference. Russian propaganda was so obvious that most Russians were able to ignore it. They took it for granted that the government operated in its own interests and any message coming from it was probably slanted - and they discounted it.
In the West the calculated manipulation of public opinion to serve political and ideological interests is much more covert and therefore much more effective. Its greatest triumph is that we generally don't notice it - or laugh at the notion it even exists. We watch the democratic process taking place - heated debates in which we feel we could have a voice - and think that, because we have 'free' media, it would be hard for the Government to get away with anything very devious without someone calling them on it. ------
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,6903,1020303,00.html - BobbyMC, on 07/21/2008, -3/+8How one can add an "e" before a classic term in this day and age boggles the mind. That's as hip as... eMachines.
Not everything has to be upgraded every time it becomes relevant again. Putting a label like that on our revolution is almost condescending. This isn't some hip social club. This is the beginning of the end for those that seek to control the average Joes. This is a situation that goes far beyond some internet rebellion. The manipulative entities such as ABC will either conform to the demands of the people soon or a civil war will ignite, wherein masses far beyond even the scope of Digg will unite in an unspoken agreeance that we're not gonna take it anymore.
In each post relating to such subject matter I will continue as I have to encourage Digg users to move beyond the internet as fast as possible. Their are people out there who will never see the light we shine here, and it must be the goal of all true patriots to save them from the psychologically induced coma the man has put our brothers in.
This isn't the buildup to something beautiful. It has already begun, and only by accepting your duty as a defender of freedoms will it survive. - baldingeagle, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6ABC Keeps deleting our comments, about them deleting our comments.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 117 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 