What is Digg?80 Comments
- inactive, on 12/31/2007, -10/+61Not surprising that John McCain would lose votes to Barack Obama. There's a clear choice that must be made by voters before deciding on whom to support. 1) Do you support President Bush's foreign policy 2) Who would best lead the country post-Bush Administration catastrophe. 3) If impeachment happens, who would you like at the helm while all of the drama is going down?
Barack Obama is stealing votes from John McCain for a few reasons. 1) Obama is a clean candidate with principles and he doesn't spit on the GOP the way Clinton does. 2) Obama is anti-War and ready to get the troops home without resorting to propaganda about "winning the war" that many political analysts and historians say cannot be 'won' because this isn't a war against a nation, but against terrorism (a tactic used by people who hate us). 3) Barack Obama seems to do well with conservatives of faith that isn't interested in pushing the U.S. along the same fear-mongering route that we've been on.
I really like John McCain, but his strong stance on the Iraq War has entirely shut me out as a potential voter. Some people argue that the war is of no significance now that "the surge is working!" I say to those people that the surge is irrelevant to millions of Iraqis that have and/or will die in war due to our illegal actions. Finally, our nation has embarked on a journey of fascist thinking, surveillance, torture, and bloodshed as the foundation of our "good men triumphing over evil." Evil can't be defeated by people who say they are "Good" but act evil in order to defeat evil. You don't fight fire with fire, you fight it with water.. and it looks like the river has run dry. - akilleen, on 12/31/2007, -0/+17Your uncle wears flip flops.
- brycelb, on 12/31/2007, -5/+18He is. Don't let the paultards confuse you. When they say things like this "Put obama up against someone who matters and then we'll have a race." you should be able to tell that they have no idea what they are talking about.
- tumples, on 12/31/2007, -7/+19Haha, he doesn't have a bloody chance soulmantim. I can't wait until the polling results are in so I can come on Digg, and read the hundreds of stories about rigged elections and how Paul would have won if it wasn't for them pesky media.
- Grumps, on 12/31/2007, -8/+16Losing to Obama only? I thought McCain should be losing to any other candidates? Hes an ass who works with Bush.
- gropo, on 12/31/2007, -1/+7Let me take a wild guess: You haven't read The Audacity of Hope.
*You* are in fact the one who "doesn't have a real idea in his head." You're more than happy to regurgitate the media-driven falsehoods that make your naive little ideological viewpoints fit to your entirely backwards world view. - Morfildor, on 12/31/2007, -5/+11They both voted to sustain the Patriot Act in 2006, they should be running mates.
- Morfildor, on 12/31/2007, -6/+11Obama voted to sustain the Patriot act, no self respecting democrat should vote for the man. Kucinich is by far a better candidate.
- jmpeagle, on 12/31/2007, -5/+10Tribune Co. which owns the LA Times reported in 2005 that it's subscriptions had fallen from 1.1 million in 1999 to 902,000 in 2005. The paper will not last much longer at the current rate.
Here's a general article on the decline which included the LA Times figures:
http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB11149991960 ... - bahamutxd, on 12/31/2007, -1/+6What makes Senator Obama unpatriotic? Just because I don't support the war in Iraq does not make me unpatriotic or less supportive of America and its future.
- frieddonuts, on 12/31/2007, -19/+24People in NH are awesome. They don't take any political *****. My uncle used to be the most hardcore Republican there was- now he's one of the most Democratic people I know. Vermont is awesome too- they have the only Socialist Senator in the US.
- inactive, on 12/31/2007, -3/+7That is a LIE propagated by the ronbots to try and make it seem like the polls we skeptics quote are bogus. Gallup Poll calls a random house, ASKS THEM WHICH PARTY they are affiliated with, and if they are likely to vote in the primaries. Only then after this is established do they lis candidates. The "Likely Republican Voters" comes from the people who identified themselves as republican. No roll-call from last election...
Sorry, your bogus theories are no good here. Maybe you'll come to understand how wrong you were once Paul is trounced in Iowa and NH - soulmantim, on 12/31/2007, -3/+7You mean the primary voting results, not the polling results.
If you did a little digging you will find that the Republican polls are based on people that voted for Bush in the incumbent race last time around.
That's why they use the term "Likely Republican Voters". That's one reason why Huck is doing so well in the polls, the religious liberal right, the Compassionate Conservatives want more Bush. Huck v. Romney = Dean v. Gepherdt...and we all know who won the nomination... - soulmantim, on 12/31/2007, -1/+5McCain got the kiss of death from Lieberman, there is no way a Republican will vote for him.
- Ajajadude, on 12/31/2007, -4/+8That explains why I'm being dugg down for speaking the very simple truth that Paul fans seem to be eager to say in every other post.
- banmaster, on 12/31/2007, -3/+7Hes an ass who works FOR Bush.
There, corrected it for ya. - LeRenard, on 12/31/2007, -0/+4As a NH independant, this phrase stopped me cold - "Winship's shift reflects a broader trend among New Hampshire independents: Over the last eight years, they have drifted to the left."
