What is Digg?250 Comments
- Carl306, on 06/09/2008, -15/+133"We Have A World Of Problems"
McCain is a Presidential candidate. That's a hell of a problem! - mykinco, on 06/09/2008, -18/+76This guy is dead in the water! He has no charisma and brings nothing new to the table. Hillary's supporters will realize this and come to the Obama camp, we welcome you by the way.
Obama '08 - p9s50W5k4GUD2c6, on 06/09/2008, -3/+53From Bay Buchanan (Republicans): "In reality there is only one candidate. Barack Obama. In November he will win or he will lose. John McCain is relevant only in so far as he is not Barack Obama. The Senator from Arizona is incapable of energizing his party, brings no new people to the polls, and has a personality that is best kept under wraps."
The RNC is going to 527 'ad-bomb' Obama. I think Digg can and should continue to highlight the truth between these 2 candidates.
I have every reason to believe that this community will continue to show Mr. McCain to be the weak, flip-flop and slimey candidate he has become.
November - Obama in a land-slide! - jeremyduffy, on 06/09/2008, -5/+47Our biggest problem is that you have to be rich, influential, and affiliated with the two ruling (and far from competent) parties to become president. And that we have no cake. I could really go for some cake right now.
- chrissku, on 06/09/2008, -13/+42Barack Obama will easily beat John McCain in November,. Easily.
- waz67, on 06/09/2008, -1/+22"For McCain to stand a chance of winning, the operative contended, the campaign, the Republican National Committee, or an independent group will have to finance sustained negative ads developing a broad assault on Obama's credibility as a national leader at a time of terrorist threat."
That's pretty much what's wrong with politics right there... - inactive, on 06/09/2008, -15/+36Digg linking to a Huffington Post article attacking Obama's political opponent? Say it aint so!
- sodade, on 06/09/2008, -1/+21At this point, transparency in government sounds like the most viable plan available. Seriously - who would vote for the guy that's against transparency?
- inactive, on 06/09/2008, -2/+21But he wants to deliver hot bottled water to dehydrated babies.
- fani, on 06/09/2008, -1/+16That over-confidence and feeling of inevitability is what killed Clinton.
Obama shouldn't and won't make that mistake.
He's all about careful planning, meticulous execution and grassroots and legwork.
Obama's approach isn't your regular approach. Thats what awesome about Obama.
I didn't hear one negative attack from him "...let our politics reflect that spirit as well...." is what he said and what he did. He's an amazing statesman.
But, he's not arrogant or overconfident. He will work hard for our votes. - mikephimikephi, on 06/09/2008, -9/+22The only reason this man has a chance is because there are a whole lot of racist people out there.
Old people too. - geddon, on 06/09/2008, -2/+15I still don't understand how Huckabee or Romney lost the nomination to some crazy ol war veteran who thinks nothing like the GOP. It almost seems as if they're lining up another dead competitor (a la Kerry) so they can effectively bet on a winning horse.
- inactive, on 06/09/2008, -6/+19Do you not understand how Digg works?
- B3000, on 06/09/2008, -34/+46Is Digg just an advertising vehicle for huffingtonpost now? I've got nothing against the site - in fact I like a lot of the writers there - but if all I wanted to read was their articles and blogs, I would just go there in the first place.
- weaksnyc, on 08/14/2009, -1/+1311 diggs down on the parent post as of now... I'm beginning to feel like people are losing perspective of the whole "get your info from multiple sources" idea.
I'm voting Obama, and I think plenty of huffington post articles are very well written, but the fact that almost every piece of political news this past couple of weeks has been from there is going to force me to find info outside of Digg. I can just go to Huffingtonpost.com if I want to read every single one of their articles.
So, I like the articles, but the parent post has a valid point.... Getting all your news from one source, no matter how good the source, just isn't keeping yourself very well informed. - GordonClass, on 06/09/2008, -3/+14He will have the same problem that Nixon had when he debated Kennedy on TV. He will come off looking haggard and beaten while Obama looks youthful and vibrant. I know looks shouldn't matter but they do.
- Sarauble, on 06/09/2008, -10/+21Social media is social.
- chrissku, on 06/09/2008, -5/+15It looks like "operation chaos" backfired on the GOP. All the Republicans that haven't switched over to the Democratic party yet left the GOP one last gift during the primacy's.....John McLame.
- AnarkeIncarnate, on 06/09/2008, -1/+11Easy. Huckabee is nuttier than squirrel turds and waits for the coming apocalypse; thinking he is ordained by god and chosen to lead America.
Romney is a shill and a sycophant. He is totally enthralled with himself and sees himself as more important than anybody else.......but we already had a Clinton running. - DarkPrincess74, on 06/09/2008, -3/+12BS = Badass Senator?
