Presidential Candidates' Site Rankings Make For Interesting Comparisons (2396 hits)
Category: PoliticsRating: 0.38 on 79 reviews (Rate this item) (V)
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (View user info) at 2007-07-03 04:33:50 EDT
Scanning the Google news wires for Ron Paul material as has become my habit, I am often not surprised to find a boatload of independent news sites saying some flattering things about him. I am also not surprised to see the mainstream sources taking potshots at him and his campaign. But one article from digital50.com caught my attention this evening (http://tinyurl.com/2olkfo) because it deals with the Nielsen Reports on the various presidential candidates' media exposure in a variety of forums - TV, radio, internet, etc.
The article reads, in part:
"Democrats are dominating new media with the online "buzz" tipping to Democrats 64.3% of the time, [not entirely untrue, but still a loaded statistic for reasons we'll get into later] according to Nielsen BuzzMetrics. Meanwhile, Barack Obama's Website generated the greatest number of unique visitors of any candidate Website in April, according to Nielsen//NetRatings."
The article goes on to claim that, according to Nielsen's "Blogpulse BuzzMetrics" (http://www.nielsenbuzzmetrics.com/blogpulse), Dems lead Republicans in online buzz generated, with Obama and Hillary in the lead, respectively. It goes on to say that, according to this "Buzzmetrics", the Republican buzz is led by John McCain and that Ron Paul is a distant fourth.
"John McCain is leading Republicans with online Buzz, potentially because of his heavy online ad spending in recent months. McCain's Buzz is followed relatively closely by Rudolph Giuliani and Mitt Romney, and distantly by Ron Paul."
Out of sheer curiosity, I plugged "Hillary Clinton", "Barack Obama", and "Ron Paul" into Nielson's mysterious blogpulse, set the time frame to the last 6 months and got the following: http://tinyurl.com/2bqneu
I have to admit the graphs are kinda neat and all. You can click on any point in time and see what the conditions were on that day, i.e. how many blog posts were created containing the terms you input. However, it doesn't account for the positive or negative polarity of the content, just counts the mention of the name as come kind of "buzz factor". For instance, I clicked on the latest date for Hillary Clinton (http://tinyurl.com/2taqgn), and the first 3 results were 1) referencing her having worn the same suit since 1994, 2) being the worst candidate for president the blogger could imagine, and 3) in reference to her lambasting of Bush's commuting of Scooter Libby's prison sentence as "another example of the administration thinking it's above the law", the blogger commented "Where was this righteous indignation when her husband, President William Jefferson Clinton, pardoned 140 people on the last day of his presidency?"
In stark contrast to Hillary, Ron Paul's results yielded not a single negative post listed on the front page of results.
To be an equal opportunity candidate basher, I plugged Ron Paul's name in with two of the supposed top buzz getters for the Republicans. I used only Giuliani's last name since he is called Rudy or Rudolph alternately. This should be to his advantage in the results. http://tinyurl.com/2mwwtl
What's interesting about this graph is that Ron Paul is actually, at the latest reading, running neck and neck with Giuliani, while Romney is BEHIND! And again, this says nothing of the positive or negative nature of the blog content, as is evidenced by the fact that for both Romney and Giuliani's results are riddled with negativity as exampled by the anger over Giuliani's applause of Libbey's commuted sentence, and one blogger's fears that Romney would "institute an ultrapatriarchal dystopia" if he became president. The funny thing is, in both Giuliani's and Romney's results there were some that were comparing them unfavorably to Ron Paul! (See fourth result down: http://tinyurl.com/39vasp)
Here is how Ron Paul stacks up to the supposed "buzz frontrunner" of the GOP, John McCain: http://tinyurl.com/327xm8 As you can see, they are running neck and neck! It is NOT, as the article asserts, that Ron Paul is a "distant" fourth in internet buzz. In fact, he is a frontrunner in that respect, and if one considers the stark contrast between the favorable views of bloggers toward Ron Paul and the vastly unfavorable views of the rest of the GOP hopefuls, a clearer picture emerges wherein Ron Paul is a real force to be reckoned with.
Here are some other number that might interest those following this election cycle closely. They are from Alexa.com and they are measures of the site traffic of the official campaign websites of all the so-called "frontrunners" and Ron Paul. The first number is the overall world traffic rank. The second number, the one I've sorted by, is the traffic rank in the United States only, which is really the only one that matters.
Traffic Rank for hillaryclinton.com: 22,754
Hillaryclinton.com traffic rank in other countries: United States 2,548
Traffic Rank for ronpaul2008.com: 30,491
Ronpaul2008.com traffic rank in other countries: United States 3,075
Traffic Rank for barackobama.com: 19,138
Barackobama.com traffic rank in other countries: United States 3,685
Traffic Rank for mittromney.com: 64,379
Mittromney.com traffic rank in other countries: United States 9,047
Traffic Rank for johnedwards.com: 54,021
Johnedwards.com traffic rank in other countries: United States 9,395
Traffic Rank for joinrudy2008.com: 103,800
Joinrudy2008.com traffic rank in other countries: United States 19,856
Traffic Rank for johnmccain.com: 93,341
Johnmccain.com traffic rank in other countries: United States 22,730
Traffic Rank for richardsonforpresident.com: 180,439
Richardsonforpresident.com traffic rank in other countries: United States 37,234
Traffic Rank for fred08.com: 200,680
Fred08.com traffic rank in other countries: United States 39,085
Notice that, no matter which way you slice it, if website visits are any indicator, and I propose that in this day and age of widespread internet use, they are, Ron Paul is either 2nd or 3rd in the overall running for president of the United States, and is certainly blowing away the Republican competition. Here is a graph that more clearly shows the comparison, or lack thereof, between the GOP candidates' site statistics: http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?q=ronpaul2008.com/&url=ronpaul2008.com/
Interestingly enough, while the Alexa stats claim the contrary, the article I mentioned earlier said that Mitt Romney was leading the internet charge in terms of traffic. According to Alexa, it's traffic rankings are "based on a combined measure of page views and users" which gives them a clear measure of the site's "reach".
If this brief excursion into web traffic stats should teach us nothing else, it's this: "don't believe everything that you read, even if it's peppered with lots of numbers, because, yes, even numbers can lie when liars hold the calculators."
User Reviews
Submitted by shitfuck (user info) at 2007-07-05 12:10:23 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
I would seriously consider becoming an American citizen just for the ability to support Ron Paul, I've even thought of opening a Canadians for Ron Paul website.
Say Yes to Dr. No.
Submitted by TheUniter (user info) at 2007-07-04 11:33:28 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Scott_James (user info) at 2007-07-04 09:54:58 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
I would comment more but I´m trying to enjoy my holiday - and Dano looks like he is about to discombulate some kid who just bombed him the pool.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-07-03 22:52:00 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by JonnyX (user info) at 2007-07-03 20:15:48 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-07-03 16:10:45 PDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by SgtHartman (user info) at 2007-07-03 18:27:57 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
If you want a post for it, why don't YOU make one.
