Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Stiv]

Enjoy this thing that one of my friends' horrible coworkers made.  Apparently it ended up on CNN at some point.

http://www.youtube.com/v/X9DrjybyhLA&rel=1

[Zaratustra]

pizza slices in dumpsters are a major ron paul demographic

[Royal☭]

I think that pizza says what we're all thinking, which is that we all want a little Ron Paul in our mouths.

[Burrito Al Pastor]

Just in case you need your Ron Paul fix while you're playing Oblivion.[/url]

RON PAUL:
WRONG ON SKOOMA
WRONG ON SLAVERY
WRONG ON OBLIVION GATES
WRONG FOR CYRODIIL

[sei]

Well, it's no pizza, but...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHI2R82RNCc

 

[Kayin]

Needs more Ron Paul AMVs

[A²]

Do Ron Paul supports still think he has a chance? Where will they go when he's shoved off?

[sei]

Back to blogging from Starbucks in Che Guavara shirts.

I'm waiting for comedy involving unupdated Diebold machines still tallying for Bush, somewhere down the line.

[Kayma]

Do Ron Paul supports still think he has a chance? Where will they go when he's shoved off?

Back to smoking pot and not attending class, I'd imagine.

[Royal☭]

Do Ron Paul supports still think he has a chance? Where will they go when he's shoved off?

Back to their IT jobs and writing their racist manifestos.

[Fredward]

Do Ron Paul supports still think he has a chance? Where will they go when he's shoved off?

Back to raping kittens and throwing them at moving trains.

[Arc]

Do Ron Paul supports still think he has a chance? Where will they go when he's shoved off?

Back to upholding alcohol-stained bleachers and prison watchtowers. 

Back to blogging from Starbucks in Che Guavara shirts.

They'd sooner impale their eyes out with a wad of Jacksons than wear Guevara, or any of the offshoots.

[sei]

Back to blogging from Starbucks in Che Guavara shirts.

I guess calling him a fruit didn't exactly top the clever charts.

[Thad]

Do Ron Paul supports still think he has a chance? Where will they go when he's shoved off?

Hard to say.  I voted Nader in '00, voted Kucinich in the '04 primary and Kerry in the '04 general.  The first two were cases of A) idealism and B) liking the other alternatives so little that I wouldn't have voted for them anyway (bear in mind Dean was already dust by last Super Tuesday), while the last was a case of, all right, this guy's a dick but the alternative is so much worse that I'm going to have to bite the bullet and vote for him anyway.  That's kinda what I'm about to do with Obama, though I like him better than Kerry, anyway.

There are lots of contributing factors that could cause someone to stick with Paul or jump ship.  Pragmatism plays the biggest role in states where the race is close, obviously; I don't see a hell of a lot of Paul voters in my state deciding "No, I have to go McCain" or "No, I have to go Romney", because they're pretty well assured the #1 and #2 slot, respectively, and Paul voters jumping ship won't change either of those.  In states where McCain and Romney are running neck-and-neck, however (or, in the case of independents who are allowed to vote in either party's primary, ones where Clinton and Obama are running neck-and-neck), they may be more tempted to vote a more pragmatic choice.

Course, if Paul dropped out, you'd see more people switching to other, more feasible candidates, but he's got the dough to stick this out and he's here to prove a point, so I'm guessing he'll be around for awhile yet.  Like Kucinich in '04.

Then you get the people who are purely Ron Paul supporters, and nothing is going to change that.  If he drops out, they may STILL vote for him (note that Richardson's probably going to win the New Mexico primary despite having dropped out weeks ago), or simply stay home; otherwise, they're voting for him, period, and nobody else is even an option.  Realistically, I think those people are a minority, but they're definitely out there.

Beyond the primary?  Well, he HAS threatened to run as a third-party candidate, and his treatment by Fox News and others clearly shows that he's being shafted by the Republican Party.  (Keep in mind he was kept out of the New Hampshire debate despite polling ahead of Giuliani, who was allowed in because Rupert Murdoch loves him so goddamn much.  Oh, and if you'll pardon a little schadenfreude, Rupert is very sad right now.)  But I doubt that'll ACTUALLY happen.

