Over a hundred people voted for Ron Paul over Hillary Clinton, and not one has shown their face!

[LoZoccolo]

What is the matter, don't you want everyone to know that you are ultra right-wing and support some guy who wants to dismantle much of the federal government and is getting support from Stormfront, probably for his racist remarks? And believes in conspiracy theories?

What are you, chicken? Bawk bawk bawk bawk bawk bawk bawk bawk CHICKEN!

[Bonobo]

1. Maybe there are just 100 people that hate you? (Not me, I swear!)

[HughBeaumont]

9. LOL!

:rofl:

[Name removed]

2. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[tekisui]

3. I will stand up, and proudly say that I

will never entertain the idea of voting for that misogynist bigot.

[bmbmd]

23. Which one?

nt

[Tektonik]

44. good one

:applause:

[ShortnFiery]

46. ...

oh ... SNAP! :rofl:

[Naturyl]

4. Over 100 votes for Ron paul on DU is apalling. n/t

[Clark2008]

52. What's more appalling?

That 100 more DUers would vote for Ron Paul over HRC or that HRC's record has so disgusted the left that 100 more would consider voting for Paul over her?

NOTE: I did not vote in that poll and would not pick Paul over Clinton because of his abortion position, but I do understand why so many on the left and holding their noses regarding Clinton's coronation.

[Naturyl]

72. I understand that, I really do. But RON PAUL?!

Not even in protest. No, not even in protest, sir.

[bunkerbuster1]

5. Not sure which DU poll you're referring to, but--no surprise to me.

I know of one person from another forum who'd been a straight-up racist / anti-semite wad of fuck who'd dropped out, only to pop back in and claim that he found DU to be the only place where he wanted to discuss politics.

I have to admit, I was astonished at the time, when he named DU as his favorite hangout.

Yeah, this guy hates Bush, and Republicans (generally), a bit more than he hates liberals, but only a bit. Far as I know he still considers black folks sub-human and Jews to be running the world.

And he's probably reading this right now. Well, fuck you, dude.

Doesn't surprise that out of the thousand(s?) of regular posters, one-tenth would be attracted to a Ron Paul. Don't imagine all or even necessarily most consider themselves especially racist, but Ron Paul is racist-friendly. And he's certainly misogynist-friendly.

Oh, one other thing. Few months back, I posted a message positing the theory that referring to human beings as "illegals" (noun form) was inherently racist. I figured I'd get about 99% support on that, but it was more like 80/20 or so. Some of the detractors just thought I was being a grammar-police fuss-pot, but some were pretty obviously hatin' on the brown folk.

Just sayin'.

[DeepModem Mom]

6. Ron Paul fanatics may register at any number of sites, just to use those sites...

for Paul's benefit. Look at YouTube. In the News&Politics section, in highest rated, favorite, etc., sometimes they crowd out almost everything else. Looking for Olbermann, or other candidates? Wade through Ron Paul. I don't know how many videos we miss easy access to because every page is covered with Paul.

They are relentless. At least one piece I read considers them cultlike. I'm afraid I see the next Nader, followed lemming-like by college kids who think they're both pure in politics, and so cool.

[TwilightGardener]

19. Salon is the same way--if a political story is run that doesn't mention Paul, the

letters will all be people demanding why. He's just not at more than 5% in the polls, that's why! His cult following is totally obnoxious, and they've infiltrated most online media.

[DeepModem Mom]

25. Thanks, wienerdoggie -- that's really interesting! I believe you are right --

they've infiltrated online media -- and may well be voting in polls here!

And just to add, I think on-air folks are getting it. Somehow, I heard Joe Scarborough mention his name on MSNBC last night, and then he said -- "just kidding, Ron Paul people, don't e-mail me!!!"

[rAVES]

71. So.. on DU you cant vote on Polls that where started before your join date..

so they lie in wait for these polls then pounce?

seriously, you're suggesting that?

[NYVet]

7. Can you link to this post you are referring to? NT

[dionysus]

8. um, did it not occur to you that they're most likely trolls?