To me, it's comparatively low on the list of Bush infractions, but be my guest, make a post about it.
============================
it may be low compared to bush infractions, but at least its PROVABLE
------------------
What's "PROVABLE"? The fact that as president he has the constitutional power to pardon him?
It's one of the few powers he DOES have as president! Provable? What the FUCK are you talking about?
We let him get away with doing shit that is well outside that spectrum of power all day long - i.e. abridging free speech, signing statements declaring an intent to break the law as passed by congress, destruction of habeas corpus, NSA spying, not to mention lying about yellow cake and WMDs and unconstitutional wars - but you raise an objection when he does something that is within his scope of power?
---------
but none of these 'things' YOU mentioned are provable - citing tinfoilhat.com is not _proof_.
--------------------
NSA wiretapping sans warrant was admitted. Their argument for doing it was national security. There is nothing in the law that excuses wiretapping of American citizens without a warrant, yet they did it, and are doing it, anyway. http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/12/17/bush.nsa/
Free speech and "free speech zones":
I could give you hundreds of instances here, but that's what Google is for.
http://baltimorechronicle.com/052704FreeSpeechZones.shtml
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_speech_zone#Notable_incidents_and_court_proceedings
Destruction of habeas corpus: The Military Commissions Act saw that that. I wrote about it the day after it was signed and told you all about it, but of course, you wouldn't listen. http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dorf/20061011.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15220450/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/28/AR2006092800824.html
http://www.lewrockwell.com/hornberger/hornberger105.html
Lying about WMD and Yellow cake: The president had CIA memos stating that the country of Iraq had no WMDs and that the administration's "yellow cake" charges should be left out of the state of the union speech. But did they listen? No, they just found their own forged documents that stated the contrary and had George Tenet sign off on them.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Yellowcake_forgery
http://www.motherjones.com/news/update/2003/03/we_338_01.html
http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/07/11/sprj.irq.wmdspeech/
http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/02/05/sprj.irq.powell.transcript/
Here are the ACTUAL forged documents that IAEA inspectors AND our own CIA questioned: http://cryptome.org/niger-docs.pdf
Or read in html if you prefer. Translation is provided: http://cryptome.org/niger-docs.htm
But, again, you can't find original documents on the internet.
Unconstitutional wars: The constitution grants congress the power "to declare war, [and] grant letters of marque and reprisal. Meaning that unless a formal declaration of war is put forth by congress, the only other recourse to international infraction is a marque and reprisal, which is a specific warrant issued for individuals to search and seize property, or otherwise issue reprisal to a foreign agent in proportion to their original offense to the issuing nation. The fact that congress has not formally declared war on any nation since WWII, and in light of our countless interferences and war activities abroad since then, the United States can be said to be in breach of its own constitution. And every time a president takes our armies into war on foreign soil without this formal declaration, he is in utter breach of the constitution he swore to uphold.
Some of this is certainly provable. You just have to have a court that is transparent and independent enough, and in possession of such resolve as would prosecute the offenders of these and other infractions.
Submitted by i_can_get_you_a_toe (user info) at 2007-07-03 22:17:24 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
No Comment
Submitted by FilthyAssistant (user info) at 2007-07-03 20:32:23 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by JonnyX (user info) at 2007-07-03 20:15:48 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-07-03 16:10:45 PDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by SgtHartman (user info) at 2007-07-03 18:27:57 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
If you want a post for it, why don't YOU make one.
To me, it's comparatively low on the list of Bush infractions, but be my guest, make a post about it.
============================
it may be low compared to bush infractions, but at least its PROVABLE
------------------
What's "PROVABLE"? The fact that as president he has the constitutional power to pardon him?
It's one of the few powers he DOES have as president! Provable? What the FUCK are you talking about?
We let him get away with doing shit that is well outside that spectrum of power all day long - i.e. abridging free speech, signing statements declaring an intent to break the law as passed by congress, destruction of habeas corpus, NSA spying, not to mention lying about yellow cake and WMDs and unconstitutional wars - but you raise an objection when he does something that is within his scope of power?
---------
but none of these 'things' YOU mentioned are provable - citing tinfoilhat.com is not _proof_.
====
What things? The list he just mentioned? Habeas corpus and whatnot?
Submitted by rob_berg (user info) at 2007-07-03 20:28:21 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Opportunistic little troll below.
Submitted by JonnyX (user info) at 2007-07-03 20:15:48 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-07-03 16:10:45 PDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by SgtHartman (user info) at 2007-07-03 18:27:57 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
If you want a post for it, why don't YOU make one.
To me, it's comparatively low on the list of Bush infractions, but be my guest, make a post about it.
============================
it may be low compared to bush infractions, but at least its PROVABLE
------------------
What's "PROVABLE"? The fact that as president he has the constitutional power to pardon him?
It's one of the few powers he DOES have as president! Provable? What the FUCK are you talking about?
We let him get away with doing shit that is well outside that spectrum of power all day long - i.e. abridging free speech, signing statements declaring an intent to break the law as passed by congress, destruction of habeas corpus, NSA spying, not to mention lying about yellow cake and WMDs and unconstitutional wars - but you raise an objection when he does something that is within his scope of power?
---------
but none of these 'things' YOU mentioned are provable - citing tinfoilhat.com is not _proof_.
Why not go for the EASY conspiracy, the OBVIOUS one that most people can see?
I'm guessing you just like being wrong all the time...
Submitted by redskieslookfake (user info) at 2007-07-03 20:01:16 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
www.thetoddtime.com
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-07-03 19:10:45 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by SgtHartman (user info) at 2007-07-03 18:27:57 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
If you want a post for it, why don't YOU make one.
To me, it's comparatively low on the list of Bush infractions, but be my guest, make a post about it.
============================
it may be low compared to bush infractions, but at least its PROVABLE
------------------
What's "PROVABLE"? The fact that as president he has the constitutional power to pardon him?
It's one of the few powers he DOES have as president! Provable? What the FUCK are you talking about?
We let him get away with doing shit that is well outside that spectrum of power all day long - i.e. abridging free speech, signing statements declaring an intent to break the law as passed by congress, destruction of habeas corpus, NSA spying, not to mention lying about yellow cake and WMDs and unconstitutional wars - but you raise an objection when he does something that is within his scope of power?
It's a damn good thing you're not a lawyer. You'd make a really shitty one.
Submitted by SgtHartman (user info) at 2007-07-03 18:27:57 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
If you want a post for it, why don't YOU make one.
To me, it's comparatively low on the list of Bush infractions, but be my guest, make a post about it.
============================
it may be low compared to bush infractions, but at least its PROVABLE
you're like elliot ness, everyone's telling you to go after Capone for something he's done thats illegal (tax evasion) but you blindly wanna go after the smoking gun, it has to be a romantic ending to bushes' reign doesnt it? It cant just end, it has to end your way...
