What is Digg?734 Comments
- inactive, on 10/20/2007, -88/+350yet more misunderstanding of Ron Paul's positions.
Like the same sex marriage. He doesn't appose it. He thinks it's a State matter and out of the realm of the Federal Government. (he may actually oppose it but it's just not something the Fed Gov should be involved in)
And "internet neutrality". He's against ALL Government regulations on the internet.
Under "immigration: legalization path" Paul has repeatedly said that people must follow the legal means to become citizens. So that is completely wrong.
Embryonic Stem Cells: He isn't against this, that I know of, but he IS against Federal funding for the research. It is supposed to be through private parties for this. Being against funding is NOT the same as being against the research. - itsme92, on 10/13/2007, -12/+100Look at the real patriots here: Ron Paul, Mike Gravel, and Dennis Kucinich. The ONLY presidential candidates who voted against the Patriot Act.
- Caspercreep, on 10/11/2007, -18/+104Gravel FTW!
- perlhacker14, on 10/11/2007, -14/+97Maybe now we will have a more intelligent voter population... Or we could just flip a coin and vote for Nixon.
- inactive, on 10/13/2007, -3/+59What really shocked me was that only Paul, Gravel, and Kucinich oppose the Patriot Act.... that pisses me off.
- resta6, on 01/12/2009, -13/+65yeah agreed...pages like that only focus on the sound byte type politics
- SickMonkey, on 10/11/2007, -17/+69I can understand someone being opposed to gay marriage for moral reasons, but actually supporting a Constitutional ban of it is nothing short of advocating institutionalized bigotry. Also, what sane person wouldn't support a background check for gun ownership?
- c0yote, on 10/11/2007, -1/+45Obviously people shouldn't vote purely off bullet points on a website. It is still a useful resource for getting information quickly about candidates.
And for the average voter, even voting base off of this is better than what they normally do: vote based on the R or D after the persons name. - bratpack8, on 10/11/2007, -16/+57It's not a very good chart as it over-simplifies each candidates position. While I haven't heard all of their positions on each issue, I do know that Ron Paul is against the Federal government being involved in abortion and many of the other issues that have a checkmark of 'opposed' to these. I believe personally he is against abortion, but as President, he would attempt to persuade Congress and the Court to overturn Roe vs. Wade so that it is a State issue, which the Constitution says it should be.
- dweeb79, on 10/20/2007, -21/+61Exactly, I was looking down through the list and its very easy for people to go "Oh he is against all of this". This checklist is bad for people who don't really care about politics because they will not be interested into diving deeper.
He believes abortion is a state by basis as well. - viciouspoultry, on 10/11/2007, -13/+49What that Ron Paul opposes anything the Federal Government does because he is a Libertarian, I'm pretty sure everyone knew that already.
- localzuk, on 10/13/2007, -5/+38Hmmm... I wonder why I haven't seen any discussion about Kucinich on here? He seems the most sensible of them all!
- djphatjive, on 10/11/2007, -20/+52Ron Paul doesn't look all that great when you look at that chart.
- jerbaker, on 10/11/2007, -10/+41"Also does Ron Paul support anything?"
Yes, drilling for oil in ANWR. - kavery, on 10/11/2007, -12/+43Living in Utah means my vote means nothing. Whoever the Republican is will undoubtedly win our electoral votes.
Damn *****. - diggmystuff, on 10/11/2007, -9/+39flip a coin thats so 20ths century, im for drawing pickled eggs
- albiniak, on 10/11/2007, -97/+126WARNING: This table is known to contain the truth about Ron Paul, which may lead to bleeding eyes and whining RP supporters who claim "they got it wrong." I find that incredibly interesting, as the source is cited as the official website of your leader of choice.
- c0yote, on 10/11/2007, -6/+35As a scientific researcher myself, I have to say your argument is completely bunk incabulos. Government funding is a big, big part of academic research there is no denying this. But important research will still go on without government funding.
People need to stop looking to the government to solve all their problems and make all the rules. So many people today just accept that the government is going to be this huge thing that controls so much of our lives. There are options other than "for it" and "against it". There are plenty of things the government should just stay AWAY from and let the people control. - Langford, on 10/11/2007, -5/+32I'm finding it hard to like any of them really.
