What is Digg?264 Comments
- stealthc, on 11/12/2007, -25/+180If 3/4 of us think the country is on the wrong track, why is the media pushing Hillary and Giuliani? Both would continue the insane Bush Doctrine everyone is so sick of. It is polls like this that tell *me* the country is ripe for a President Paul. There is no other pro-freedom, anti-war candidate who is remotely viable (The Democrats have already made their decision, stop denying it, and third parties are forbidden exposure).
My only fear is that people believe the lies from these candidates and from the media far too easily, and Americans have been dumbed down by this to the point where they can't comprehend freedom -- can't imagine it. My fear is that possibly, most voters have become too stupid to want their freedom back. - ghee, on 11/12/2007, -5/+95So this article is pretty much saying that 26% of Americans are idiots.
- MonsterChaOS, on 11/12/2007, -3/+62This is why people need to stop doing what the media tells them and go vote for someone like Dennis Kucinich. Lets vote for someone who wants to follow the constitution for a change!
- pintomp3, on 11/10/2007, -1/+53bush has a higher disapproval rating now than nixon did during impeachment.
- Herostratus, on 11/08/2007, -7/+54The question isnt why is the media Pushing Clinton and Ghouliani, we know that already, the question is why are the masses just eating it up...
- pintomp3, on 11/12/2007, -2/+48bush declares 74% of americans terrorists.
- sahaqiel, on 11/06/2007, -2/+41If only more couples were more honest with each other. Removing the bush is something every person can agree on.
- totorototoro, on 11/12/2007, -1/+3826% want more? wtf.
- benroy, on 11/12/2007, -2/+30the other 26% are die hard republicans doing what they do best; never being wrong, producing ***** that doesn't stink and harboring nothing but contempt for those who question them.
- Spoomeister, on 11/07/2007, -4/+32Cue false flag attack and/or attack on Iran, with martial law right behind, in 3...2...1..
- F1aw3d, on 11/12/2007, -1/+28Experience [has] shown that, even under the best forms [of government], those entrusted with power have, in time and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.
– Thomas Jefferson 1779 - rz8472, on 11/09/2007, -0/+229/11. 9/11. 9/11. 9/11.
- colincornaby, on 11/07/2007, -3/+24Why is it that every time a Ron Paul supporter whines about the Democrats, they completely target Clinton and they don't talk about Obama? Obama is also a very reasonable alternative to Clinton.
- catullus13, on 11/06/2007, -2/+21Ghouliani? If you want to see America crumble faster than the WTC under his watch, then vote for the serial adulterer.
- rcook18, on 11/06/2007, -3/+21In the story about the emperor's new clothes, did the last 26% of people ever admit he wasn't dressed?
- otatop, on 11/06/2007, -2/+19Those 26% are the people who think Bush is the greatest President of all time. They drive their SUVs and think about all the sweet tax breaks, and all the terrorists Bush protects us from.
- V3n0M, on 11/06/2007, -2/+19Sarcasm, right? The point of the story is that people are "eager for a change in direction from the agenda and priorities of President Bush" - *not* that they want more of the same thing.
- kirashira, on 11/07/2007, -4/+19The fact that Bush was elected twice proves a lot more than 26% of your country stupid.
- pintomp3, on 11/08/2007, -10/+25ron paul is not the only anti-war candidate. dennis kucinich is not only anti-war, he is more pro-freedom; he supports a woman's right to choose. it's too bad the corporate media sidelines him, he represents the american people more than any other candidate:
http://www.dehp.net/candidate/stats.php - xenotek, on 11/07/2007, -4/+19Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.
-Hermann Goering - ZenMojo, on 11/07/2007, -5/+19Like Southpark said, 1 out of 4 people are idiots.
- KibibyteBrain, on 11/06/2007, -1/+15Obama's main political problem is he's one of the few Democrats with the balls to attack other democratic candidates, and that has alienated him from the more corrupt party base. He still has it better than Kucinich though.
Obama is no more a libertarian than Clinton, and also is not opposed to using the military for offensive means. He is just overall more reasonable. Still, people who'd support Libertarian or non-interventionist policy would not like him much either.
Its a shame, because while I disagree with him on most policy, I feel its in the same way I disagreed with Bill Clinton: in the way that while I think he has the wrong ideas, they are SANE wrong ideas, and therefore he will not throw the country into chaos during his term. Can't say that for any other mainstream candidates right now. A shame, because he could win the election, just not the nomination. - starkruzr, on 11/06/2007, -0/+13No. Noun, verb, 9/11.
- Bhima, on 11/06/2007, -4/+16Dennis Kucinich is the only candidate that I agree with more issues than disagree. I'm sure if more people looked at his stance on all the major issues they have a similar view... certainly he's a better candidate than all of the front runners and not nearly as scary as Ron Paul.
- FriskDown, on 11/12/2007, -2/+14No it's MUCH more than 26%. This just says that 26% of the people that participated in the statistic were idiots.
- siszam, on 11/07/2007, -11/+23The last thing we need is another selfish Republican and four more years of Americans dieing from lack of health care. We don't need Ron Paul. We need Kucinich.
- Twoodge, on 11/06/2007, -6/+17Can we stop turning any topic remotely political into a vehicle to support Ron Paul? Yes, I think he is high up on a list of the best candidates, but I'm not shoving it into everyone's faces at every chance I get. People get the message. Most Diggers, I would hope, are intelligent enough to make their own voting decisions.