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-07-03 18:11:14 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by JonnyX (user info) at 2007-07-03 17:50:09 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-07-03 12:26:59 PDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by JonnyX (user info) at 2007-07-03 14:59:41 EDT (#)
Ranking: -1
Why no rant about Scooter Libby?
I love how whenever there is GENUINE conspiracy taking place right in front of you, you ALWAYS choose to ignore it.
--------------
I mentioned it. Read the post.
-----
you mentioned it, in passing...where is the post for it?
---------------------
If you want a post for it, why don't YOU make one.
To me, it's comparatively low on the list of Bush infractions, but be my guest, make a post about it.
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2007-07-03 17:55:53 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
http://stuff.ubersite.com/1118947347493318356/1/thanks%20for%20the%20money.jpg
http://www.op.net/~cinder/shirts/kurt_cobain_closeup_photo_closeup_front.jpg
lol
Submitted by domenad (user info) at 2007-07-03 17:50:13 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
"Interesting" - a word that is never applied to posts made by a certain Brad Linzy. Can't you please hurry up and die that violent death you promised?
Submitted by JonnyX (user info) at 2007-07-03 17:50:09 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-07-03 12:26:59 PDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by JonnyX (user info) at 2007-07-03 14:59:41 EDT (#)
Ranking: -1
Why no rant about Scooter Libby?
I love how whenever there is GENUINE conspiracy taking place right in front of you, you ALWAYS choose to ignore it.
--------------
I mentioned it. Read the post.
-----
you mentioned it, in passing...where is the post for it?
Right in front of you, a genuine opportunity to make a post about real governmental shenanigans - a post that people would read and go 'Dang, Brad's right on this one!'
And you blew it.
I seriously think you're a plant for the Bush Administration - you give them a free pass on a lot of stuff.
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2007-07-03 17:45:00 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (View user info) at 2006-03-24 04:48:02 EST
Then one night, late 1995, while tripping acid, I caught a glimpse of it again.
I was falling through the blackness of my mind... All my memories were rewinding back to the source, like a tape that had recorded everything. Memories I didn't even know still existed were now right in front of me. I could hear the silence so loudly it sounded like humming. I thought for sure I was dying, because isn't this what's supposed to happen when you die? Your life flashes before your eyes, and all the people you've ever loved come to say "farewell"?
Later that night, I wrote the following words on a scrap of paper:
this
can you tell me what happens
when every door is closed
when every childhood memory
or dream is gone?
can you tell me what happens
when all we've ever known
is molten away like a liquidy metal broth
to nothing...
to black...
left out wet to wander into the
resonant undertones of that horrific
lateral dimension?
the same reason I want out
is the reason I came in
the infinite temple of conception -
STOP!
Don't open that door...
Hello, Mr. Serpent, it is
only by the pushing
of life's uncertain breeze
that hath brought us now
face to hideous face
in this labyrinth of trails yet blazed
Must you fill me now
with your bubbling death?
I'm not ready to die.
I actually went into it searching for death...wanting to get it over with, but again I was reminded I had something to do I hadn't yet done. I just wanted someone to come to me or something and SPIT IT THE FUCK OUT! What the hell am I supposed to fucking DO? This is bullshit, I thought. And it certainly wasn't fair. What did I owe to anyone? Besides, can't you just get someone else to do whatever the hell it is?
Guess not. I'm still around.
Only recently, with the rise in awareness of the whole global warming issue among other things have I begun to see what I might be here to do. I really don't mind that it's taken me this long to start to figure it out. Sometimes a little more ripening on the vine is a good thing.
To me, when I look at our world leaders, I see those kids who sat next to me in class way back when, and I see their motivations and I see what I think must be their thoughts. I see the obvious crookedness just beneath their veneer of lies and I see the power and money upon which they are propped and I feel guilty seeing my country's place at the top of the evil pyramid scheme wherein the rich trample the poor mercilessly.
I see a world that Jesus Christ, even, would have almost been ashamed of, and it's finally becoming clearer the general direction my inner voice is taking me. I don't know what lies at the end of this trip, but one thing is for sure, I am NOT some psycho, I am NOT some conspiracy theorist, and I'm not going to start shooting innocent people down in the street.
I am a man with a mission, but no target. That's because I suspect the target will most likely be me.
Call it a complex if you like. I call it instinct.
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAH
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2007-07-03 17:39:39 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by Foolproof (user info) at 2007-07-03 16:52:30 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
I read on the internet about a guy that travelled through time ( http://www.johntitor.com/ ).
Since it's on the internet, INSTANT FACT!
Do NOT debate the content of the internet Caul! My banzai cat doesn't think it's funny!
===
i predict that ron paul will accept his defeat and will keep on working for whatever are his political goals.
ETS will call for rigged election with statistic conspiracies and doctored voting machines because he just can't accept that his "Truth" be rejected by the public opinion, which can take years, if not decades, to even consider alternative views.
you see, the problem with brad is that he spent most of his youth pretending he would kill himself, like kurt cobain (it's in his posts) cuz it was "marginal". now that being emo is not that marginal anymore, he is a tormented political martyr that's fighting the system.
so you see while of us were busy getting an education, brad thought he was too cool for that. now brad grew up and realized he was just a tech support deadbeat so he has to have some validation to feel different. so he became a political goth. a few months ago he started reading up on politics and now he thinks he's enlightened because of alex jones. just like the dumb bitch who spent her teenage years being a superifical cunt and who after watching billy o'reilly will mouth off at the dinner table, thinking she's knowledgeable of anything.
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2007-07-03 17:27:34 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-07-03 16:42:36 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Exactly what "demographic" are you talking about?"""
Newflash for the clueless: in every industrialized nations, voting turnout in younger generation is significantly lower (Proof: YOU!) than the elderly generations, who tend to vote more conservatively. not your american version of "conservative", which has to have a face on it whether its ron paul or neo-cons, conservatively as in LESS CHANGES. now being that the largest proportion of our elligible populace is above 40 and less likely not only to have the internet but USE it for something else than paying their bills (your anecdotal experience with your molester of a dad doesn't matter), your ron paul alexa stats do not encompass the whole picture.
i can't be bothered to search for stats for your own dumbass country but i'm sure that with your l33t google skills you can find something that will corroborate that.
sooner or later you're gonna have to grow up and accept that polls and statistics aren't conspiracies. that trying to convince yourself that the internet is a reliable reflection of reality is not gonna get anyone elected or explain the possible defeat of your desired candidate, which you consider God.
i'm quite certain you are the most stupid yet stubborn individual i came across on the internet and beyond.
Submitted by mikethescottish (user info) at 2007-07-03 17:26:46 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
Mildly diverting.
Biden for President.
Submitted by Foolproof (user info) at 2007-07-03 16:52:30 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
I read on the internet about a guy that travelled through time ( http://www.johntitor.com/ ).
Since it's on the internet, INSTANT FACT!
