CNN GOP DEBATE **discussion thread**

page: 23
17
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 12:36 AM
link   
I donated! This is the first time I've ever contributed to ANY political candidate.

In the time it took me to read this thread, Ron Paul has received:


In the time it took to make this post, he is now up to:
178,268.81

WoW....

... but you know... Ron Paul only has a few fringe lunatic supporters, a small minoritity that is flooding these polls...


how's that working for ya now?




posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 12:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by StarPeace

I posted that "bug" earlier in this thread. Maybe a connection crashes you hit refresh, and vote again boom 2 votes added to the results.

Out of curiosity visit another site go back to the poll vote again..Boom another vote added.

Hence some polls are poorly designed and managed no doubt some will abuse the system and it's really obvious in those severely lumpsided polls.

Its a known fact that some people abuse polls deliberately.
There are "bots" that will spam a poorly designed poll.


I won't argue that, it is possible that some people with nothing better to do will create programs to influence online polls.

Can the same be said for donations, though? As others have pointed out, donations to Paul are flooding in right now, at the rate of over $100,000 an hour thus far. All from individuals, all in small amounts. No way to spam that with any kind of bots. The support is there.



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 12:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by ker2010
LOL on Msnbc Facebook all the Ron Paul support threads are getting deleted under their GOP debate thread. They are making it so obvious now.


Im on the home page now of website and i actually see an ad for supporting ron paul



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 12:40 AM
link   
reply to post by g0dhims3lf
 


Perry, Romney and Santorum all came off as very juvenile this debate.

Gingrich for the most part did well. He is by far the most intellectual and practical of the group. Yet, he's not simple or attractive enough for most petty Americans.

Sadly his campaign will likely run out of funds and he will be unable to compete against the monolithic juggernaut of Romney, who is backed by the world's major banks.



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 12:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by squidboy
You assumptions are saying that only Dr. Paul supporters would rig polls (doubtful).
edit on 19-10-2011 by squidboy because: (no reason given)


Actually yes, I do. None of the other guys in these debates have "loyal fanbases." Nowhere on the internet are you going to find a hotspot for Mitt Romney or Santorum (beyond their own campaign forums, I mean). Paul, however, is popular on the internet. he has a little community going on, sort of like Howard Dean back in 2004. Thus it's very easy to post a link to a place in "Paul country" and watch them all crash it. Post the same poll on say, FreeRepublic, and you'll probably get a much more divided vote.

However his internet community has the same problem as Howard Dean's did - they're not a representative demographic. A large number of them probably either don't vote, or can't. A great many of them demonstrably don't understand Paul's positions (many don't even understand the issues he's taking positions on, even), and are simply traveling with the herd, or they're cherry-picking his positions and just ignoring what they don't like (Much as Democrats did with Obama back in 2007-08 - thus their stupid "outrage" when he expanded Afghanistan.)

Ron Paul's major support exists mostly in the demographic of white males on the internet with political interests in the 14-30 age range. While perhaps not a tiny segment of the population, it IS rather... narrow. He doesn't have broad appeal. remember folks, something like 30% of the nation votes based on a candidate's physical attractiveness.
edit on 19/10/2011 by TheWalkingFox because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 12:57 AM
link   
No politician can create jobs. Both parties, combined with the Fedral Reserve, capitalism, miltary adventurism, and good ole' corporate greed have led to the current situation. The GOP is not the answer. The Dems are not the answer, and the Tea Baggers are just fringe conservative nut-jobs. Ron Paul does not support a woman's right to reproductive freedom, which doesn't appear to be very "Libertarian" of him. All of those guys ( and that goofy Bachmann monster ) will say anything to get elected, and I can't believe that anyone is actually taking Herman Cain's boat-load of BS seriously. People said Al Gore was stiff...what the frick about Romney? That guy is a robot.

If the so-called "job creators" ( the rich ), need to prevent taxes from being raised in order to create jobs ( which is a fricking deceptive lie to begin with ), why aren't they creating jobs right now? The GOP is causing political gridlock in order to do anything to make Obama look bad. They're playing politics with the economy, jobs, our basic Rights...it's all sickening. If anyone here thinks Ron Paul has your best interest in mind, you're only fooling yourself.

We need a strong, independent third party, which keeps the religious and conservative wingnuts on the fringe, where they deserve to be.
IMHO, of course. If you think the Kool-Aide tastes Greeaat, keep on drinking....
edit on 19-10-2011 by moonzoo7 because: Forgot to throw Bachmann in there....