- inactive, on 06/09/2008, -0/+9Nobody wants to elect this old man as their president. He's not even an old man like that nice grandpa you had as a kid. He's the old man next door who yelled at you for playing whiffle-ball on the front lawn. It's amazing to me that McCain was deemed more "electable" than Ron Paul by the media.
- truck87bp, on 06/09/2008, -2/+10The Republican Party is an almost total farce today with a few exceptions. One of them is still running for Office of President and if the rest looked the other way and become human again, Obama would have a fight on his hands.
GOP...., McCain is a total looser and you know it! Aren't you ashamed of who you've become? If not, you shouldn't be in office and we know it! - bemenaker, on 06/09/2008, -0/+8The real problem there isn't the McCain so much as it is the GOP itself. That party is so lost in the woods, it's ridiculous. The GOP supports voted the most MODERATE candidate they had running, and now that he has the nomination, his advisers failed to catch the message. They took the candidate that had a chance, and pushed him right off the cliff. The GOP itself really needs to wake the fuhq up.
- rodrigo74, on 06/09/2008, -3/+11How the frack is digg (or any other social website) is supposed to work then? Should it have only news from sites that you like but don't go to? How would you implement such algorithm?
- Asrrin29, on 06/09/2008, -2/+10Just because he has such excellent charisma compared to our latest failures doesn't mean his stances and policies are any less. He happens to be a powerful orator, AND has a solid plan to get the change he talks about going. Maybe if you spent less time being a dumbass and a little more time reading his stances on current issues you would know this.
- x5pfif, on 06/09/2008, -0/+7No way the Patriots lose to the Giants in the Super Bowl. They are undefeated!
- NelsonR, on 06/09/2008, -0/+7The war issue should be enough to convince you. Read up on Vietnam and compare the wars. It is so wrong yet here we are again. Read up on the Keating Five and McCains role. Now for Obama, it's only the hope and change but of late I am having doubts about even him. His M.E. stance and pandering to AIPAC has me already troubled. Maybe no hope and change is in the cards.
- czernel, on 06/09/2008, -0/+7rEVOLution
- shlos, on 06/09/2008, -0/+7yea WTF... where is all the love for Ron Paul these days? It seems as if mostly everyone one here has switched to Obama.. which makes very little sense on a political basis but i can understand why so many have flocked to him. Wait until the Republican Convention. Ron Paul and his supporters have something very big under their sleeves. Don't forget RP never dropped out of the presidential race...
- chanop, on 06/09/2008, -1/+8It all depends. The American people are pretty fickle. The RNC will ride the gaffe train, which a lot of people will follow. If there were conviently some sort "national security issue" people will most likely get behind McCain. Luckily a lot of the gaffes got put out there in the primaries.
- willyummy69, on 06/09/2008, -1/+8As the last 2 elections proved...never underestimate the power of large groups of old white people who actually get out and go vote. I too am white and it amazes me some of the things i hear older people say, things that have nothing to do with the election, just the color of skin. It doesn't matter who the better candidate is for a lot of them, it only matters what has been ingrained in them since they were little. They are not going to vote for a black man simply because of that. I wish it weren't true. I hope all the younger activists stay involved and get young people out to the polls, but if that doesn't succeed, Obama won't have a chance against McCain.
- aphexcoil, on 06/09/2008, -4/+10Nothing will be easy about November. Start thinking like that, and we'll have another old, white, war-monger in office come 2009.
- Slitchy, on 06/09/2008, -0/+6Crweaks23 - great point. I tend to come to digg because I like the range of news but I try to avoid one sided propaganda on either side. A website with a stated bias is not a news website. The unfiltered voice of the internet has filtered itself free of one side of news.
- jvittetoe, on 06/09/2008, -3/+9McCain is a complete ***** moron. The GOP deserves what it got having ignored the only candidate who has a clue, the doctor, from Texas.
- Slitchy, on 06/09/2008, -1/+7Huff is not a news site, so thats a good start.
- ZevFan, on 06/09/2008, -0/+5The name was RON PAUL of course. And I hope the morons at Fox, etc. will enjoy the socialism they helped bring about.
- albatross5000, on 06/09/2008, -0/+5Yellowcake?
- inactive, on 06/09/2008, -2/+7Forgive me if I don't take the ideas in a Huffington Post article too seriously, when discussing the Republican Party. There might be a little bit of...what's the word...bias...in the article.
- Waiting2awake, on 06/09/2008, -2/+7 Was it Barbara Bush that said, in regards to the first Iraq war , "I don't want to waste my beautiful mind on that"? That it wasn't relevant?