[LoZoccolo]

10. Forty percent?

I doubt that.

[dionysus]

14. hmm, DU, 110,000 registered users....

107 votes for Paul...

so approx 1/1000 th of DUers voted for Ron Paul... must be those damn libruls you despise so much.

And you do realize, um, that liberals a left wing, right? and ron paul is a RW nutter.. so...

oh never mind, you'll still pretend you don't get it...

[LoZoccolo]

15. Only about 4000 people post here in a week.

If you take some random numbers and plug them into the user ID field of the URL for the profiles you'll see a surprising number of people do not even stay to make a hundred posts.

But it was still forty percent of the respondents.

[dionysus]

16. still, to imagine 107 trolls on a board this size is no stretch

liberals would never vote for paul because he's a rw'er, it's just that simple

[txaslftist]

20. I was surprised at how many of us loyal Democrats didn't bother with the poll.

We DU other polls but don't bother with our own?

[dionysus]

24. i just think its a ridiculous poll...

we're dems here, noone here except the trolls would vote for the guy, unless some did so just to toy with loz...

[JeffR]

30. BINGO

but it's not worth it if it doesn't get a rise out of him.

[Capn Sunshine]

21. less than a thousand post actively-

we couldn't even break 700 votes in Bobthedrummers' presidential poll.

[RebelSansCause]

38. we did indeed reach and surpass 1000

in less than a week. longer than the 2 days we had hoped for, but we got there.

[HughBeaumont]

11. Here's reason number . .. well, ONLY, not to vote for him:

This was on a flyer that his people passed out at a parade I went to.

Yeah, THAT's going to get me to vote for you: a photo of Paul with The King Of All Middle Class Destruction.

Not to mention he's anti-choice and anti-taxing the wealthy, which is painfully short sighted.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

12. Is He A Libertarian Or A Federalist?

There's a huge difference...

Does he believe that pornography, prostitution, and drugs should be legal or only that they be decided at the state level? If believes the latter his libertarianism isn't even helpful to "true" libertetians...

[Renew Deal]

13. Who are the other three people in that picture?

Just wondering.

[Forkboy]

17. I'm guessing you just gave the people who voted for Paul what they wanted.

[TSIAS]

28. Do you notice a theme

Some DLC'er posts a poll that is obviously intended to inflame. People vote for Paul out of spite for the most part, and then the DLC'er comes back and cites a poll that has almost no validity.

If anybody thinks a DU poll has any worth at all, they're crazy.

And on edit, I, like some other people, simply like to irritate people for fun.

[txaslftist]

18. They should fess up and take being banned like honest people.

[LoZoccolo]

22. As I like to say: accept your beating. n/t

[Naturyl]

27. Don't hold your breath

The types who voted for Paul are the sorts who secretly hate Mexicans, or hate welfare recipients, or hate gays, or hate blacks, etc, etc. They know very well that revealing themselves will get them put out.

[txaslftist]

56. I completely agree. That whole "hope for America"... who do they think

they're fooling?

They should change it to "hate for (certain) Americans"

[Tektonik]

45. Maybe this site isn't for you

:shrug:

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[JeffR]

29. Wow, I'm hurt to be forgotten like this

I seem to recall saying in that thread that I voted for Paul, and why I did. Or maybe that was some other equally meaningless poll. It's hard to keep track around here these days...

[JVS]

35. yup

[JVS]

31. They were probably Hillary supporters who want to accuse others of disloyalty

[cuke]

32. They're tied up waiting on the line to apologize for believing the HRC left no tip story

I'm sure they'll be along any minute now

:rofl:

[rufus dog]

33. I can honestly say...

it wasn't me, if it was Kucich or Obama or Dodd or Biden or Gore or Carter or Clark or Dean or... you get the point... my hand would have gone up.