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 01:01 AM
link   
By the way, if Bachmann dislikes the LBGT community so much, why did she dress like Michael Jackson's ghost???



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 01:02 AM
link   
The clock strikes *exactly* midnight here in Colorado, I got to the ronpaul2012.com website and what do I see?? Over 200k in donations already.



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 01:03 AM
link   
100% grassroots created Ron Paul moneybomb already hit 200k in its first two hours.


Ron Paul raised 8.2 Million in the third quarter of 2011 from some 100,000 individual donors.

Rick Perry raised 17 Million in Q3 from 22,000 donors.



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 01:05 AM
link   
reply to post by moonzoo7
 


Well, maybe not exactly true on hte jobs thing. it's true that the President doesn't create jobs. But congress can have an impact.

cut taxes on the bottom 40% of Americans. Increase taxes on top 15%. Expand "Welfare" programs at the bottom 10%.

What you've just done is drastically increase the buying power of the majority of Americans. They'll buy more, demand goes up, jobs (hopefully) expand.

The cause of these economic contractions is, after all, people not engaging in the economy. so the obvious way out of a contraction is to provide the means and incentive for the bulk of the populace to get back to business.

Unfortunately? Our Congress is bought and paid for, and will continue pretending that jobs are created by hte top 5% of wealthholders - after all, that's who bribes them so luxuriously.

America's primary interest needs to be in keeping Americans employed, housed, and well, not on ensuring gigantic profits for the narrowest sector of the populace.



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 01:09 AM
link   
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 


I can agree with that. Your posts are always so sensible, I must say. I keep seeing them around.
Your point is well-made.



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 01:13 AM
link   
reply to post by eLPresidente
 


And the sad thing is, the source of those donations doesn't matter. it's the cash itself that counts.

I'll be perfectly honest. I loathe Ron Paul. I would not shed a tear at all if tomorrow the man were eaten by bears. I consider nearly every policy he advocates - with the glaring exceptions of his Defense and drug policies - to be directly and dangerously contradictory to anything resembling a successful American nation.

And he's also far and away vastly better than his current competition. Seriously, if i had to pick only republicans? I'd be going a Paul / Huntsman ticket (Huntsman being the second least-awful turd in the GOP candidate septic tank). While I don't think he has any chance of defeating Obama - frankly I doubt he could defeat a rutabaga with Hitler's face painted on it - I think he might be able to spur Obama to "tighten up" on several key policies.

Unfortunately? That ticket will never happen, for the reasons you just brought forth. Perry rakes in more money. THat's the bottom line for the Republican party. Whoever brings in the most bucks to the party coffers is who will be nominated by the party "leaders."

Frankly, I think Paul would be better-served to jump ship and try a model after bernie Sanders - all the way up to caucusing with the Dems. They could use another "Devil's advocate" sort, I think.



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 01:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by moonzoo7
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 

Your posts are always so sensible,


...lolwhut?

*looks around*

Ashton Kucher's BOUND to be hiding around here somewhere.



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 01:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox

Originally posted by squidboy
You assumptions are saying that only Dr. Paul supporters would rig polls (doubtful).
edit on 19-10-2011 by squidboy because: (no reason given)


Ron Paul's major support exists mostly in the demographic of white males on the internet with political interests in the 14-30 age range. While perhaps not a tiny segment of the population, it IS rather... narrow. He doesn't have broad appeal. remember folks, something like 30% of the nation votes based on a candidate's physical attractiveness.
edit on 19/10/2011 by TheWalkingFox because: (no reason given)


Ha. The 30 percent thing cracks me up. It's a scary thought.

Have you ever been to a Ron Paul Rally? Have you ever heard of Blue Democrats? Have you ever been to his Facebook page and looked at who is posting their support (551 thousand supporters there, and I see a well defined mix of people, age, sex). Granted, some of those might not be voting age, some of those might be foreigners... I'm just saying, you need to actually go to a rally to see the crowd.

Don't get me wrong, Paul's loyal fan base might put off a lot of people... I can understand that. The constant reminding of Paul to the masses can be a bit annoying I suppose. You have to understand the rationale behind their support. I've personally supported Paul since 2006.