Do NOT debate the content of the internet Caul! My banzai cat doesn't think it's funny!
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-07-03 16:42:36 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2007-07-03 16:15:35 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
stfu filthy, since when is the internet a mirror of reality?
i know your husband brainwashed you in submission but even if Paul is most viewed on YouTube and has great alexa or digg stats and whatever the fuck you want, the internet just doesn't reflect the reality on the ground mostly because of the demographics of its users.
-------------------
My DAD has the internet. He is the last person on earth I ever thought would have it, but now he does.
Exactly what "demographic" are you talking about? I know people of all colors and stripes who use it. Those people who don't probably have grandkids who do, and if they don't see Ron Paul on the debates, they will be exposed to him through them.
Do you not realize that demographics mean nothing if people can and are perfectly willing to shuck the "demographics" by changing their party affiliation to vote in the Republican primary?
Ron Paul is not your prototypical neo-con type Republican, so the demographical models really don't apply here. He is appealing to a lot of people who otherwise would not even vote because they are disgusted with the system and with the fact that all the other candidates sound exactly the same!
Demographics are just like any other statistics...they are used as much to SWAY as to REFLECT, and often, they are just as malleable and undefined as anything else.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-07-03 16:29:28 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2007-07-03 15:28:01 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by FilthyAssistant (user info) at 2007-07-03 15:14:58 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
What? That's like saying anyone who quotes information found in a bookstore has to be wrong. Perhaps you only frequent the myspaces and the livejournals but to discount all the legitimate internet information that is also available via other sources is retarded. What is not rock solid about the archives of the library of congress, or a fortune 500 company's annual report, or the transcript of a president's speech?
---------------------
"legitimate internet information"
hahaha
99% of all ETS links come from prisonplanet and info wars.
-----------------------------
Sure, I link to them from time to time, because they have put a lot of pieces together already and to do otherwise would be a form of plagiarism. But prisonplanet and infowars does a pretty good job of documenting their own sources of information in hyperlinks and citations right in the posts. So if there's anything questionable, you are more than free to look it up for yourself.
Research on the internet is not difficult, that's why we all love it so much. It's pretty easy, with a few searches, to find just about any information you want. You can read original documents in PDF form in most cases.
Also, a website like Alexa has just as much credibility as a Nielsen Report on paper ever had!
The two main sites linked in this post are for Nielsen blog ratings and Alexa website ratings.
What's so "incredible" about that? And what WOULD constitute a "credible" in some of your eyes? Hell, I could post a video of a person admitting guilt to some such crime and still some of you would criticize where the video was hosted and call the material worthless.
What it amounts to is your source standards are severely out of touch with the modern world. Books are becoming obsolete, I'm sorry to say. Databases, records are more and more being digitized, modernized, and put up on the internet. If you want to get an A in a college course or get your story published in a magazine, you might have to cite sources that are more PC than wikipedia, but if you are simply looking for information about when a person lived, what documents were declassified, where they can be found, what was the general historical timeframe, there are literally thousands of internet sites that can and DO suit that purpose.
I'm not trying to impress a professor here. Even if I were, the only place to get the statistics I've cited in this post are THE INTERNET! Which brings me to my next point, the internet is a source because information, news moves faster than the speed of the printing press these days and more times than not, I'm not writing about the historical migrating patterns of sea turtles, I'm talking about things that are happening NOW.
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2007-07-03 16:20:46 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
there's a good side to ETS brainwashing, you're obeidient.
Submitted by FilthyAssistant (user info) at 2007-07-03 16:17:22 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Well ok, since you asked so nicely
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2007-07-03 16:15:35 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
stfu filthy, since when is the internet a mirror of reality?
i know your husband brainwashed you in submission but even if Paul is most viewed on YouTube and has great alexa or digg stats and whatever the fuck you want, the internet just doesn't reflect the reality on the ground mostly because of the demographics of its users.
STFU STFU STFU STFU STFU STFU STFU STFU STFU STFU STFU STFU STFU STFU STFU STFU STFU STFU STFU STFU STFU STFU STFU STFU STFU STFU STFU STFU STFU STFU STFU STFU STFU STFU STFU STFU STFU STFU STFU STFU
Submitted by FilthyAssistant (user info) at 2007-07-03 16:15:27 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by SgtHartman (user info) at 2007-07-03 16:04:07 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
you are right, you havent stated what you believe in this post persay, but the simple fact that you would defend this post and my critisism of it with such brovado is an indicator to me that you agree with whats being said, not to mention your track record when it comes to ETS posts.
===
I disagree with your criticism that the links presented here are fringe because I happen to be familiar with those two companies in a corporate setting. That has no reflection on the post - only on your opinion of what is and is not mainstream.
My "track record" is actually pretty even keeled, that is if you actually read the comments and not just rely on some fabrication cited by someone else. Indo once levelled the same criticism at me and yet when we pulled up all of the ETS 9/11 posts that had been made at the time, I hadn't commented on a single one. That should tell you something right there.
Submitted by SgtHartman (user info) at 2007-07-03 16:04:07 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submitted by FilthyAssistant (user info) at 2007-07-03 15:55:52 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by SgtHartman (user info) at 2007-07-03 15:39:36 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submitted by FilthyAssistant (user info) at 2007-07-03 15:14:58 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by SgtHartman (user info) at 2007-07-03 13:45:31 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
First of all anyone who quotes the vapid shithole of information that can be found on the internet is seriously lacking in any information that is rock solid and fact based. If you could put up a post without adding in a link to some fucking silly obscure website I would be in "shock and awe."
===
What? That's like saying anyone who quotes information found in a bookstore has to be wrong. Perhaps you only frequent the myspaces and the livejournals but to discount all the legitimate internet information that is also available via other sources is retarded. What is not rock solid about the archives of the library of congress, or a fortune 500 company's annual report, or the transcript of a president's speech?
=====
So what you're saying is that you would compare the information from http://www.nielsenbuzzmetrics.com/blogpulse), and http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?q=ronpaul2008.com/&url=ronpaul2008.com/, oh yeah and also http://tinyurl.com/327xm8, http://tinyurl.com/39vasp (and so on) to the library of congress? The only reason that you and ETS hold any credibility to those sites is for the simple fact that they re-affirm your beliefs already. If you can't see that then you truly are blinded by your own desire for your beliefs to be wholeheartedly correct. If thats the case, Im saddened by your plight, fighting against the whole world and trying to change every opinion that opposes your own.
===
Digital50 I can't tell you anything about, but if you aren't aware of the mainstream-ness of alexa and Nielsen Media Research (which is how virtually every major newspaper across the globe charts its marketing success - an industry standard, if you will) then I can't help you. If those sites do not deserve credibility from me, then they do not deserve credibility from anyone - I'll be sure to call the national newspaper group I used to work for and tell them you think Nielsen is too 'fringe'
While I understand your reservations about some of his links, right here you talking about things you do not understand. Case in point - you assume I give them credibility because they 'agree' with what I believe, without me even ever stating what I believe.
