Wonkette, that foul-mouthed site founded by a certain foul-mouthed D.C. gutter snipe, ran a collection of links yesterday, one of which pointed to an article called “Ron Paul: One man, one vote”. Frequent readers of digg, reddit, etc. will readily recognize Dr. Ron Paul’s name, as he has become the Presidential contender of choice among the frothing Libertarian/libertine set on the ‘Net. Said set has taken it upon themselves to astroturf every possible article and pad each online poll in a desperate “Pay attention to meeeeeus, daddeeee!” ploy, so much so that digg and reddit’s respective front pages have become overwhelmed with Ron Paul Spam. I’ve had several coworkers vow never to return to digg in particular, so obnoxious has the Paul Spam gotten. Those of you that aren’t avid readers of those above-mentioned sites likely have not heard of Dr. Paul, as he consistently polls at 0% of the American electorate. (Trust me, you’re better off that way.)
Now, Wonkette is a site known for its sarcasm and snark and so it is with little surprise that I noted, and promptly just about cried myself silly from laughter at the snark on display in the comments attached to that post. To wit:
BY AVERY AT 07/23/07 11:43 PM
Oh boy, another story about how Ron Paul votes against things on principle. Tell me more! I’m fascinated!
BY UNAMERICAN AT 02:18 AM
Ron Paul: One man, one vote. That’s the most accurate prediction of his election results I’ve seen yet. Two votes if there’s not a Firefly rerun on that day.
BY UNAMERICAN AT 02:20 AM
@Avery: Have you noticed the internet has started to sound like Matt Damon in Team America? ‘RON PAUL! RON….PAUL!’
Bwahahaha. Now I’ll never be able to shake the image of Matt Damon’s puppet uttering “RON PAUL!” It sure will make reading digg fun again.
[Removed your blog spam link, but other than that your comment is unmolested. -ed.]
Given that Ron Paul has raised 14% of the money in the GOP race in Q2. Seems to me, it is the landline polling numbers that are out of whack.
later
If dollars were votes, you’d have a point. All that goes to show is that Libertarians view a marginal Republican as their single best shot, ever, at placing one of their own in higher office.
He may end up pulling a Kucinich and hanging around until just before the convention since he spends bupkis on advertising, but there’s absolutely no way Ron Paul sees the electoral light of day, period.
So stop wasting the Internet and leave the poor diggers alone, whydontcha?
So if “there’s absolutely no way Ron Paul sees the electoral light of day, period.”…
you’d be willing to bet ten million dollars to my penny that he doesn’t win New Hampshire.
I mean you said absolutely (implying 100%) so this should be a deal you can’t refuse.
If you e-mail me a mailing address I’ll get a lawyer to draw up a contract.
That’s asinine. I don’t make bets that I can’t keep and I certainly wouldn’t wager money over politics.
I note you either 1) don’t have a blog/site or 2) don’t feel confident enough to attach it to your comment. I’ll make you a deal: man up, include a link to your site and we’ll make a bet. If Dr. Paul wins New Hampshire, I will run a campaign banner for his campaign on this blog for a month following said victory. If not, you have to run a Thompson or Giuliani banner on your site.
You game?
I don’t have my own blog or I might consider taking you up on that.
But I guess this reveals that you didn’t really mean “there’s absolutely no way”. Otherwise you would have taken my initial offer.
What part of “I don’t wager over politics” do you not understand? Even if I had ten million dollars to bet, I wouldn’t do it on politics. It’s not a horse race, it’s the future of our country.
Additionally, the fact that RonSpamPaul is polling 15 points behind Her Hillaryness and 20 behind Barack “The Rock” Obama and is garnering roughly 1% of likely GOP primary voters pretty much confirms my point.