The best way I can describe their vigor is:

A group of "fat" people found the best tasting Ice Cream in town, It's non fat, all natural, and it's cheaper then any other brand out there. The Ice Cream has made them all skinny, they are healthier then ever, and are saving money buying it. It's been around for 30 years, but the other Ice Cream Companies are hiding it's existence from the market. They have to tell the other "fat" people about it. The Ice Cream Companies don't like this, so they kick into overdrive to Market Ice Cream that tastes sorta like the best tasting Ice Cream, but makes people fatter in the process. It's also more expensive. The Skinny Ice Cream Lovers, then have to kick their announcements of the Ice Cream into overdrive, everywhere to meet the effort (that has more money, people, commercials) from the Other Ice Cream Companies. The skinny people just don't understand, why the other "fat" people want to remain fat and spend more for Ice Cream that tastes like crap....

Point being from this story. It's the people pushing a product, vs. the Companies pushing a product.

Top contributers for 2012 Republican Presidential Primary

-Ron Paul

US Air Force.... $23,437
US Army........ $23,053
US Navy................ $16,973

-Mitt Romney

Goldman Sachs..... $354,700
Credit Suisse Group $195,250
Morgan Stanley.. $185,800

-Herman Cain

Wausau Homes.... $9,800
Wells Fargo.... $8,300
Houston Texans.. $7,400

(no offense to Fat or Skinny people intended)
edit on 19-10-2011 by squidboy because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 01:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by moonzoo7
By the way, if Bachmann dislikes the LBGT community so much, why did she dress like Michael Jackson's ghost???


I was wondering which navy it was that she stole that uniform from.

She looked like she was going to a military ball not a debate.



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 01:25 AM
link   
^^^Ron Paul would make a great ice cream flavor. Just saying.



I've been to Ron Paul events and it is a very diverse crowd. People of all colors, ages and professions. When Paul came to a GOP convention in California, 1000 unique supporters showed up.

He went to NY, 1800

He went to Louisiana, 1500

He is building great momentum, now if only the media would start being fair across the board and let the people make their own decisions.



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 01:25 AM
link   
reply to post by squidboy
 


551,000 friends on his Facebook, you say? Let's, for a moment, utterly ignore the vapidness of "friending" on Facebook, let's ignore the points made about voting eligibility. 551,000 is smaller than the population of Tulsa, Oklahoma (by eighty thousand or so.)

I'm honestly not trying to make a judgement call on the supporters themselves (At least, not in this thread) - all I'm saying is... the numbers aren't what you think they are. It remains a relatively slender demograpic. 'course that doesn't impact whether you should support him or not - herd mentality is for sheep - it's just me making hte point that maybe you giuys shouldn't get so upset when offline polls show him with numbers like 7% or whatever.

Even if every single person who ever went "I kinda like Ron Paul" went out and voted for the guy... i'm not sure it would kick him to the win. Maybe it would (I mean, really, look who he's running against here) but I would harbor doubts.

So you havethis small, loud, and pretty much echo-chambered bubble of support for Paul. I'm kidding you not, this is just how it looked for Dean in 2004. Dean didn't lose because of his "YEEEEEEAGH!" moment, he lost because the noisy support didn't really have the numbers to back to decibels.



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 01:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
remember folks, something like 30% of the nation votes based on a candidate's physical attractiveness.


Perhaps that percentage was established during better times. I'm hoping times like these may change that kind of stupidity. The masses aren't comfortable anymore, they're starting to realize our way of life is not a given, by any means. People aren't buying what the establishment politicians are selling anymore, on either side of the political spectrum. Ron Paul is presenting real answers, and it seems like you truly don't understand his positions or his plans. I voted for Obama on his promise to bring the troops home, I took that "to the bank", and the check bounced. We have more wars, more debt, and no end in sight. I didn't know much about Ron Paul last time around, and I regret that. If I did, I wouldn't have wasted my vote on Obama.



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 01:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by 27jd
I voted for Obama on his promise to bring the troops home, I took that "to the bank", and the check bounced. We have more wars, more debt, and no end in sight


So when is he scheduled to return the Nobel Peace Prize he recieved?

After we Invade Iran and a few more piddly African Nations???

BTW... in 2.5 hours he's made: $222,193.71 or ~1500$ per minute.

I'd say he has ... just a few supporters... will be interesting to see the number of people who contributed!
edit on 19-10-2011 by pianopraze because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 01:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
reply to post by squidboy
 


551,000 friends on his Facebook, you say?



Point being. You can look through the comments, and see every Sex, Age, Race represented. I wasn't trying to push numbers here. I was pushing demographic make up.

Comparing Paul to Dean is hilarious by the way... Totally two different men. Paul's been here for a long time... And his support will just continue to grow (despite OBVIOUS Media Blacklisting).
edit on 19-10-2011 by squidboy because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join