No. I'd argue that our ideals have stayed pretty much the same, it's the political climate in the country that has moved much farther right. - tomabanjo, on 12/31/2007, -5/+9Been a while since I've read the LA Times. This was one of the most spun articles I've read since taking an interest in this presidential campaign. Check it out. It was re written many times. The commission on the article was not about McCain or Obama. Those were creative choices by the contractor. The job ticket called for a reduction in the independents NH voters going to Ron Paul. Folks, this is high dollar writing. You can barely see the bullet points you are being sold. The hierarchy of strategy on every MSM art purchase starts with Hillary Nov 08. All the other candidates function as bought actors (Except the Good Dr.) An actor can always screw up but generally speaking he is trying to do his job to the satisfaction of the director. Paul is not in on the deal. Don't take my word, check everybody's bank accounts. All Non Paul candidates are wearing their bar codes on their forehead for convenience in the check out line.
Polls are not windows into the statistics of public opinion. Polls are commissioned commercial art from pro vendors. The purpose of publishing polls is never to educate the reader or even sell more newspapers. The mob is heavily influenced by what it thinks other members of the mob are thinking. (not by what they are actually thinking) Polls are one of many MSM media art products, like the news, that accomplish the agenda of the strong in the manipulation of the weak.
Digg? - stalefries, on 12/31/2007, -7/+11Really? Can you provide subscription numbers that support your claim?
- ScornedPatriot, on 12/31/2007, -1/+4It's not that they can vote for anyone they want in an open primary, it's that they get 1 vote per party. Here, I can vote in the republican and democrat primaries. So you get to vote for someone, and against someone else. Primaries here are so much fun.
- frieddonuts, on 12/31/2007, -4/+7Actually, they just disassembled the disastrous Tribune Corp. and made it privately owned by its employees, so it's got a much brighter future than before. Mwahahaha, take that.
- Platina, on 12/31/2007, -1/+4What´s wrong with that:p hehe
- dattaway, on 12/31/2007, -1/+3I'm sure this problem will be fixed in time by upgrading the voting machines to a more reliable technology since its too late to redraw the voting districts.
- GhostyBoy, on 12/31/2007, -0/+2As a Ron Paul supporter, Obama is the scariest candidate out there. Seriously. If Ron Paul takes the nomination he would destroy Hillary, she is so unlikeable. But Obama is well-spoken, well-liked, the media likes him and he's seems genuine. He would be the hardest to beat of any of the candidates.
But it would make for a way better race as well. - odigity, on 12/31/2007, -0/+2I wish I had an accurate poll to refute you with, but that won't happen till Jan 8.
- bahamutxd, on 12/31/2007, -1/+3The only way for Black people to get ahead is by affirmative action and liberal guilt. Because, if a black person succeeds, it must mean that somebody gave them a free handout along the way, right? I'm sure someone gave him his law degree, his senate seat, and everything else he's achieved simply because he's a Black man. /sarcasm Is that really the best you can come up with? You don't attack his politics, just his race in an effort to voice your opposition to affirmative action. His race shouldn't even be an issue.
- inactive, on 12/31/2007, -0/+2Dugg down for "Polls are commissioned commercial art from pro vendors."
If you read the history of polls like Gallup (which have been independent for over 50 years) you'd see how ignorant you are on the issue. This article was NOT written about Paul because his support isn't taking off, well, anywhere. If anything mccain voters ARE switching party or shifting toward romney/huckabee - inactive, on 12/31/2007, -0/+2Who CARES! We have not even nominated the candidates who are running for office yet!
- vault, on 12/31/2007, -5/+7I find that pretty hard to believe, that the LA Times will be out of business by 2010.
- adfdsfkjla, on 12/31/2007, -3/+5In the "stronghold of Ron Paul", McCain's polling 18.8% above Paul (in 2nd place), so I'm not sure how he's irrelevant.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/presi ... - smacksaw, on 12/31/2007, -6/+8Single page:
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-indepen ...
They just briefly mention Obama vs Hillary, but the bigger story is Iowa. McCain needs Hillary or Edwards to win Iowa so Obama is hobbled. If Obama wins Iowa people in NH will see he is viable and vote for him. Otherwise they may decide their vote is better spent towards Ron Paul. - Vega310, on 12/31/2007, -2/+4***** you frank.
- jmpeagle, on 12/31/2007, -7/+9that's true of all print media
- inactive, on 12/31/2007, -4/+6To elaborate on my comment: when this country was established, it was to be a free and open society where government had little to no affairs in the lives or personal matters of the citizens.
As the country grew, others wanted the federal government to hold more responsibility and to have a little bit more say so into public affairs... which is why today the govt is so bloated that it has stepped over the line of what's acceptable or was meant to be - for example, prohibition of drugs should NOT be in place. That's not what the federal government was meant to oversee.