===============
you are right, you havent stated what you believe in this post persay, but the simple fact that you would defend this post and my critisism of it with such brovado is an indicator to me that you agree with whats being said, not to mention your track record when it comes to ETS posts.
Submitted by FilthyAssistant (user info) at 2007-07-03 15:55:52 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by SgtHartman (user info) at 2007-07-03 15:39:36 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submitted by FilthyAssistant (user info) at 2007-07-03 15:14:58 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by SgtHartman (user info) at 2007-07-03 13:45:31 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
First of all anyone who quotes the vapid shithole of information that can be found on the internet is seriously lacking in any information that is rock solid and fact based. If you could put up a post without adding in a link to some fucking silly obscure website I would be in "shock and awe."
===
What? That's like saying anyone who quotes information found in a bookstore has to be wrong. Perhaps you only frequent the myspaces and the livejournals but to discount all the legitimate internet information that is also available via other sources is retarded. What is not rock solid about the archives of the library of congress, or a fortune 500 company's annual report, or the transcript of a president's speech?
=====
So what you're saying is that you would compare the information from http://www.nielsenbuzzmetrics.com/blogpulse), and http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?q=ronpaul2008.com/&url=ronpaul2008.com/, oh yeah and also http://tinyurl.com/327xm8, http://tinyurl.com/39vasp (and so on) to the library of congress? The only reason that you and ETS hold any credibility to those sites is for the simple fact that they re-affirm your beliefs already. If you can't see that then you truly are blinded by your own desire for your beliefs to be wholeheartedly correct. If thats the case, Im saddened by your plight, fighting against the whole world and trying to change every opinion that opposes your own.
===
Digital50 I can't tell you anything about, but if you aren't aware of the mainstream-ness of alexa and Nielsen Media Research (which is how virtually every major newspaper across the globe charts its marketing success - an industry standard, if you will) then I can't help you. If those sites do not deserve credibility from me, then they do not deserve credibility from anyone - I'll be sure to call the national newspaper group I used to work for and tell them you think Nielsen is too 'fringe'
While I understand your reservations about some of his links, right here you talking about things you do not understand. Case in point - you assume I give them credibility because they 'agree' with what I believe, without me even ever stating what I believe.
Submitted by SgtHartman (user info) at 2007-07-03 15:39:36 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submitted by FilthyAssistant (user info) at 2007-07-03 15:14:58 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by SgtHartman (user info) at 2007-07-03 13:45:31 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
First of all anyone who quotes the vapid shithole of information that can be found on the internet is seriously lacking in any information that is rock solid and fact based. If you could put up a post without adding in a link to some fucking silly obscure website I would be in "shock and awe."
===
What? That's like saying anyone who quotes information found in a bookstore has to be wrong. Perhaps you only frequent the myspaces and the livejournals but to discount all the legitimate internet information that is also available via other sources is retarded. What is not rock solid about the archives of the library of congress, or a fortune 500 company's annual report, or the transcript of a president's speech?
=====
So what you're saying is that you would compare the information from http://www.nielsenbuzzmetrics.com/blogpulse), and http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?q=ronpaul2008.com/&url=ronpaul2008.com/, oh yeah and also http://tinyurl.com/327xm8, http://tinyurl.com/39vasp (and so on) to the library of congress? The only reason that you and ETS hold any credibility to those sites is for the simple fact that they re-affirm your beliefs already. If you can't see that then you truly are blinded by your own desire for your beliefs to be wholeheartedly correct. If thats the case, Im saddened by your plight, fighting against the whole world and trying to change every opinion that opposes your own.
Submitted by livEvil (user info) at 2007-07-03 15:38:05 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by SgtHartman (user info) at 2007-07-03 13:45:31 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by PokeyMen (user info) at 2007-07-03 10:29:30 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
statistics are like Bikinis.
What they reveal is interesting but what they conceal is much more relevant.
To paraphrase.
==========================================
Everytime you post something on here I can see why people get so pissed off at you. I'm an easy going guy, I dont get pissed too often so I would never get mad at some internet garbage, but I can see how people would get so pissed off at someone that is as bullheaded as you are ETS. First of all anyone who quotes the vapid shithole of information that can be found on the internet is seriously lacking in any information that is rock solid and fact based. If you could put up a post without adding in a link to some fucking silly obscure website I would be in "shock and awe." Unfortunately in my humble opinion the democrats are going to GIVE away this upcoming election by running a woman and a black man for office as their main candidates. Now in no way am I sexist or racist but I am not a good representation of the rest of the nation. Believe me most middle aged white men (the majority of voters in America) do not want their wife running the country! and they sure as hell aren't ready for a black man to be running the nation, when alot of them aren't even ready for one to be their next door neighbor. I dont care how "tiger-woodsesque" he may be. Im sick and tired of hearing the argument that Hillary would be good fof the spot because of how well she's doing in NYC. I hate to inform all you New Yorkers out there but the world is not NYC, and NYC is probobly the most awful place to pick if you wanted a good cross section of the majority opinion in this nation. I know people from NY like to think that its the center of the world, but its not. In conclusion, we will have 4 more years of Republican Dictatorship because my Demicratic party has become so liberal as to think that the nation is ready for a woman and a black man to be president. Stupid fucks, see you all at the end of the world.
----------------
This could've been a post all by itself.
Very well stated.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2007-07-03 15:28:01 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by FilthyAssistant (user info) at 2007-07-03 15:14:58 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
What? That's like saying anyone who quotes information found in a bookstore has to be wrong. Perhaps you only frequent the myspaces and the livejournals but to discount all the legitimate internet information that is also available via other sources is retarded. What is not rock solid about the archives of the library of congress, or a fortune 500 company's annual report, or the transcript of a president's speech?
---------------------
"legitimate internet information"
hahaha
99% of all ETS links come from prisonplanet and info wars.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-07-03 15:26:59 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by JonnyX (user info) at 2007-07-03 14:59:41 EDT (#)
Ranking: -1
Why no rant about Scooter Libby?
I love how whenever there is GENUINE conspiracy taking place right in front of you, you ALWAYS choose to ignore it.
--------------
I mentioned it. Read the post.
Submitted by FilthyAssistant (user info) at 2007-07-03 15:14:58 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by SgtHartman (user info) at 2007-07-03 13:45:31 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
First of all anyone who quotes the vapid shithole of information that can be found on the internet is seriously lacking in any information that is rock solid and fact based. If you could put up a post without adding in a link to some fucking silly obscure website I would be in "shock and awe."
===
What? That's like saying anyone who quotes information found in a bookstore has to be wrong. Perhaps you only frequent the myspaces and the livejournals but to discount all the legitimate internet information that is also available via other sources is retarded. What is not rock solid about the archives of the library of congress, or a fortune 500 company's annual report, or the transcript of a president's speech?