[JVS]

34. And actually, I believe that in that thread there were one or two people who showed their faces...

and explained either that they were single issue voters wrt the war, or gave other reasons

[last_texas_dem]

36. I'd be willing to bet that many of those votes were not meant seriously

I voted for Clinton (and I think I made a comment in the thread saying thus), but I think there's a good chance that a number of DUers voted for Paul just because they aren't that big of fans of either candidate, thought the poll was flamebait, and were trying to piss off some of the folks (and I'm not saying you're one of them) who are already acting as if Clinton has been determined to be the Democratic candidate and that no one should be allowed to be critical of her.

[madfloridian]

37. Did you say Ron Paul? Well....read about his views.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/1630

[Reno.Muse]

39. I am a Dem and not a troll

but I'd have to admit, I'd lean toward Ron Paul at this point if the only competition was Clinton-Redux. I hate reruns on TV and I hate reruns of bull crap in politics. I am sorry if I offend anyone who wants the good old "happy days" music to ring out loud with Ma and Pa Clinton at the helm.

[cuke]

40. If you hate re-runs

why are you speaking well of the man who will re-run Jim Crow?

[LeftishBrit]

41. Reruns of bull crap in politics?

Considering that Ron Paul avowedly wants to go back to the days before FDR, I should say he would bring plenty of reruns of that substance! Rerun of Herbert Hoover?

[txaslftist]

63. You might be interested in a different take on this topic.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/reading-dollar-crisis.html

Apparently the libertarians, using their "revisionist history" are actually blaming the Great Depression on Herbert Hoover for TOO MUCH intervention in the markets...

Wackos.

[Naturyl]

73. I told you before, I'm onto you, txaslftist.

You are a Ron Paul supporter and/or a libertarian. I'm a little dense at times, but not too dense to pick up on this sort of approach. You're always around to highlight just how crazy Ron Paul or the libertarians are in a subtly satirical way that actually encourages people to consider Ron Paul's perspective. You also have a habit of always leaving links directly to libertarian sites while talking about how crazy they are...

I've got to give you credit, you're really quite good at what you've been doing in these Ron Paul threads. And having 1000+ posts means you've gone undetected a long time. Hats off to your skill, and I suspect that hardly anyone else will notice.

The denial now, please. It wouldn't be complete without your denial, and I'm sure it will be a work of art. :)

[txaslftist]

76. Obviously I'd be wasting my time denying your paranoid take..

I am surprised, though, given your penchant for finding "hidden thoughts" and "conspiracies" behind every post of mine, that you aren't a Ron Paul supporter.

Don't they gather together all of the "truthers" and "CIA killed JFK" and "PNAC is Controlling America" and "Skull and Bones is out to get us" conspiracy people? It seems like, with your suspicious nature, you'd fit right in.

As for the 1000+ posts, I've been posting at DU since before the 2004 election; heck, I think I was here even before 2002. I've even been quoted on other websites: http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum/showthread.php?t=53399 (although not kindly).

Ed Schultz has even posted something I once wrote:

http://edschultz.invisionzone.com/lofiversion/index.php/t3200.html

In other words, I've been around a long time, and not particularly "evading detection".

Do I have an agenda beyond the exposure of Ron Paul supporters and the cleansing of the Democratic Party? That's for you to decide, and obviously you've made up your mind.

[DrFunkenstein]

42. Maybe The Poll Was Symbolic and They Wanted to Register Their Antipathy

To Hillary Clinton. Honestly, the whole faux indignation thing around here is really boring. That's the job of conservative hacks.

[cuke]

43. Not much of a defense

that so many DUers are so petty

[DrFunkenstein]

49. I Wasn't Defending Them. Just Trying To Cut The BS.

I can't imagine that many people voting that way with actual sincerity. But the real issue here seems to be the "outrage" that is so easily whipped up for the sake of a cheap advantage on a discussion website.

I used to bitch about how ridiculous the media coverage of campaigns was normally, but maybe it's just an American thing in general. There has to be some cultural or psychological reason for the frequency with which we pretend to be indignated.

[cuke]

67. I don't see any outrage in the OP, faux or real

I see the OP taunting the posters who voted for RP. However, lately I have seen an increase of faux outrage at faux outrage and it tends to be very selective. For some, they get outraged when Obama doesn't show up to vote on Mukasey but not when Clinton doesn't show. For others, they get outraged when Clinton doesn't tip and then even more outraged when they find out she did tip.

