What is Digg?329 Comments
- GalacticXenu, on 12/09/2007, -13/+185Yes, but don't put up a poll if you're going to ignore results that don't fit in with what you want to report.
- TypeEE, on 12/09/2007, -18/+170Not the first time it happened, so I am not surprised.
- airwalkery2k, on 12/09/2007, -16/+161I wonder what they'd do if Rudy Giulliani was getting 80% in these polls? They'd likely trumpet it around.
- Jimbob200, on 12/09/2007, -13/+102Why is this story from October 11th front page news?
- wilsgrant, on 12/09/2007, -16/+102What are you going to say when the same thing happens during the real election?
- thefirstenemy, on 12/09/2007, -60/+145Please Ron Paul supporters, be honest. Sure, CNBC did a dick move completely taking down the poll, but with any online poll Ron Paul has an advantage that other candidates don't-- his organizers(which I'll estimate the vast majority are online based supporters) are meticulous to vote, and make sure other supporters vote for him, in every poll RP is mentioned. If you believe the CNBC poll was scientific, then you're delusional.
- afwjam, on 12/09/2007, -3/+65You don't put a poll up online if you don't want the people online to respond. Yeah I bet a majority of Ron Paul supporters have access to the internet. I also bet a majority of them are far more educated on all the candidates in the running.
- vanza001, on 12/09/2007, -7/+66Well put. But our election process is done the same way right? Those who show up count? Guess who's showing up? Now who will show up at the primaries? That's what we should look at. Paul does much better than any main stream news will admit. It's not about if its scientific or not. It's about giving credit where credit is due and giving coverage where coverage is due.
- Carlothos, on 12/09/2007, -26/+82https://register.cnbc.com/email/EmailSupport.jsp that is link to give cnbc a clue.
RON PAUL 2008! - n8o8, on 12/09/2007, -14/+56I just emailed them a polite inquiry and expressed my discontent if there was bias in removing the poll. I suggest you do the same if you feel so inclined.
- monger68, on 12/09/2007, -13/+53It's not as if the "Paulites" had a secret meeting to figure out ways to steal the election. These people are emotionally driven and pissed off. I'm calling for some surprised network news stations in January.
- sujayjaju, on 12/09/2007, -2/+39CNBC's response:
http://www.cnbc.com/id/21257762/ - airwalkery2k, on 12/09/2007, -3/+39But that's the beauty of voluntary polls. People who don't feel passionate don't vote. Any supporter has the ability to vote for something, so it really does say something when the supporters of one candidate bother to vote more often.
With less than half of elligible voters actually voting in the general election, and a much smaller percentage voting in the primaries, the ones with drive to go out and vote are the ones who are going to be counted, not a random swatch of landline owners whose candidate had the advantage of being named in the poll and had their button working. - GoKings, on 12/09/2007, -2/+34You are right on one hand, that RP may have an advantage. However, if this poll had any other result (say... Huckabee) we would have been reading about how Huckabee is SURGING in his campaign trail. They pretend like ALL their polls are scientific, and only use said results if they get what they want. That my friend... is wrong, and is misleading to the American public.
You don't think Giuliani or Huckabee have an advantage in telephone polls? Most young people don't even have a land-line anymore. Yet they have no problem plastering those results as proof. - kurtu5, on 12/09/2007, -9/+38Um here is some real evidence of stuffing the ballot box.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdCcGWX2SuU
But its not Ron, it Mitt Romney.
Nice tactic though. Accuse an innocent party of doing what you do. That way the have to defend themselves first. If they call you out for doing it, you can simply switch topics and accuse them of something else. - wumps, on 12/09/2007, -3/+30I heard if Ron Paul wins he's giving iPhones running on Ubuntu to everyone!
- NycterisA, on 12/09/2007, -4/+30It's all because Ron Paul has a cool blimp.
- zioxide, on 12/09/2007, -5/+30***** YOU FRANK!
- Fabc001, on 12/09/2007, -1/+23That's the end of Romney then!
- rkzda, on 12/09/2007, -0/+22I think CNBC would take Giulliani over Paul.
- inactive, on 12/09/2007, -1/+22yep - posting on digg.
- masgrada, on 12/09/2007, -0/+20***** their collective pants in joy.
- Phyltre, on 12/09/2007, -0/+20Remember: Elections aren't scientific.
- djruden, on 12/09/2007, -3/+23I think he meant that when in a real election and the voters all choose Ron Paul and the govt and diebold machines takes that vote away and replaces it with the one saying their generic candidate won.
- Azriel7, on 12/09/2007, -2/+21Anybody got the telephone number? Calling is more useful than emails, since I am sure the emails are going directly to the trash bin. It is a LOT harder to dismiss angry phone calls than it is emails.
- inactive, on 12/09/2007, -2/+21"When a well-organized and committed "few" can throw the results of a system meant to reflect the sentiments of "the many,"
............like the big 5 media corps who throw off the results of the election by only reporting on their candidates (rudy, hillary, etc)? Because that doesn't represent the people either. - odigity, on 12/09/2007, -6/+24Well, since you asked...
- kaelyiesta, on 12/09/2007, -0/+17Take your argument one step further. Would it then be justified to take down phone polling if they don't match who you want? Hate to break it to you, but phone polling methodology is a lot more biased than that website poll is. At least the option to choose Ron Paul is there. You can't say that for some of the landline polls.
If anything, the interest and support for this candidate is being buried in both poll formats. The landline polls are biased in their questioning, and as this article states, the web based poll is biased in reporting the outcome.