Submitted by JonnyX (user info) at 2007-07-03 14:59:41 EDT (#)
Ranking: -1
Submitted by HadToBeDone (user info) at 2007-07-03 05:09:47 PDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-07-03 07:38:03 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
eating shit, I stated my reasons why that law was not valid and a direct contradiction of the constitution, thus making the law null and void. No shit-eating necessary. Besides, it was a figure of speech to being with, akin to eating one's hat, so even if I wasn't right, which I am, you'd still see no shit eating, and you'd still bitch about it redundantly like a little girl with carnival vertigo.
-----
Income tax is a constitutional amendment. As it does not specify personal or corporate anywhere within said amendment, it can't be unconstitutional.
----
Why no rant about Scooter Libby?
I love how whenever there is GENUINE conspiracy taking place right in front of you, you ALWAYS choose to ignore it.
Submitted by SgtHartman (user info) at 2007-07-03 13:45:31 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by PokeyMen (user info) at 2007-07-03 10:29:30 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
statistics are like Bikinis.
What they reveal is interesting but what they conceal is much more relevant.
To paraphrase.
==========================================
Everytime you post something on here I can see why people get so pissed off at you. I'm an easy going guy, I dont get pissed too often so I would never get mad at some internet garbage, but I can see how people would get so pissed off at someone that is as bullheaded as you are ETS. First of all anyone who quotes the vapid shithole of information that can be found on the internet is seriously lacking in any information that is rock solid and fact based. If you could put up a post without adding in a link to some fucking silly obscure website I would be in "shock and awe." Unfortunately in my humble opinion the democrats are going to GIVE away this upcoming election by running a woman and a black man for office as their main candidates. Now in no way am I sexist or racist but I am not a good representation of the rest of the nation. Believe me most middle aged white men (the majority of voters in America) do not want their wife running the country! and they sure as hell aren't ready for a black man to be running the nation, when alot of them aren't even ready for one to be their next door neighbor. I dont care how "tiger-woodsesque" he may be. Im sick and tired of hearing the argument that Hillary would be good fof the spot because of how well she's doing in NYC. I hate to inform all you New Yorkers out there but the world is not NYC, and NYC is probobly the most awful place to pick if you wanted a good cross section of the majority opinion in this nation. I know people from NY like to think that its the center of the world, but its not. In conclusion, we will have 4 more years of Republican Dictatorship because my Demicratic party has become so liberal as to think that the nation is ready for a woman and a black man to be president. Stupid fucks, see you all at the end of the world.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2007-07-03 12:54:10 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by BLITZKREIG_BOB (user info) at 2007-07-03 12:37:37 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Right now, it looks like it may be Gore vs. Thompson in '08. Paul would make an interesting running mate.
--------------
Not sure if this a joke or one of the most ignorant political comments I have ever read.
Submitted by BLITZKREIG_BOB (user info) at 2007-07-03 12:37:37 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Right now, it looks like it may be Gore vs. Thompson in '08. Paul would make an interesting running mate.
Submitted by inion_de_trua (user info) at 2007-07-03 11:23:57 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-07-03 05:05:07 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Not sure what you're talking about, Scott. Besides the fact that he served in the Air National Guard
------
all i could think was "bush"
Submitted by Bushy (user info) at 2007-07-03 11:07:58 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
If a main argument of yours is that statistics can be misleading, i'd reckon that negates you being able to use them in any way to support your argument. That leaves you a bit up shit creek really.
oh, and if you completed a time series analysis over the entire campaign period i'd reckon this recent spike in RP activity would probably be marked as interesting, but in the end an abberation.
unlike this post, which should be marked as an abortion.
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2007-07-03 10:45:19 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2007-07-03 08:45:42 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-07-03 07:38:03 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
taxes, I've explained
peace corp, never said anything about
living off the grid, would like to but it's not feasible and it's not where I could make a difference
leaving the country, I love my country. I'm not leaving it till it gets so bad there's no going back, which will be soon enough at this rate.
---------------------
You didn't explain taxes. You said you were ready to go to jail or even be killed for not paying your taxes, but your excuse is that filthy couldn't come to the US if you didn't. Tell me smart man would you be able to spend time with filthy if you were in jail or dead? That is a complete cop out and the minute the IRS dragged you to court you would have paid up in full.
===
even ron paul said in an interview with cavuto that even though he agrees with civil disobedience, people must be ready to live with the consequences which can include jail time.
brad is a fucking pussy who talks a lot of shit but who doesn't do anything. he fucking voted at 30 years old for fuck's sake and acted as if he was a hero heading a cavalery charge.
and how is living "off the grid" not feasible in the US climate...i wonder how all these people survived before iPods, eh?
i can't wait for him to post a video eating his own shit.
Submitted by kaos-king (user info) at 2007-07-03 10:43:42 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Hey ETS and Indo...
You both owe Habeeb a beatdown for what he did.
http://www.ubersite.com/m/109801
_____________________
Oh, and just an observation - I was talking to a young Air Force vet yesterday... he considers himself a conservative but didn't know who Ron Paul was. All he could do was bad mouth Hillary. I asked him who he liked then for the nomination and he just stared at me. I found this very... telling.
Submitted by Adamdidit2u (user info) at 2007-07-03 10:33:21 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Imo copypasta this to some of my friends. Thanks for doing the research
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2007-07-03 10:32:01 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
such a great analysis
Submitted by PokeyMen (user info) at 2007-07-03 10:29:30 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
statistics are like Bikinis.
What they reveal is interesting but what they conceal is much more relevant.
To paraphrase.
Submitted by CaptainThorns (user info) at 2007-07-03 08:47:26 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Vote for Orgasmatron in '08.
He'll put the "O" in the Oval Office.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2007-07-03 08:45:42 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-07-03 07:38:03 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
taxes, I've explained
peace corp, never said anything about
living off the grid, would like to but it's not feasible and it's not where I could make a difference
leaving the country, I love my country. I'm not leaving it till it gets so bad there's no going back, which will be soon enough at this rate.
---------------------
You didn't explain taxes. You said you were ready to go to jail or even be killed for not paying your taxes, but your excuse is that filthy couldn't come to the US if you didn't. Tell me smart man would you be able to spend time with filthy if you were in jail or dead? That is a complete cop out and the minute the IRS dragged you to court you would have paid up in full.
You have mentioned thinking about joining the peace corp. I gave you a link to it back when you were less crazy. You gave some BS excuse of not having the education required, yet, and were considering it. but of course there would be no computer there for you to work on your revolution, so I am guessing you haven't made too much progress on that plan.
The same goes for living off the grid. Wouldn't not paying for polluting energy make a difference? Wouldn't not paying taxes on public utilities take money away from the govt you hate? It isn't a huge deal but if you believed in what you say you would try it.
It is not even worth going into how worthless your excuse for the eat shit thing is because everyone here has already commented on how you are wrong.
