Presidential Poll - (This one's not anonymous)

[Beeewbs]

I decided to start my own poll because RP supporters have a tendency to cause polls to be off balance of actual reality. Now we can see who votes for what, and we can see if those users are people that come in this section on a regular basis or were just brought in to vote on a stupid poll to make it look like more people are voting for him than really are.

[MikeJones77]

OP exposed as Bill O'Reilly

[Beeewbs]

OP exposed as Bill O'Reilly

How so?

[F3AR]

How so?

In Bill O'reilly's poll he DQ'd Paul because he got too many votes. 'twas lulzy.

[Beeewbs]

In Bill O'reilly's poll he DQ'd Paul because he got too many votes. 'twas lulzy.

What does that have to do with me?

[DocHol1day]

Lol @ OP. He's a die hard occupier and he's supporting Obama over paul. Newsflash kid, Obama opposes the core issues occupy pushes. Paul supports issues occupy supports.

What. A. Joke.


You vote based on party lines instead of issues. You and everyone who votes like that are part of the problem.


I do agree with you though. I don't think Paul is as popular as online polls would have you agree.

[F3AR]

What does that have to do with me?

You're pulling an O'reilly. You realize that Ron Paul crushes online polls and you're trying to handicap Paul to your (obama's) advantage.

[Keenl3ody]

You're pulling an O'reilly. You realize that Ron Paul crushes online polls and you're trying to handicap Paul to your (obama's) advantage.

Ron Paul always dominates online polls because his people vote as much as possible. bill oreilly's poll could be voted more then once so they went on there and flooded it. in the election you can only vote once....

there is like a 1% chance that Ron Paul will be president. nothing for or against him, just the truth

[F3AR]

Ron Paul always dominates online polls because his people vote as much as possible. bill oreilly's poll could be voted more then once so they went on there and flooded it. in the election you can only vote once....

there is like a 1% chance that Ron Paul will be president. nothing for or against him, just the truth

uhh no. Even O'reilly openly said on the show the reason for the DQ was Ron paul fans WHO WERE NOT FREQUENT LISTENERS OF THE SHOW. not that they were stuffing the ballot, retard.

[BigThree210]

I voted for although he probally wont win I believe he is the one candidate that actually gives a fuk and will stick to his guns and at least try to help america. Obama has proven he is not what we need and is just a little bitch.

[kusok]

How did you make out this time OP?


For teh ****s who say Ron Paul is only popular online:

- Ron Paul won more straw polls than any other candidate. Those are almost always not online.
- He is leading in Iowa by 4 points.
- More donations from military than Obama and all other candidates combined.
- Strong 2nd place in New Hampshire.
etc.

Give it up.

[Birdy69]

How did you make out this time OP?


For teh ****s who say Ron Paul is only popular online:

- Ron Paul won more straw polls than any other candidate. Those are almost always not online.
- He is leading in Iowa by 4 points.
- More donations from military than Obama and all other candidates combined.
- Strong 2nd place in New Hampshire.
etc.

Give it up.

Prepare your angus y'all. Paul's coming in fast and hard.

[Keenl3ody]

uhh no. Even O'reilly openly said on the show the reason for the DQ was Ron paul fans WHO WERE NOT FREQUENT LISTENERS OF THE SHOW. not that they were stuffing the ballot, retard.

I was watching the show when he said it? retard?

he said Ron Paul and some other candidate flooded the polls and it was inaccurate. he didn't care if they were viewers or not, it was a poll

[MikeJones77]

how do you see who voted for who

[Keenl3ody]

I have never seen Ron Paul over 12%. if he even wins the nomination then I will chop off my right foot and post pics

[kusok]

I was watching the show when he said it? retard?

he said Ron Paul and some other candidate flooded the polls and it was inaccurate. he didn't care if they were viewers or not, it was a poll

Did it ever occur to you that other candidates' supporters have the same internet access, same ******** pages, same spamming supporters who rally the troops to flood polls, same forums and websites etc ?

Can it be that the simple truth is that people like Ron Paul? They like him enough to have the devotion to actually support him. Romney voters don't really like their candidate, they often consider him to be "lesser evil", they may not even go vote if the weather outside is bad. Can it be that corporate sponsored media is lying about Ron Paul's real popularity? Can it be that Ron Paul makes more sense in debates and people vote for him based on that?

[kusok]

I have never seen Ron Paul over 12%. if he even wins the nomination then I will chop off my right foot and post pics

You're aware that he is with 25% in the lead by himself in Iowa with no margin for error, correct? And this is with scientific studies proven media black out. He is above 12% in NH as well, in 2nd place, thou they didn't even start mailing brochures to that state yet.

[kusok]

how do you see who voted for who

click on number of votes on the right before the % in the poll graph.

[Keenl3ody]

You're aware that he is with 25% in the lead by himself in Iowa with no margin for error, correct? And this is with scientific studies proven media black out. He is above 12% in NH as well, in 2nd place, thou they didn't even start mailing brochures to that state yet.

I'll come back to this and repost when Romney becomes the candidate (not who I want)

lettuce be real, America isn't ready for Ron Paul. some of his stuff is OUT there. I know everybody wants to be able to do drugs, but hello? friends with Iran? that hurt him

[kusok]

I'll come back to this and repost when Romney becomes the candidate (not who I want)

lettuce be real, America isn't ready for Ron Paul. some of his stuff is OUT there. I know everybody wants to be able to do drugs, but hello? friends with Iran? that hurt him

Who do YOU want?