[Arc]

Paul drops out.

Kinda. Sorta. Yes?

Looks like he fell into the same predicament as Kucinich, in that his national campaign wasn't going anywhere, and his congressional seat became contested.

Meanwhile: His supporters continue to Stick It To The Man.

[Royal☭]

Meanwhile: His supporters continue to Stick It To The Man.

Besides being in violation of the law, Hauer showed disrespect toward the officer during each traffic stop, LaDue said. "He talks himself into a citation each time," LaDue said.

So basically he wouldn't even have the citations if he weren't a douche-fag.

[S D S]

"They gave me a DWR — driving while Republican."

Oh, for fuck's sake.

[Mongrel]

LOL.

While in Washington state the past week, his campaign for that state's primary was still in full swing. I actually saw two fully operational campaign centres in Seattle and NO END of bumper stickers.

It's the zombie that Just. Won't. Fucking. Die.

[Arc]

Looking over this message after browsing the wiki this weekend:

1. Any reasonable recount shows Gore won Florida.

Not all reasonable recounts point towards this conclusion. Most recounts in favor for Gore, in fact, are in the minority. If going by the methods Gore himself requested, he would still lose. The most ludicrous recount win for him was by a margin of three votes, due to only counting ballots with fully removed chads. Now that's a spicy disenfranchisement meatball!

The "if Nader hadn't run Gore would have gotten enough votes that they wouldn't have needed a recount" argument is pure conjecture.  I find it very easy to believe Jeb, Harris, et al would have found another way to rig Florida if not for Nader.

Dismissing one conjecture for another? The official vote results:

George W. Bush     2,912,790
Al Gore                  2,912,253
Ralph Nader               97,421

Only 537 tallied votes of difference between the two. The likelihood that Gore could have picked up 537+ 1 votes from that Nader block? High.

Bush would have picked up a few himself, and a larger block would not have participated. Still, that is nearly 100,000 potential votes floating closer to Gore's political spectrum.

If Gore had run a competent campaign, he never would have been close.

Correct. At this very moment Lieberman could have been the unchallenged Democratic Presidential nominee. His current standing in the party is our consolation prize.

Harboring disdain for Nader '00 voters is petty and wrongheaded, but labeling him as a spoiler is still accurate when accounting for these margins, in my view. Going further, this label should still not warrant looking down upon this particular campaign run.

[Thad]

Looking over this message after browsing the wiki this weekend:

1. Any reasonable recount shows Gore won Florida.

Not all reasonable recounts point towards this conclusion. Most recounts in favor for Gore, in fact, are in the minority. If going by the methods Gore himself requested, he would still lose. The most ludicrous recount win for him was by a margin of three votes, due to only counting ballots with fully removed chads. Now that's a spicy disenfranchisement meatball!

The "Gore's own method of recount was to shoot himself in the foot" point makes a great metaphor for his entire campaign, but it's irrelevant to my "reasonable" qualifier.  Every full, statewide recount gives it to Gore, and those are the only ones I give a damn about -- the ones that count ALL the votes.

The "if Nader hadn't run Gore would have gotten enough votes that they wouldn't have needed a recount" argument is pure conjecture.  I find it very easy to believe Jeb, Harris, et al would have found another way to rig Florida if not for Nader.

Dismissing one conjecture for another?

More like suggesting that one moot point is as good as another.

The official vote results:

George W. Bush     2,912,790
Al Gore                  2,912,253
Ralph Nader               97,421

Only 537 tallied votes of difference between the two. The likelihood that Gore could have picked up 537+ 1 votes from that Nader block? High.

Bush would have picked up a few himself, and a larger block would not have participated. Still, that is nearly 100,000 potential votes floating closer to Gore's political spectrum.

So are the 95,000 or so African-American voters scrubbed from the rolls in one fell swoop.  I don't think disenfranchising another 100,000 Democrats would have been hard -- hell, Palm Beach alone accounted for at least 5,000 erroneous Buchanan votes.