Submitted by HadToBeDone (user info) at 2007-07-03 08:09:47 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-07-03 07:38:03 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
eating shit, I stated my reasons why that law was not valid and a direct contradiction of the constitution, thus making the law null and void. No shit-eating necessary. Besides, it was a figure of speech to being with, akin to eating one's hat, so even if I wasn't right, which I am, you'd still see no shit eating, and you'd still bitch about it redundantly like a little girl with carnival vertigo.
-----
Income tax is a constitutional amendment. As it does not specify personal or corporate anywhere within said amendment, it can't be unconstitutional.
I learned that in 6th grade.
I like how you pick an obscure, no chance in hell candidate just so you can feel oppressed when he loses. The first time you vote.
Submitted by thorpe (user info) at 2007-07-03 07:53:27 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Generally if you are using a figure of speech, you don't say you will "post a video" of it.
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2007-07-03 07:50:59 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
you could always try answering my questions :)
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2007-07-03 07:50:36 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
little boy? I'm not entirely sure how old you are, but I reckon I'm definitely your senior
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-07-03 07:48:29 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2007-07-03 07:40:29 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
only child or something?
---------------------
Stop trying to play Freud, little boy. You're not even smart enough to play Corky.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-07-03 07:47:09 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Foolproof (user info) at 2007-07-03 07:25:11 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
I internet site traffic constitutes political prowess, then www.hotyoungteenwhores.com is surely the next President.
---------------------
It's not so much a question of whether people enjoy porn more than they do politics, that's not debatable. Only an idiot would even trying to make that kind of comparison because it's senseless. That fractured logic makes about the same amount of sense as saying that the Red Cross gets more donations per annum than Hillary Clinton, therefore the Red Cross should run for president.
Look at the comparisons between the candidates. Look at the numbers that tell you how many people use the internet in this country. Put 2 and 2 together and, OH! They make 4!
The point is, Ron Paul has the second greatest reach of any candidate in the running, be they Democrat or Republican, and considering he's going up against people with tens, hundreds of millions of dollars, that's an incredible feat. And it's one that is difficult to write off, like an online poll or a text poll.
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2007-07-03 07:40:29 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
only child or something?
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-07-03 07:38:03 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Think what you want about Ron Paul or his supporters, I really don't give a shit. I'm not writing this stuff for you, indo. Have you not figured that out yet?
As for the rest of your review that I shouldn't even respond to but will...
taxes, I've explained
peace corp, never said anything about
living off the grid, would like to but it's not feasible and it's not where I could make a difference
leaving the country, I love my country. I'm not leaving it till it gets so bad there's no going back, which will be soon enough at this rate.
leaving ubersite, said I'd leave. Changed my mind. Bitch about it all you like. Don't really care. You'll get your wish soon enough, but it won't be because of anything you say or do.
eating shit, I stated my reasons why that law was not valid and a direct contradiction of the constitution, thus making the law null and void. No shit-eating necessary. Besides, it was a figure of speech to being with, akin to eating one's hat, so even if I wasn't right, which I am, you'd still see no shit eating, and you'd still bitch about it redundantly like a little girl with carnival vertigo.
Submitted by Foolproof (user info) at 2007-07-03 07:25:11 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
I internet site traffic constitutes political prowess, then www.hotyoungteenwhores.com is surely the next President.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2007-07-03 07:18:37 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Well it looks like Ron Paul has a good shot to win if the election were to be decided with on-line polls dominated by losers who do nothing but watch google videos about how jew bankers rule the world, blog about how only Ron will save them, and spend all their time on-line because they fail at life.
But last time I checked that wasn't the case.
Tell me, when the election gets more heated are you going to make another poorly though out claim and promise to do something you don't have the balls to follow through with when it is inevitably wrong?
taxes, peace corp, living off the grid, leaving the country, leaving ubersite, eating shit, etc...
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2007-07-03 07:15:49 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
out of interest, how was your childhood?
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2007-07-03 07:06:10 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
don't be a tit, I'm stuck on this computer doing some boring as fuck job that nevertheless needs to be done, and you can stop thinking of yourself as a celebrity right now
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-07-03 07:03:35 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Whatever Woody.
That string of reviews you just posted reminds me of some stalker letter that a celebrity might receive just before they are brutally attacked in the street outside their home one autumn evening.
Seriously, dude, get over it. Unplug the computer and do something else. This is even more unhealthy for you than it is for me apparently.
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2007-07-03 06:42:55 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
even before you started all this insane stuff you were so incredibly insecure, always putting down everything, always on the defensive. I don't know what happened to you, maybe it wasn't anything much, but whatever it was you really need to get over it.
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2007-07-03 06:35:34 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
and as for your use of 'as usual' I'll remind you that I debated your points in a serious manner for far longer than anyone else, but eventually gave up when I accepted that you're either
- intent on keeping this personality/bad joke going indefinitely,
or
- a moronic insane loser with delusions of grandeur
either way, now I'm just here to tell you to fuck off/point and laugh alternately.
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2007-07-03 06:28:12 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
my rating of the post itself was a +1, though that was generous as 'worth reading' would have been far more accurate, adjusted -2 for the continued absence of a shit eating video, and in later reviews further reduced due to your insane reviews.
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2007-07-03 06:26:41 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
for gods sake can't you admit you're wrong ever?
it's so mad for a man who's wrong so very often
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-07-03 06:26:28 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Woody, do you have anything to say about the post itself, or are you just here to be a general dipshit as usual?
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-07-03 06:24:40 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2007-07-03 05:41:55 EDT (#)
Ranking: -1
Actually we, or I, don't hear anything bad over here about him.....
-------------------
And you don't hear much about him at all, do you? Which is, again, exactly what I said.
"You won't hear much about him that isn't bad." Meaning, if you don't hear bad things about him, you're not going to hear much good about him either.
It was a prediction of the future, dumbass. The presidential race has a long way to go.
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2007-07-03 06:24:18 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
can you explain it filthy?
Submitted by FilthyAssistant (user info) at 2007-07-03 06:14:35 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
I don't know about that whole "women will vote for women" thing scott - sounds like bullshit to me. I started googling some Thatcher stats but got sidetracked by this gem: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0607/4528.html
I got a wry smirk out of this comment "Lady Thatcher is still highly regarded [...] in the UK"
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2007-07-03 06:12:09 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Explain it then bitch.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-07-03 05:05:07 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Not sure what you're talking about, Scott. Besides the fact that he served in the Air National Guard and the U.S.A.F. as a flight surgeon, which in its own way IS being a war hero, the point is, the man focuses on the Constitution and he tells the truth about America's foreign and domestic policies, even if it's what some people do not want to hear - even if his own party's talking points are largely opposed to what he says. This is what he does best, and that is why he's so popular.
You're not going to hear much about him over there that isn't negative, I can almost guarantee that
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-07-03 05:59:54 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2007-07-03 05:41:55 EDT (#)
Ranking: -1
Actually we, or I, don't hear anything bad over here about him.....
--------------------
That's what I just fucking said, you unbelievable moron.