- ZenMojo, on 11/06/2007, -0/+11Oh, I'm willing. The question is "willing and able."
- pintomp3, on 11/06/2007, -2/+13actually, the president appoints supreme court justices. they could overturn row v wade. bush appointed two conservatives, they just need one more and women in many states will have to turn to coat hangers and have the babies of their rapists.
- thomasprebble, on 11/07/2007, -5/+15And more than 74% of the world have had enough with YOU America! What ever happened to the friendly America of the 90s?
- rz8472, on 11/06/2007, -1/+10He said that he would insert special forces into Pakistan if there was actionable intelligence that Bin Laden was present - and it's about time we did that.
And why not 1-on-1 talks? The US has nothing to lose, and it shows that he's different from Clinton in that he's willing to focus much more on diplomacy rather than resorting to force. - williamdyer, on 11/06/2007, -2/+11Bush has betrayed and destroyed the Republican party. He and the neocons can all go to hell.
- sockpuppets, on 11/06/2007, -3/+12My gf had hers lasered. It's a permanent racing stripe, I highly recommend it.
- nebion, on 11/12/2007, -0/+9It's kind of disconcerting that even as a foreigner, it's obvious to me that both of the "front runners" (Clinton and Giuliani) represent more of the same (especially Giuliani)...
If I were American, my first choice would be Kucinich...but even if he wasn't a realistic choice, out of the rest of the candidates a good number would be better than the front runners. For the Democrats - Kucinich > Obama > Edwards > Clinton. For Republicans, Paul > McCain > Romney > Giuliani.
I don't know enough about the rest of the candidates to place them in order - but Americans definitely should. - pintomp3, on 11/06/2007, -2/+10actually, congress as a whole has an approval rating of 11%, but the democrats in congress have a much approval rating than the republicans. people are unhappy with the war, which republicans support. stop trying to unhitch that from the republican wagon.
- diggerydood, on 11/07/2007, -1/+9For a lot of people RP is the "protest" candidate.
- lilbitmoreslyk, on 11/06/2007, -0/+7Clinton had our debt stabalizing and was spending WAY less than Bush
- scottknick, on 11/06/2007, -0/+7I had to dig a bit for the actual data for this poll, which is here (PDF alert):
http://abcnews.go.com/images/PollingUnit/1050a1Ele ...
Unreported strange facts:
* John McCain, whom everybody seems to be dismissing as washed up, has much higher positives than anybody but Giuliani. Mitt Romney's negatives are high and getting higher.
* While only 28% approve of Congress, 36% approve of the Democrats in Congress and 32% approve of Republicans in Congress.
* Hillary's positives among Democrats are stellar, but her negatives are very high among the general electorate. Which may explain why even though 74% want a change in direction, Hillary still loses 47% of independents to Giuliani.
*The percent of Democrats who say they "Strongly Support" Clinton has plummeted a full 10 points since July.
* Ron Paul is still pulling only 3% among Republicans.
* The percentage of Republicans who say they "Strongly Support" Giuliani skyrocketed a full 13 points since July.
* And yet, only 28% of Republicans see Giuliani as "the most honest and trustworthy."
* Giuliani, McCain, Thompson and Romney were tested in match ups against Clinton, but no other Democratic front-runners were tested against Giuliani. That seems an oversight given Clinton's high negatives. - soulkitchen, on 11/07/2007, -0/+7Its driving me nuts that Hillary is leading the Democratic polls and I can't seem to find a Hillary supporter who can tell me why they're voting for her. Is it because shes a woman and the women are all voting for her? If that's the case, we're not likely to see another woman pres for a long time. Is it because of name recognition? Biden...nope...Paul...nope...I don't know any of these people...OH WAIT, Clinton hey i know that name (fills out voting card) (pats self on back for being politically savvy). But ***** aside, are there any Digg readers/ Hillary supporters out there who can explain to me what she brings to the table?
- mikeland86, on 11/07/2007, -0/+7No stats 101 for you, I assume?
- Grummond, on 11/07/2007, -1/+8He also supports net neutrality and decent health care.
- ZenMojo, on 11/09/2007, -4/+10They both want to follow the Constitution. Lucky for you the Constitution's very flexible.
- knomevol, on 11/09/2007, -1/+7United States Constitution FTW
- draebor, on 11/10/2007, -3/+8For the Democrats this election should be like shooting fish in a barrel, yet they just HAVE to have candidates that will divide the Democratic vote. All the candidates in the two big parties suck... not one of them is worthy of the office of president. Real change will only come for the country when a 3rd party can truly contend.
- nnagflar, on 11/12/2007, -1/+6Oh trust me, I want us to be friendly just a much as you do.
- nnagflar, on 11/08/2007, -14/+19Ron Paul 2008! Go ahead and bury me.
- drmattbarney, on 11/12/2007, -30/+35"I am a friend of the Free State Project. Check it out...and if you like it, join and continue the effort!" -- Rep. Ron Paul
http://www.freestateproject.org/intro/ron_paul - nnagflar, on 11/06/2007, -0/+5The mean of a random sample is a good estimate of the mean of a population. Take stats.
- Patented, on 11/06/2007, -1/+6WHAT?
The Constitution should not be scraped because politicians have corrupted it, that's akin to banning public restrooms because senators like to have sex in them. -
Show 51 - 100 of 263 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