- Captainhaddock, on 10/30/2007, -21/+47The grid is rather lame, since it leaves out a critical third option for most issues: "believes the issue is not up to the federal government."
- jaguarp80, on 10/11/2007, -13/+39Am I the only one who has a problem with people voting based on bullet points? I'd prefer to actually listen to the politicians themselves, so I can judge their sincerity, among other factors. Voting based on a "fact sheet", to me, seems about as ignorant as doing so based on what your voting group has told you. In this day and age, it isn't hard to find whole, unaltered debates to watch, rather than going off of out-of-context quotes and soundbytes.
- Hale, on 10/11/2007, -9/+34Ron Paul isn't against abortion, the death penalty, background checks, etc. He's against the federal government enforcing them.
- Zaetha, on 10/11/2007, -0/+22Funny, almost every issue is inverted compared to Giuliani. And that's a compliment.
- onyxrev, on 10/11/2007, -1/+21No, you don't have to vote for someone who only has some of the "right" responses. Vote for Mike Gravel.
- whoaohh, on 10/11/2007, -1/+21Look at Romney's stance on abortion...
The other day I had someone tell me that they supported Romney because "he seemed solid and sure of his stances."
I about bitch slapped them. - bratpack8, on 10/12/2007, -30/+50Yeah, they forgot the row with the title 'CONSTITUTION' because Paul would be the only one with a track record who supported it.
Many of the check marks of Paul's opposition are truly his opposition to the Federal Government being in charge. Take education for instance. He believes it should be decided on a State level, and preferably, as local as possible (of course the States would have to decide how local it is). This doesn't mean he's against education, rather the exact opposite -- he knows that the more localized it is and less central planned, the better it will be. How can anyone support a bunch of idiots in DC who are all politically motivated making decisions on what your kids are allowed to learn in Kansas? - tremor_tj, on 10/11/2007, -6/+25You're right. According to that chart, it looks like he's against a lot of things that I support; until you hear that his "opposition" usually means he believes it's a states' issue.
- jambarama, on 10/11/2007, -1/+20I was going to digg this because I think putting candidates positions in a more accessible way is important. Unfortunately, not only is this slightly misleading on certain candidate positions, but I think we are doing a disservice to ourselves by overly simplifying the issues at hand. If everything could be simplified to a yes/no/maybe answer, what would the point of presidential debates be? Just pass around the checkbox card, and distribute to the American people. Occasionally issue new ones when Romney changes his position on abortion/gay rights, and when Hilary decides being pro-war isn't fashionable anymore.
- ender42081, on 10/11/2007, -1/+19I'm a software engineer, my vote means alot. mwahahaha!
- debuggercll, on 10/11/2007, -5/+23I second that.
- 80hd, on 10/11/2007, -10/+27lol ron paul has three green marks
- stmiller, on 10/11/2007, -5/+22Search youtube. There are some great vids, esp the Google- Ron Paul session.
- Crimsoneer, on 10/11/2007, -9/+25Well said. The whole point of being libertarian is that the state shouldn't control you on issues which you think matter, and by the state we mean the national AS WELL AS the federal government. Nobody should be allowed to stop my wife having an abortion if she wants one, or stop two gay men getting married. Thats what being a libertarian is.
If your a truly a libertarian, join the party.
www.lp.org - Twoodge, on 10/13/2007, -3/+19Kucinich +1.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -1/+17Personally I am not fighting for Paul exactly. I am fighting for my liberty. Paul just happens to be the one candidate who will follow the Constitution which will bring back the liberties that are being taken from me. If it wasn't Paul it would be someone else, probably a Libertarian candidate.
- smedrick, on 10/13/2007, -0/+16I agree. Before seeing this table, I had very little interest in Gravel...but now I'm going to research him some more. So far my Biden and Gravel are at the top of my list.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -10/+26What sane person is willing to compromise their Rights that the Government has no authority to compromise.
- atheinostic, on 10/11/2007, -2/+18Voting based on bullet points is much better than voting based on nothing. Lots of people who vote are totally ignorant on the issues and will just vote for whoever they "would rather have a beer with." It would be better if they actually paid attention, but at least a list gives them a clue.
