ruined a perfectly good country, along with all its other traitorous lockstep media competitors

how funny...reminds me of the time that howard stern listeners hijacked an online People magazine poll for 'sexiest man of the year...' i don't think the folks at People expected Hank the Angry Drunken Dwarf to come in at #1 in the poll...

Lucky for Ron Paul (and America, I might add), most elections are determined by those who actually VOTE. These online polls are a pretty good indication of the passionate support of Ron Paul, and I hope it carries through to the election. After the primaries, the race will be all downhill.

What's with the media ignoring Ron Paul? Is his insurgent campaign not following the established narrative they had in place for viable candidates? If they're talking about McCain, they should be talking about Ron Paul, yes? Even this AP campaign spending blurb...

http://www.salon.com/wires/ap/2007/10/15/D8SA01E83_campaign_fundraising/index.html

...makes no mention of Ron Paul, while at the same time leapfrogging him to dead letters like Huckabee and Brownback. He's shaping up to be the Republican Howard Dean, it would seem, the impermissible candidate, although instead of ruthlessly attacking him, it appears that they're just ignoring him, hoping he'll go away.

If McCainiacs (if they're going to say "Paulites," then I'll play that game with everybody) had bogarted that poll, they'd have run that story, like touting McCain's surprising and amazing surge in the poll, reflecting the verve and enthusiasm of the McCainiacs for their candidate. If Giulianians had done the same thing, it would also have been covered breathlessly.

But somebody who's not supposed to be doing well like Ron Paul does it, and they take it down? Lame.

I don't agree with everything that he says but I plan on voting for him. If nothing else, I think that his support will make it even more obvious how biased and corrupt the media is. They will keep ignoring him until they realize that he won't go away. Then will come the slander, which will make what John Kerry got look tame by comparison. Then hopefully the slander will be debunked and discredited in time, but I doubt it. The average uninformed voter will just go, 'Ron Paul? Yeah, I heard that guy's racist', and never give it another thought. You know, the people that still believe the story about the babies in the incubators from Gulf War I.

As far as the specific issue with the poll, don't they at least verify that every unique ip address gets a limited number of votes? Maybe they can allow 2 or three for internal networks. But don't they have some limits for the number of votes that they count for each ip address? And if that isn't the problem then how was the vote hacked? Just because the other guys' supporters didn't bother to vote, that doesn't mean that the results are invalid. I've long suspected that the mainstream polls showing Giuliani leading are 'hacked'. And I know a lot of Republicans and I have never met one Romney fan. Outside of New England he's just another rich white guy.

Hillary is way too powerful for any other democrat to get the nomination, and the republican field is way too slimy for any of those guys to have a chance, except for Ron Paul.

The republicans will never nominate him though, because he makes them ashamed of what they have become, so it's going to be Hillary, just as our economy tips into the abyss after 30 years of financial shenanigans.

The next few years are going to be rocky.

Do you honestly believe Ron Paul will be the nominee?

There's no chance in hell of that happening.

I've been a registered Democrat for 36 years. Two months ago, I changed my party affiliation to Independent. It broke my heart after all these years, but I don't trust the Democrats now. At any rate, I consider these issues to be the most urgent: restoring the Constitution, ending the Occupation, and fixing the broken economy. On those three issues, I agree with Ron Paul's views rather than those of HRC, Obama, or Edwards. I don't agree with some of the screwy stuff he advocates, but he strikes me as a very open, honest man. I can't say that about the top tier Democrats (or the Republicans, of course, who are just plain doofuses).

Have you ever heard of amendments. Some times politicians will vote against a good bill because it has had so many stupid amendments attached to it.

isn't the same as winning the election. And thinking candidate x won the debate doesn't mean one must also think candidate x would make the best president.

I'm now a registered Republican supporting Ron Paul. He's running as a Republican on a traditional Republican platform and seems to be the only candidate in this campaign other than Dennis Kucinich who is willing to stand up before the American people and speak the truth about the frauds being perpetrated on them in the name of government. Every other candidate is irretrievably tied to the corporate power elite that is exploiting the resources and people of our nation in support of an intrusive, authoritarian oligarchy.

Only Ron Paul stands by the Constitution while others give it lip service and subvert its mandates with ill-considered legislation and executive orders. Ron Paul can be trusted to fulfill his oath of office to the letter without being seduced by the power of the presidency into accelerating the current drift toward tyranny.

I'm not under 35 (obviously) but I value my privacy and my liberty. I am a dedicated participant in voting for Ron Paul on Internet polls because it generates articles like the current one in a press that would rather ignore and belittle candidates who oppose the lemming march to fascism.

It's become a verb: "freep this poll!"

The pioneers at stuffing online "ballot boxes" where the folks at Free Republic, the right-wing blog. Now the right and left bloggers all do it.

If a site wants a decent shot at having an online poll mean anything, they need to have some way of limiting freeping, like only allowing registered users on the site to vote (once each) and not counting votes from users who register after the question was posted.

Even then, sites with large memberships will still see distorted polls.

Alternatively, you can think of the polls as tests of organization online.