That just popped into my head when I heard the "cake" remark.. - Jexie, on 06/09/2008, -1/+6Uh, no need to mention deficit spending separately, its been the most defining aspect of Bush's gov't (the biggest spending gov't in US history, where do you think all those extra trillions on the US debt came from?).
- ElbowGeek, on 06/09/2008, -1/+6The thing to keep in mind is that the American electorate is, by default, conservative Republican. That is to say, Democrats only get elected if things are going particularly badly in the country, and/or the Republican president is particularly unpopular for some reason. This is where the current Republican administration erred: If they had just concentrated on keeping the economy bubbling along and stable, without doing anything particularly adventurous like invade a defenseless country or sap peoples' personal liberties, the American public will happily keep re-electing Republican candidates til the cows come home.
- NelsonR, on 06/09/2008, -3/+8Have we Americans deserved our present economic condition?
Absolutely Yes, and it is the aggressive Iraqi war with the acquiescence of almost half of the populous. Do we deserve to go bankrupt, you bet since almost half of the populous think McCain is right for America. We should be another third world nation, we earned at least that much. Let's see what your leaders can F up today and what they can steal tomorrow.
By the way congrats to Fox News for exposing Denny Hastert for the crook he is and the Democratic congressman crook from N.E. Pennsylvania. Only problems these crooks like their associates will never see a jail like their compatriots. - captnkurt, on 06/09/2008, -0/+5"I'm pretty sure "y'all" think you're a pretentious *****."
Cool, thanks. I'll try to be more of a regular guy type of ***** in future comments. - theaceoffire, on 06/09/2008, -2/+6You're the perfect McCain supporter!
Grats! - joeanon, on 06/09/2008, -1/+5What small government supports don't grasp is that the government is the only thing holding back complete corporate control of the US.
If you take power and money from the government you will simply create opportunity for corporations to come in and take up the same positions but charge a profit on top of everything.
National health care is only a bad idea if you don't bother to do any of the math. When you consider it saves the nation 1 trillion dollars a year, even a con has to at some point admit the obvious. Privatization alone is not a solution it's just handing more money to an even less efficient model.
We should be rating government and private programs on EFFICIENCY rather than using ideology to guide our economy.
Privatization is ONLY useful in an industry that has competition. Health care does not.
Energy is another highly necessary market where private businesses has just dropped the ball.
If we could just be practical and say.. hey... these industries are doing a horrible job... lets focus on them.
It's not magic... the rest of the world pays half the price for medical care and lives longer than Americans.
The rest of the world is not paying this much of their INCOME in bills. Their taxes may be higher in some nations, but even then the people have more money to their name.
Beyond that, you should not have bought into the GOP's borrow and spend strategy. It's far FAR more irresponsible to borrow and spend than it is to tax and spend.
When you tax you actually create the money to pay your debts. When you borrow you're just putting off your bills with some fantasy mindset that your borrowed spending will pay for itself in the long run. That's the accounting practices of a nation of idiots. That's also why American's as individuals owe more debt than anyone else on the planet.
There is basically no such thing as small government. In a globalized market where many corporations make more money than entire nations small government is a fantasy.
If you're not paying the government your taxes, you'll be paying them to corporations.
Corporations will not sit by while you free up personal income and not take advantage of you. The corporate model of profit simply doesn't allow them to not raise prices when they have the opportunity to make more money. Even if doing so in the long run may harm the economy that is not something corporations consider.
I'd rather have power in government which can be controlled by the people rather than private industry which we have no control or oversight over. Especially in highly necessary markets which can clearly benefit from central management.. government is the easy winner in efficiency.
If you don't believe it... at least back a rating system for corporations and government so we can benchmark their performance.
You'll see in most cases the government easily beats the private market, especially in the long run where. Take health care, where the vast majority of consumers are domestic. There is just no reason to make 300-500% profit margins off your OWN CITIZENS.
That's a horribly unpatriotic thing to do in my opinion. We should just not allow it. Corporations should be at the people's mercy, as they were originally setup. Granting them the freedoms of individuals was a grand mistake because they have reduce liability and insane levels of wealth. That was EXACTLY what the founding fathers wanted to avoid, the consolidation of wealth.
In their time the greatest offender was the catholic church, now days it's corporations. - MmmPi, on 06/09/2008, -0/+4At least you're optimistic!
(Sarcasm, done correctly, does translate to an online world) - mikephimikephi, on 06/09/2008, -2/+6I'll take 'empty words and rhetoric' over recession and 100 year wars any day of the week!
- inactive, on 06/09/2008, -1/+5Amazing to think that we have finally found a case there Democrats are actually giving credence to words coming out of a Buchanan family member's mouth.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 259 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is