- emjaymj, on 10/11/2007, -5/+20Actually abortion isn't a libertarian issue at all. Even the purest of libertarians can be on either side of the fence.
If a libertarian takes the position that the life of a fetus has value and killing it is murder, then anti-abortion laws are simply protecting the rights and freedoms of the fetus, which is at the very core of libertarian values. On the other hand, if the libertarian takes the position that abortion is NOT murder, then suddenly it would become an issue of protecting the woman's rights and freedoms.
What Dr. Paul is suggesting is that the states should come to their own decisions of whether the unborn life still has value. It's not an issue of protecting freedoms, it's an issue of whether we extend these freedoms to the fetus.
It used to be like this with women, blacks, etc. It wasn't that it infringed on anyone's rights for women or blacks to vote, it was whether or not their lives were as valuable as the lives of white men. Obviously in this day and age, there's only one side of THAT argument that doesn't sound ridiculous. I'm not saying abortion is as clear-cut as this, I'm just giving an example. - Rabbittt, on 10/11/2007, -2/+17If you don't vote for who you support, you are wasting your vote..
- jambarama, on 10/11/2007, -2/+17Or we could actually think about the issues. Some issues are complex, and require more than a check-mark as means of explanation. I mean, we're only comparing what here, (hopefully) sophisticated policy solutions to complicated problems. For example, you might think Paul was anti-free trade because he opposes NAFTA, CAFTA and their ilk. If you thought that, you'd be wrong--he is anti-favoritism and pro-free trade.
- kungPow, on 10/11/2007, -12/+27Ron Paul
- Mavtek, on 10/11/2007, -2/+17http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_vnfkDiVXjc
You mean like in Vegas where we had over 3000 show up for his rally?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFwP0Q8WQFU
Or how about here where we had over 5000 show up in California?
Is that "real" campaigning? - lcarsdeveloper, on 10/11/2007, -2/+17I ignored everything about Ron Paul until I saw him on Real Time with Bill Maher (the 2nd time, not the 1st time). Then I understood why he was so popular. His Daily Show and Colbert Report interviews were also great. People should watch those videos before making up their mind based on some chart on a website, or comments on a forum.
- zumpiez, on 10/11/2007, -6/+20So, it would appear that you didn't actually read this before yanking out snippets that make him sound bad. Read it harder. He wants to put it firmly in the hands of individual states, and opposes the federal government forcing states on the issue.
I highly encourage anybody who was incensed by the stuff that atheinostic quoted to actually click on the link and read it themselves, because they will find that he does not take a pro or anti homosexuality stance on this at all. His concern is states' rights, which is something he's been a very consistent defender of. - incabulos, on 10/11/2007, -32/+46Sorry, being against Federal funding for research is the same thing as "being against it". Taxes are to be spent in the interest of the commonwealth, and I'll be damned if studying embryonic stem cells doesn't represent our interests more than not.
- Antimatter3009, on 10/11/2007, -2/+16One important thing to say here is that Ron Paul also wants to lower taxes (including getting rid of the IRS). He does not want to take your taxes that you want to go to stem cells and spend it elsewhere, he would just rather let you keep that money and do what you wish with it. If you support stem cell research then you can donate to it yourself. Ron Paul's views honestly do not look good on a chart when that chart doesn't include "cut way back on taxes." He doesn't support a lot of things, but in large part because he does not support the federal government spending your money on just about anything.
On the other hand, lack of net neutrality worries me. That's one of the very few places I think government regulation may be necessary and beneficial. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -10/+23Don't take my money at gunpoint to fund something that the private sector, with donations, could do on their own if some many people wanted/believed in it.
- airwalkery2k, on 10/11/2007, -0/+13It would be useful if a frame popped up listing the candidate and position when you highlight a box for those of us without gigantic monitors.
- bigj480, on 10/11/2007, -1/+14There is a very big difference between not supporting something and not supporting the use of tax dollars to fund it. He also is against the use of tax dollars to buy lollipops for cute little kids. WHAT?! He don't want cute little kids to have lollipops? What a jerk! You see my point?
-
Show 51 - 100 of 710 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is