Really though, none of this interests me. Polls are *****(Oh, and ***** you, Frank), and this behavior says more about the people running the polls than anything else. - EuphopiaB, on 12/09/2007, -1/+18They shouldn't use any of the data at all if it was a poor representation. They cannot take out the 80% that voted for Paul and then act like the rest of the data collected is any better. If that is the case, they might as well make ***** up. I agree, the online community puts Paul ahead and that doesn't represent the actually numbers of the population, but what pisses me off is that that took and reported on what they wanted - they specifically misinterpreted and engineered the results to be and look how they want. Either dump the data as being bad or put it all out there and on the side mention the problems in gather it, such as it being online where Paul people are common to vote. If they had just taken it down I wouldn't have cared. It is that they still reported on part of the data and ignored the rest as they wanted to that makes me mad, and though it is not science, it is really ***** journalism.
- doronster195, on 12/09/2007, -2/+18This is such a ridiculous point. Should Ron Paul supporters curtail their voting just because supporters of other candidates don't bother to vote on polls?
- uncoveror, on 12/09/2007, -10/+25Are Ron Paul's supporters crapflooding these polls, or does he really have a lot of support? We'll find out when Iowa and New Hampshire vote. All the Internet buzz about Howard Dean on the 2004 elections added up to nothing when it really mattered.
- wwnexc, on 12/09/2007, -5/+19Way to go! I wrote them a nice note about inaccurate reporting when they took down the poll.
Please do the same. - banmaster, on 12/09/2007, -2/+15Any of the other candidates are quite free to also develop their support on-line.
Its NOT Dr. Paul's fault that they don't or can't do this! - colincornaby, on 12/09/2007, -11/+24Ok. Who here really honestly believes that Ron Paul has the support of 90% of American Republican voting public?
- atdigg, on 12/09/2007, -1/+14Give me your address, I'll ship a pig to you by airplane.
- Namakemono, on 12/09/2007, -13/+26***** CNBC and Frank!
- JonForTheWin, on 12/09/2007, -3/+14Kind of like how we stuffed the donation box with $4 million in a single day with an average contribution of $90.
- inactive, on 12/09/2007, -0/+11ya it was the target of a campaign? like maybe the presidential run of ron paul? how stupid is that..
we took it down cause too many of his voters were voting for it!
they made an apology for doing it, and posting that article calling us spammers a day or two later
but they still went on their TV shows and insult ron paul and his supports are bots.. - jkizzle, on 12/09/2007, -15/+25they wont steal the election, they just steal online voting systems and digg.
- meed, on 12/09/2007, -5/+15If by stuffing the ballot box you mean getting as many people to vote once, then your on. There has been more evidence that supporters for other candidates have been stuffing the ballot box.
- JonForTheWin, on 12/09/2007, -1/+11Remember, you can't vote multiple times with the same IP address.
- spucky, on 12/09/2007, -5/+15Ron Paul supporters are magical! They are the only ones who figured out how to stuff a ballot box. Obviously the supporters of Guilianni, Romney and Huckabee are too ***** stupid to figure it out. Is that what you are telling us? Because I can go along with that.
- kurtu5, on 12/09/2007, -2/+11"....Some of you Ron Paul fans take issue with my decision to take the poll down. Fine. When a well-organized and committed "few" can throw the results of a system meant to reflect the sentiments of "the many," I get a little worried. I'd take it down again.
Sincerely,
Allen Wastler
Managing Editor, CNBC.com "
So this editor all of a sudden realized that polls on a web site do not reflect the many, but just those that participate in the medium? Would the editor have left the poll up if it matched what results they wanted? Will CNBC stop using web polls now in the future? Or will it simply use polls when the results match what they want to show? - odigity, on 12/09/2007, -1/+10So... it was only supposed to be a poll of apathetic people?
- Ascendant, on 12/09/2007, -6/+15After Ron Paul gets 80% of the vote in the general election, I'll probably be retiring off my profits from selling the Brooklyn Bridge.
- taquitohater, on 12/09/2007, -0/+9Point out his grammatical errors.
- BenElMagnifico, on 12/09/2007, -1/+10He would still be shocked at the sight of flying pigs.
- wherl78, on 12/09/2007, -7/+16He has 90% of American votes that are intelligent enough to use the Internet
- Toshibi, on 12/09/2007, -5/+13Nice ad hominem. Have anything better than guilt by association? One guy that you know of gave $500 measly dollars to his campaign. About 1:10,000 of what he raised in ONE DAY. Look at Ron Paul's options. He gives back the $500 to the guy and everyone says "Well, i thought he was for freedom of speech and association and a free market." or he gives the $500 dollars back and the guy then has $500 in his pocket to spread hate. Hell, look at what happened when he payed back part of Alex Jone's donation. Everyone said he was paying Alex Jones and was a truther supporter. He would then be on record giving $500 to Neo-Nazi's and that would be twisted against him. I think Dr. Paul's current position of "I don't agree with the guy, but he gave me money, so it's his loss." is just about the best answer.
Fact is, and what most of you Ron Paul bury brigade ***** don't get was that Digg was a tech site, techies are known to have a libertarian bent, so Digg was really ripe for Ron Paul's candidacy. Of course, I've been preaching nearly the same message as Paul on digg for about 2 years, but I'm a bit more radical in my libertarianism than he is. No, he's not the perfect candidate, but compared to the rest, he sure as hell shines. - d03boy, on 12/09/2007, -1/+9It's ok, it just discredits all of their other polls I guess.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 330 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is