You're totally right, Americans are not ready, it may take a complete collapse or total fascism until people understand. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't try. Gotta do the right thing.

Hey, what's wrong with being friends with iran? Iran never attacked anyone. When will people stop listening to propaganda?

[Keenl3ody]

Who do YOU want?

You're totally right, Americans are not ready, it may take a complete collapse or total fascism until people understand. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't try. Gotta do the right thing.

Hey, what's wrong with being friends with iran? Iran never attacked anyone. When will people stop listening to propaganda?

I prefer to believe its not propaganda. I'm not much on the whole "the gov, the media, and the military are all out to exterminate Americans and take over the country" thing. I believe Iran IS a terrorist nation and they DO want to kill Americans

[kusok]

I prefer to believe its not propaganda. I'm not much on the whole "the gov, the media, and the military are all out to exterminate Americans and take over the country" thing. I believe Iran IS a terrorist nation and they DO want to kill Americans

Fact sheet:

- Iran never attacked anyone.
- USA started the conflict when CIA overthrew a good democratically elected government in Iran and stole oil (and admitted to it)
- Iran has no airforce that can come here to attack US.
- Iran has no gas to power the airforce they don't have. (we steal all the gas)
- According to CIA Iran has no nuke and according to CIA will not have one in 10 years (government is now trying to change this story)
- Define "terrorist". Wouldn't those who invade Middle Eastern countries and kill thousands of civilians be called terrorists?
- US said the same thing about Iraq, that they have WMDs and even possibly nukes, and Al Qaeda etc, and we now know it was a ll a lie. Why do you believe them now?

[Birdy69]

I prefer to believe its not propaganda. I'm not much on the whole "the gov, the media, and the military are all out to exterminate Americans and take over the country" thing. I believe Iran IS a terrorist nation and they DO want to kill Americans

We are the only thing stopping Israel from solving the issue.

Ron Paul said that when he's president, we'll get out of Israel's way and they can take care of the Iran issue however they want. He also said if Iran becomes an actual threat in the future, congress will make a declaration of war, we'll fight it, and we'll win it. But only if we must.

[Keenl3ody]

Fact sheet:

- Iran never attacked anyone.
- USA started the conflict when CIA overthrew a good democratically elected government in Iran and stole oil (and admitted to it)
- Iran has no airforce that can come here to attack US.
- Iran has no gas to power the airforce they don't have. (we steal all the gas)
- According to CIA Iran has no nuke and according to CIA will not have one in 10 years (government is now trying to change this story)
- Define "terrorist". Wouldn't those who invade Middle Eastern countries and kill thousands of civilians be called terrorists?
- US said the same thing about Iraq, that they have WMDs and even possibly nukes, and Al Qaeda etc, and we now know it was a ll a lie. Why do you believe them now?

al Qaeda didn't have any of that stuff either, didn't save the twin towers huh? and the WMD wasn't a lie, a lot of people believed it. he'd used WMD before and it was common knowledge, we just thought he had a stockpile of it and was wrong.

[DocHol1day]

al Qaeda didn't have any of that stuff either, didn't save the twin towers huh? and the WMD wasn't a lie, a lot of people believed it. he'd used WMD before and it was common knowledge, we just thought he had a stockpile of it and was wrong.

Your talking to someone who honestly believes bombs brought down the wtc and bush put them there. Save your breathe.

[kusok]

al Qaeda didn't have any of that stuff either, didn't save the twin towers huh? and the WMD wasn't a lie, a lot of people believed it. he'd used WMD before and it was common knowledge, we just thought he had a stockpile of it and was wrong.

Attacks on 9/11 (if the official story is true) were a predictable consequence of US military presence and invasions in Middle East, as 9/11 commission report and our own CIA clearly stated, and as Ron Paul predicted. This is the part you don't get, WE started it, this is a historical fact. US went in first to start conflicts and wars. A country like Iran has no history of EVER attacking anyone, do you get this?

Do you know why he used WMDs? Because we gave it to him We gave him the gas.

A lot of people believed it? That makes it not a lie???

Is this real life?

[Ashton117]

The United Sates had good relations with Iraq and after Kuwait violated OPEC Saddam had the blessing of some politicians to use military ation

[yg7s7]

Your talking to someone who honestly believes bombs brought down the wtc and bush put them there. Save your breathe.

[Birdy69]

Attacks on 9/11 (if the official story is true) were a predictable consequence of US military presence and invasions in Middle East, as 9/11 commission report and our own CIA clearly stated, and as Ron Paul predicted. This is the part you don't get, WE started it, this is a historical fact. US went in first to start conflicts and wars. A country like Iran has no history of EVER attacking anyone, do you get this?

[BigThree210]

Fact sheet:

- Iran never attacked anyone.
- USA started the conflict when CIA overthrew a good democratically elected government in Iran and stole oil (and admitted to it)
- Iran has no airforce that can come here to attack US.
- Iran has no gas to power the airforce they don't have. (we steal all the gas)
- According to CIA Iran has no nuke and according to CIA will not have one in 10 years (government is now trying to change this story)
- Define "terrorist". Wouldn't those who invade Middle Eastern countries and kill thousands of civilians be called terrorists?
- US said the same thing about Iraq, that they have WMDs and even possibly nukes, and Al Qaeda etc, and we now know it was a ll a lie. Why do you believe them now?

Its pretty cool that a far left and a conservative independent can agree on Ron Paul