What is Digg?816 Comments
- Talphin, on 11/10/2007, -39/+242Well, from what I have seen so far, it looks like it will either be Barack Obama or Ron Paul... And to be honest with you, Republicans have left a bad taste in my mouth lately, along with an aching feeling in my ass.
- dukeeeey, on 11/12/2007, -49/+196Ron Paul because hes actually read the constitution, and because he stands for the people, not the financial corporate interests of the wealthy elite. (UK)
- Zarokima, on 11/10/2007, -23/+158Ron Paul: he doesn't eat babies
- inactive, on 11/12/2007, -38/+140Ron Paul was from the start against the war in Iraq so he is the obvious choice to gain the support of the planet
he has mine a Polish born Canadian Citizen - baronvonnasty, on 11/10/2007, -33/+117Nice, but Ron Paul wins every internet poll, almost. Gonna be Inaccurate like those polls, too, because of the Webmachine that the Paulites have. I am a Paulite as well. RP should be the GOP candidate, but we are just effin up all the polls.
- inactive, on 10/21/2007, -17/+100I say we let..
Penn and Teller, Stephen Colbert, and Jon Stewart run the US.. but thats just me. - redrock34, on 11/12/2007, -16/+96Countries that don't fit into western civilization wouldn't be in fear of invasion if Ron Paul was elected.
- DrunkenSavior, on 11/10/2007, -16/+87Neocons left a bad taste in your mouth, and the aching feeling in your ass.
All while decrying gay marriage.
Amazing. - ImperatorTerrae, on 10/21/2007, -6/+70So... why am I limited to voting for actual presidential candidates? I want to vote for myself. I mean, think about it, who would represent my own interests better?
- GliTCH82, on 10/21/2007, -5/+68As an American, I'd like to say thanks to everybody else around the world for actually giving a damn about the state of our country and our politics, and showing us that you really care whether or not our country goes down the toilet. Or something like that, anyway. :-)
Also, I apologize in advance for the other ***** in our country who will no doubt continue to make us look bad. - appetite, on 11/12/2007, -61/+121Obama > Ron Paul
(down I goooooooooooooooo...) - g30ff, on 11/05/2007, -27/+76Dennis Kucinich. The more I hear from him the more I like him for Prez, although any of the Democratic candidates would do. (Canada)
- Beatmiser, on 11/12/2007, -6/+54Go back and read Ron Paul's stance. Yes, Ron Paul is pro-life, but from a Constitutional perspective, he wants to leave the issue of abortion up to states and local governments. He is not looking to IMPOSE his stance on Americans, but instead to give them a VOICE.
- adam84a, on 11/02/2007, -1/+49Does anyone else find it sort of creepy and ironic that John McCain is winning in Viet Nam ?
- ZephyrNinety, on 10/23/2007, -7/+47LeVar Burton.
But don't take MY word for it. - darkfate, on 10/21/2007, -2/+41I, for one, vote for Error 500: Strong, Patriotic, and always there for you!
- jefferygomer, on 10/21/2007, -0/+38For better accuracy of a global election, it should be IP based results. There is nothing stopping me from selecting Kenya as the country I am voting from. Err... anyway.
Ron Paul (Kenya) - Yonson, on 10/23/2007, -21/+54They seem to have confused Austria and Australia. Embarrassing.
Obama by the way. - EvilGnome, on 11/08/2007, -8/+40I think that will be RP's biggest disadvantage. I have a feeling that the connotation that being a Republican brings with it will severely hurt his chances. People wont see what he stands for come poll time. They will see D or R and people are too afraid to vote Republican. Just my thought on it.
- inactive, on 11/07/2007, -16/+48anyone who isnt bush..?...? oh wait that was last election....
eh, i would vote ron paul, and im a liberal. - Stonedonkey, on 10/21/2007, -4/+35I don't understand the appeal of Clinton. She wouldn't wipe her own ass if her consultants thought it would cost her a few percentage points.
- nick111, on 10/10/2007, -3/+34Well really, we wouldn't care either way if you'd behave like Canada - but as things are at the moment, the US is simply doing too much damage to the world to ignore. That combined with the fact that The US spends more on weapons than the rest of the world put together, and is run by people who are governed by irrationality (AKA: Religion - particularly rapture-orientated religion) makes the US a little too dangerous to ignore.
And you're our friends. - IllBeBack, on 10/21/2007, -11/+36Stewart/Colbert 2008 FTW!
- NorCalRedNeck, on 10/21/2007, -6/+31"The moral and constitutional obligations of our representatives in Washington are to protect our liberty, not coddle the world, precipitating no-win wars, while bringing bankruptcy and economic turmoil to our people". - Congressman Ron Paul - Freedom Under Siege, 1987
- Me1000, on 10/21/2007, -3/+27Never the less the US affects many world affairs!
- Yonson, on 10/21/2007, -5/+28Funny you can choose what country you're from and vote multiple times.
Look! I'm from Tunisia and I would vote for Ron Paul! - gwhardyiv, on 10/28/2007, -6/+29Wow. That's refreshing.
- mikedoth, on 10/30/2007, -11/+33Ron Paul is running on the republican ticket to get noticed. He's libertarian.
