This post is dedicated to Ron Paul and doubly dedicated to his supporters who are the persistent spammers of Presidential Polls. We know you want Ron Paul to win. Unfortunately, the relentless spamming of polls is a form of self deception when you, deep in your hearts, know that Ron Paul does not have a snowball's chance in hell of winning any presidential primary. You are delaying the day of your disappointment and distress. I suggest you find another candidate you can support - someone who believes the US is responsible for 9/11, just like Ron Paul.
For the reading pleasure of Ron Paul's supporters, I have spammed my own blog with Ron Paul's illustrious name.
Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul
Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul
Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul
Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul
Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul
Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul
Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul
Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul
4 comments:
My dedication to Ron Paul
Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul
I think we need a definition of "spamming the poll" here - a definition that is nearly always sorely lacking from whiny little blogposts like this one.
I consider it "spamming a poll" only if a person votes a large number of multiple times, and/or uses some deliberate means [IP reset, cache clear] to get around the limitations of a poll set up to allow you to vote only once.
I don't consider it "spamming a poll" if someone posts a link on a message board somewhere to a poll, and lots of Paul supporters see it and show up and vote.
And based on my experience it's the latter that's actually happening.
Fluffy, when you have an organized effort to vote in internet polls, but pseudo-leftie types who agree with Paul that America is to blame for the terrorist attacks, I call that spamming. Have you seen the web sites that list the polls and encourage people to vote Ron Paul? The only people I know that have that level of online organization are the MoveOn and Daily Kos crowd. You guys are in for some wailing and gnashing of teeth.
This may offend you, but I'm not sorry.
Radiant
I believe in the primacy of truth between honest men. It's a principle that was stated in Atlas Shrugged, I believe during John Galt's infamous extremely long speech. Honest men may disagree at a given moment. Yet in any sustained and important matter the truth eventually arises, and both men then profit from knowing it. This is all a very long-winded way of saying, don't be sorry about offending people. The honest will do their best to glean such truth as may exist in your word - and if none exists, they will attempt to dispute you.
Anyways, my reply to the post is, there's a lot more to the Ron Paul campaign than internet straw polls. Even if there wasn't it is vital to support politicians because they are good rather than because they can win. One of the themes throughout The Fountainhead is again and again how the honest men in society stay quiet. Atlas Shrugged refines this concept into the sanction of the victim. The character who most exemplifies it is Hank Rearden. Constantly throughout the early book he is in situations where he could take a stand, but he is convinced that he must be wrong because others think he is wrong.
I bring this up because a similar principle exists here. It is important to remove polls as a valid tool in selecting candidates. We must do what is right because it is right, not because it is widely supported.
Like most ethics based upon life and living, this is actually a good policy for having effect on elections. To illustrate: When you "vote for the winner" and he/she wins, what have you gained? Nothing. If "the winner" is not the best candidate, you have actually lost through aiding his election against the best. On the other hand, if you vote for the candidate who best represents your stances, you send a message to the political establishment that you are indeed willing to stand up for those stances.
Post a Comment