Basically this whole "faux outrage" meme is turning into an excuse for some posters to dismiss what others are saying by falsely portraying a poster as having an extreme emotional reaction (ie outrage) instead of actually addressing the point. In this thread, you portray the OP (and possibly other posters), who seems to be having fun at other's expense, as being outraged. If anything, your outrage at the non-existent outrage is what is faux here, not the OP

I don't see ANY outrage. Can you point out where the outrage is in this thread?

[cuke]

70. And, after looking at the 1st page of GDP

I see that some people are still expressing faux outrage over Hillary's not leaving a tip even though the Clinton campaign has produced a receipt showing they left a $100 tip. I think you should go there and condemn the Hillary Haters faux outrage, or is faux outrage something only Clinton supporters do?

[ShortnFiery]

47. "faux indignation" = quite entertaining at times, but proving ineffectual. n/t

[cuke]

69. SnF is one of those

who are still upset about the tipping non-scandal. But I bet the Dr won't call that faux outrage

[Perry Logan]

48. Chill. Ron Paul supporters are very ugly. That's all.

[txaslftist]

57. It's true. Have you seen their "Ron Paul Girl?" Gag...

[Naturyl]

74. No link? Pure genius.

Now they will have to Google it, and because sex sells, you know they will.

Man, you really are good at this. Hats off again.

[Rowdyboy]

50. You shouldn't be surprised....there are easily 100 trolls working hard on any given day

You just got them to admit their Republican sympathies.

[rAVES]

51. I voted for paul over clinton in that poll, and would again...

she's a dishonest, corporate whore and shes Spineless.

[IndianaJones]

53. wrong site. there are several Republican sites that would appeal to you. nt.

[rAVES]

55. Hey its not my fault your favorite candidate is shit.

and no, I quite like it here and Support Dennis Kucinich.

[txaslftist]

59. But she's a Democrat! How could you?

Look, maybe she is a creature of raw ambition that will do anything to win. I don't challenge that. But she's a WINNER. Consistently, and she's a Democrat.

We need to retake the White House, and if that means giving up a few of our sacred cows like "the war" or "economic justice", then we have to do it to win.

[rAVES]

61. Oh right.. give up the two MAJOR issues facing the US right now...

more of the same for the next 4 to 8 years.. only we cheer on while the GOP foams at the mouth..

This country is doomed... seriously.

[txaslftist]

62. You've got it. We CHEER!

That's the important point. We finally get to rub those Republicans' noses in it.

Sure, it's not the best thing that could happen to America, but it's the best thing for the Democratic Party, friend. That's the important part.

[rAVES]

64. Simply not good enough.

There is millions dying in Iraq and Afghanistan and possibly more by the end of this trainwreak presidency,
are they to be the butt of this grand joke called US politics?

Somebody with a spine, and REAL moral stand need to be elected this time around, the likes of Hillary will pander to the Military industrial complex and drag out this war for profit while REAL people DIE. these are not statistics.

[txaslftist]

65. There "are" millions dying in Iraq, not "is"

And this presidency is a "trainwreck".

And this is the fundamental question of our times, of this election cycle.

Are we going to be good Democrats and vote for a Democrat, even if it is over the bodies of the people we will kill in Iraq and possibly Iran between now and 2013, or are we going to be less than Democrats and maybe even vote for or support a Republican/Libertarian/whatever-the-heck-he-is just because we can't stomach the deaths, the torture, the domestic spying and the dragging of our moral reputation through the mud across the world?

I think this choice is quite obvious. We vote for the Democrat, regardless of the cost.

It's about winning, sir.

[LoZoccolo]

66. You give up everything when you vote third party.

You bury every one of your issues.

[L0oniX]

54. flame bait

[William769]

58. Showing hypocrisy of people usually brings out the flame bait argument.

[Name removed]

60. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LynneSin]

68. Don't forget to dismantle a woman's right to choose

:grr:

[ileus]

75. preach it to 'em! brother...Hillary 2008.