- shadeOgrey, on 10/26/2007, -6/+28Ron Paul might not personally support any of those. But he does support each states right to make it's own laws on the matters. That's why he has my support, despite my difference of personal opinion with him on these issues. I don't want to blindly impose my will on anyone, nor does he, that's what the real issue is.
- kewalter, on 10/21/2007, -2/+23Anyone else notice that the flags for Austria and Australia are switched?
- bitcloud, on 10/10/2007, -1/+22agreed.
you are our friends... It's like watching your best mate drive himself into bankruptcy while going on a paranoid prescription drug and fast food binge, and throwing insults and attacking everyone in the street.... - gl77, on 03/31/2008, -0/+20umm Mr. Gravel anyone? he was also against the war from the start.
- rick2k, on 11/07/2007, -26/+46from all the guys i have seen it HAS to be ron paul.
The other guys are ***** morons by the looks of it! WAR WAR WAR.. yeah ok you do that and ***** your once great country up even more. Bush ***** up eveything for you guys.. get it right this time america.
ron paul would get my vote (UK) - MalDON, on 10/10/2007, -7/+26I've read the constitution as well. The problem is that it can be interpreted in many different ways. It can be twisted to mean really whatever the lawmakers want.
- zovres, on 11/06/2007, -1/+20the world
- Klainmeister, on 11/05/2007, -2/+20The whole RP spam thing i'm not so sure i believe in. I am a RP supporter and don't belong to any group or what not, but from time to time will vote on these. How do we know that all of them are spam style voting, i am an individual citizen and vote for him like everyone else,
- hooksie, on 10/10/2007, -2/+19Epic fail.
- bryxal, on 10/28/2007, -6/+23Ya it couldn't possibly be that those on digg have more information at their disposal are more aware of what Ron Paul stands for and such. Personally I would be classified as a Democrat, that being Said I'd vote for Ron Paul even if i believe in a bigger government because of how he would help personal freedom and liberties.
- afflusso, on 10/10/2007, -7/+23He's more Republican than the other candidates. Republicans stand for a limited government, and RP follows that better than anyone else.
- Daedalus81, on 11/08/2007, -4/+20Its a completely valid opinion. One I do not agree with, but that doesn't matter. In any case just follow the money like Gravel said.
- JettaMan, on 11/08/2007, -3/+18But how else will you reform the Republican party unless people show Republicans that if they nominate someone like Ron Paul, we'll actually vote for him. If Republicans think he will get them in power, maybe they will nominate him. Then if RP gets in power, hopefully he'll start making some changes.
- thesixthdesign, on 10/10/2007, -9/+24Obama was also against the war from the start just to let you know.
- dagnome1984, on 11/08/2007, -1/+16Ron was against it in 1998 when the neo-conns started talking about a war with Iraq and again in 2002 before the mantra for war started. Beat that.
- wtbuser, on 10/27/2007, -2/+16Ron Paul never advocated banning gay marriage on any level. That was referring to abortion if you didn't notice. Ron Paul advocates every level of government leaving the business of marriage and marriage licenses.
- spooky47, on 10/26/2007, -2/+15I think I may be able to sum up Paul position on gay marriage which is governments should not be involved in granting permission for marriage. The choice should be between two individuals. It effectively boils down to the difference between rights and privileges. I don't have my copy of Black's Law anymore so these will be generic definitions. Right: a power or action exercised without need of permission because the individual taking the action is the supreme authority. Privilege: a power or action exercised needing permission from a higher authority, usually government, often through licenses and permits.
IIRC, the first marriage licenses, in the 1860's, were issue to blacks for couples who intended to intermarry - mix races. Blacks needed permission from government while whites did not. (Same applies to the first firearm licenses - issued to freed slaves) Over time, the privilege class needing official government permission, was extended to all. I believe Paul wants to restore the rights of individuals, which by default, without government regulating, would allow gay marriage. However, businesses and individuals would also be free to accept or reject a marriage under those conditions because there would be no official state sanctioning of marriage. It would default to either religious beliefs or contract law much the way George Washington was married without permission from the state.
People would be free to marry and people would be free to accept or reject any type of marriage. A free society. - ChayD, on 10/10/2007, -5/+18Jon Stewart for pres!
- Borramakot, on 10/10/2007, -1/+13Where does the Constitution talk about marriage? As far as I know, thats a state thing.
- Taiman, on 10/21/2007, -4/+16If you are too lazy to do research on the candidates standpoints, use this page: http://www.digg.com/2008_us_elections/Too_lazy_to_research_a_candidate
direct link: http://www.dehp.net/candidate/ - saintdesy, on 10/10/2007, -3/+15I love the guy, but those straw polls have like 40 people voting in them.
- joel2600, on 10/31/2007, -0/+12Sorry, you people are retarded. A large base of people on the internet participating in a discussion or poll where anyone can be involved is not spamming or skewing anything. Jeez, just because the guy is popular for standing up for all of us, you people want to crucify him when people support him.
If I see a poll, and it asks me who i support, i'm going to answer. Just because my answer is ron paul and not barack obama, my vote is spam? ***** you all. -
Show 51 - 100 of 802 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