My god, I am so completely sick of having to explain everything to people like you who just can't fucking read... It gets really old.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2007-07-03 06:02:48 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
you what?
"You're not going to hear much about him over there that isn't negative"
English mudafuker!
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-07-03 05:59:54 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2007-07-03 05:41:55 EDT (#)
Ranking: -1
Actually we, or I, don't hear anything bad over here about him.....
--------------------
That's what I just fucking said, you unbelievable moron.
My god, I am so completely sick of having to explain everything to people like you who just can't fucking read... It gets really old.
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2007-07-03 05:51:41 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
by the by, I've had a few people tell me they will switch to Republican if Hilary gets the Dem nom, purely because they don't think that a woman should be president...and all of the people who've said this are female, so it may not be quite as big a bonus as you'd think, though I'm sure it'll help her overall.
Submitted by Scott_James (user info) at 2007-07-03 05:49:09 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-07-03 05:05:07 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Not sure what you're talking about, Scott. Besides the fact that he served in the Air National Guard and the U.S.A.F. as a flight surgeon, which in its own way IS being a war hero, the point is, the man focuses on the Constitution and he tells the truth about America's foreign and domestic policies, even if it's what some people do not want to hear - even if his own party's talking points are largely opposed to what he says. This is what he does best, and that is why he's so popular.
You're not going to hear much about him over there that isn't negative, I can almost guarantee that. It's difficult to judge the complexities of American politics through the lens of your media, which is mainly a thinly veiled regurgitation of MSM coverage over here. As much as most Brits would deny it, your media is just as bad as ours. I'd even go so far to say that your media is even more dangerous since it puts up a much better front of non-bias.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Ah yes, I know he was a war veteran, but he is not portrayed as a war 'hero', unlike, for instance, John Kerry or John McCain. I think it's admirable that he does not make political hay out of his military service but ultimately it will be the subject of intense scrutiny. The fact that he is not black will hurt if he goes up against Obama and the fact that he is not a woman will destroy him if he goes up against Hilary. Both of these contenders have a particular clique (because let's face it - that's what they are) who they can appeal to for votes, regardless of what they selling.
Of course, Ron Paul talks a good game and - shock of horrors - seems to be embued with integrity (He has a fairly consistent voting record on key issues) but all that will count for nowt if he can't convince the blacks, the women, and the black women that he will be a better leader than Obama or Hilary.
Our media, of course, is a myriad of skullduggery and subterfuge and apart from US foreign policy disasters, American politics rarely gets much coverage unless there is an extented spotlight on something in the news cycle - recently, for example, Fred Thompson's emergence as a front-runner for the candidacy was published in The Independent - so I'm not that surprised. Politics is power. Nothing more.
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2007-07-03 05:43:32 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
"If you've ever seen the documentary "Hacking Democracy", you know how easy it might be for a candidate or party to win with the electronic voting machines. This campaigning is really all just carefully coordinated pageantry designed to make the pre-determined outcome look legit. It's cover, that's it. The news stories and "scientific polls" are just there to throw people into believing it when Hillary Clinton becomes our next president, even when most people you'll ever talk to hate the bitch with a passion. "Well, all the polls said this is how it would go, so it must be legit."
And people act like that's far-fetched to believe that. Like it's some kind of 'conspiracy theory' to think that some very powerful people, more powerful than a mere president, are putting this all together to serve their own interests."
stop being such a wanker for fucks sake.
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2007-07-03 05:41:55 EDT (#)
Ranking: -1
Actually we, or I, don't hear anything bad over here about him.....in fact I don't hear anything at all apart from from friends in the usa.
Which is mostly positive...
you forgot to link the video of you eating your own shit by the way.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-07-03 05:26:32 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Notice that Barack Obama seems to be popular with foreigners. This is evidenced by his website's 1st place 19,000+ overall Alexa ranking, and his 3rd place 3,600+ ranking in America.
This tells me, simply, that he's getting a lot of play in the foreign press. The same might be said of Hillary.
One should also take note of the fact that, although the article that I referenced in the first paragraph of the post was written on July 2, they had to quote numbers from APRIL to get Barack Obama's site to be "the most viewed".
"Meanwhile, Barack Obama's Website generated the greatest number of unique visitors of any candidate Website in April, according to Nielsen//NetRatings."
That was BEFORE the first GOP MSNBC debate on May 7 in which Ron Paul started getting his massive following.
Do you see how these numbers can be rigged?
"Internet buzz" is nothing more than the sheer number of references to a particular candidate on the "top 40 blogs", good or bad. They really say nothing about someone's popularity, which is how much they are known AND liked. If I had $100 million like Hillary and Obama are going to have with all their special interest and Hollywood money, I'd be pretty well known too. I'm pretty sure I could put a dent in Nielsen's blogpulse ratings myself, even if I had to BUY news stories.
But that's not what this is about.
If you've ever seen the documentary "Hacking Democracy", you know how easy it might be for a candidate or party to win with the electronic voting machines. This campaigning is really all just carefully coordinated pageantry designed to make the pre-determined outcome look legit. It's cover, that's it. The news stories and "scientific polls" are just there to throw people into believing it when Hillary Clinton becomes our next president, even when most people you'll ever talk to hate the bitch with a passion. "Well, all the polls said this is how it would go, so it must be legit."
And people act like that's far-fetched to believe that. Like it's some kind of 'conspiracy theory' to think that some very powerful people, more powerful than a mere president, are putting this all together to serve their own interests.
To me, it's an excuse to remain unthinking and lazy in the face of our country being overrun by racketeers, thugs, thieves, and murderers.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-07-03 05:05:07 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Not sure what you're talking about, Scott. Besides the fact that he served in the Air National Guard and the U.S.A.F. as a flight surgeon, which in its own way IS being a war hero, the point is, the man focuses on the Constitution and he tells the truth about America's foreign and domestic policies, even if it's what some people do not want to hear - even if his own party's talking points are largely opposed to what he says. This is what he does best, and that is why he's so popular.
You're not going to hear much about him over there that isn't negative, I can almost guarantee that. It's difficult to judge the complexities of American politics through the lens of your media, which is mainly a thinly veiled regurgitation of MSM coverage over here. As much as most Brits would deny it, your media is just as bad as ours. I'd even go so far to say that your media is even more dangerous since it puts up a much better front of non-bias.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-07-03 04:55:11 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
That last link in the post should have been this one: http://tinyurl.com/24767g
It shows a graphical comparison between Ron Paul and Romney, Giuliani, and McCain.
Submitted by Scott_James (user info) at 2007-07-03 04:48:22 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Curious. Maybe Ron Paul needs a better profile. He's not black, he's not a woman, and he is not a war hero. Three things that are going to count against him in the next year. Maybe he should focus on what he's good at rather than try and compete in areas he has no hope of winning.
Submitted by EmissionImpossible (user info) at 2007-07-03 04:45:56 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
YAY!!!!!!!!!!!!