Same with social security and the massive amounts of other BS that is in place. For example, if a state declares the drinking age to be something other than 21, Federal govt threatens with cutting funds. Very wrong. Simply put - there are way too many laws established on the federal level that should be left to the smaller governments.
Most of this stuff is common sense. Because we've been conditioned to accept this sub-par retardation of the founding fathers' original ideals, most people can't fathom such ideas. They truly think that once you change these backwards ways in which we live, our society will unravel and hell will break loose.
Not the case. People will be much happier in a truly free society. - Terri84, on 12/31/2007, -0/+1McCain is picking up speed, so people attack him now. Last week it was huckabee, then before that it was Romney and before that Guiliani. All of this is BS.
- inactive, on 12/31/2007, -2/+3I have a problem with the word Hero here. McCain got shot down in North Vietnam doing what he signed up to do, that is not the same as some of the real heroics I have witnessed. I think this nation should be VERY CAUTIOUS in electing ANYONE who has advanced in life and career because of the people he knows. McCain was an Naval Aviator because his daddy was an Admiral....just like Bush was a draft dodging state side fighter pilot protecting Texas from foreign invasion by our enemy who had no aircraft even remotely capable of reaching Texas.
- FascistNation, on 01/02/2008, -0/+1Gee,I didn't know McCain was running against Obama.
Talk about a non-story! - kickingback77, on 12/19/2008, -0/+1I just found out that McCain lost the election.... this should make the homepage........wait, am I only one to just find out about this......
Los Angeles, news travel fast, must be the helicopters covering news?
http://www.helinet.com/services_charter.php - Vega310, on 12/31/2007, -1/+2Ron Paul has received donations from over 100,000 individuals, $19 million in the last 3 months alone. His support *IS* taking off, the MSM is just lying about it to you and you are too stubborn to stop and see that.
the words of the prophet will be written on subway walls and tenement halls. the revolution will not be televised. - Bantec, on 12/31/2007, -0/+1Hah, I think I got that one. I'll remedy the Diebold voting machines with a higher caliber and a better scope.
- inactive, on 12/31/2007, -4/+5He's a republican and has been for 10 years. He has libertarian values.........oddly enough so does every candidate in the race! Hard to imagine huh? Must be nice to live in a world where the only way you can marginalize your opponent is spreading lies. Makes you look bad as a supporter for whomever you're rooting for.
- addictist, on 12/31/2007, -2/+3"Obama is a clean candidate" if by that you mean completely backed by the financial industry? Go digg this down, and ignore the truth.
- perogi21, on 12/31/2007, -1/+2FYI: The people of NH don't even care who wins in Iowa (no disrespect intended to Iowans).
New Hampshirites vote for the person they want to win, not the person they think CAN win. - recordingautist, on 12/31/2007, -0/+1I like Kucinich, but you're not representing Obama fairly. He voted for the extension of the Patriot act with modifications (including removing provisions for extensive wiretapping). Please check your facts before you post stuff like this.
Here's Obama's statement when he voted for reauthorization of a modified patriot act:
http://obama.senate.gov/speech/060216-floor_statem ... - martalli, on 12/31/2007, -0/+1Illinois allows people to choose which primary they wish to vote in, irregardless of party membership (or lack thereof). That lets us simply vote int he more interesting primary, which is either the one with a choice (like in 2004), or in the primary with the most likely winner (this year probably the democrats). So republicans or republican-leaning folks crossing over to the democratic primary is hardly surprising to me (as an Illinoisian).
- martalli, on 01/01/2008, -0/+1"Black Curtain"?
- jcalex, on 01/01/2008, -0/+1America knows that Obama,and others,are working together behind the "Black Curtain" to put one over on America.
Why has Obama not mentioned this:Paul has filed a civil suit charging Sen. Clinton and her husband, former President Clinton, with fraud, coercion and conspiracy. California courts so far have denied the Clintons' motions to dismiss, and Paul expects the case to proceed at the beginning of the year, just as Hillary Clinton prepares to defend her Senate seat.
"This public servant, who is sworn to uphold the Constitution, is the biggest violator of the fundamental principles and statutes relating to fair elections and honest government," Paul told WND. "She needs to be dealt with in a way that will show this country and elected officials in Washington that everybody is accountable to the rule of law."
We have video,phone conversations,hard copy,everything needed to get a conviction,yet Obama,for some reason,does not have the guts to bring it up.WHY!! because he is part of the scam on the American people.Why else would he not want Americans to know the truth. - perogi21, on 12/31/2007, -0/+1If you knew anything about NH voters, you would know that independents in NH remain so until they declare a party before the election (I believe it's 60-90 days). After the election, we declare ourselves independents again until the next election so we have more leeway and not get pigeonholed as to what party we support. (Actually, Dems or Reps can change parties before an election too.)
- ZenMojo, on 01/01/2008, -0/+1There was a time when the candidate you describe as "scary" would be comforting. Partisanship PHAILZ!
-
Show 51 - 80 of 80 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is