patrick.net

Shrek?

Darn, I have to stop doing it for free!

Can usually spot them, they are economic as well as purely political. They tend to suffer from common diseases of participation. Notice a lot of members stopped posting here right after the election was over? Hmmm!

Flame retardant suits, monotonously predictable, incorrigible-horrible, broken record themes uttered over and over, completely devoid of susceptibility to new information or rational reasoning, kind of like the real estate shills that hang around here?

Pot meet Kettle.

Wait, they actually pay for this?

http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2013/01/01/professional-crisis-actors-simulate-mass-casualty-events/

Why would someone pay someone else to post opinions? How does one measure/justify return on investment?

dublin hillz says

Why would someone pay someone else to post opinions?

Didn't Obama claim to be king of the social media, when he first came in office? I wonder how much of that Obama money Hussein got for coming here and blasting pro Obama threads while having a vested interest in damage control on threads he disagreed with.

Say something in a CNN article thread, against Obama, it's always the same 4 or 5 spin doctors that will flame you rotten, and then get 56 likes with two minutes. When Mark Twain him self would be doing well to get 3 likes out of your typical CNN reader.
Take 121212 for instance, is there really 2 people here that likes EVERY comment he posts?

CaptainShuddup says

Say something in a CNN article thread, against Obama, it's always the same 4 or
5 spin doctors that will flame you rotten, and then get 56 likes with two
minutes

Why would someone have those 4 or 5 individuals on the payroll? What would be the measurable outcome that the money was well spent? I seriously doubt that opinions posted on blogs influence election outcomes. The more likely explanantion is that the same 4 or 5 "spin doctors" are simply politically charged folks who enjoy political opinion battles/confrontations.

dublin hillz says

Why would someone have those 4 or 5 individuals on the payroll? What would be the measurable outcome that the money was well spent?

Because people like to be on the "Right side of History", just like all of those clueless Generation Whiners working the counter at the fast food joints. They are all on the right side of History, they voted in Obama. And this is how History rewarded them.

I actually recall watching a documentary that was along these lines. Yes- there are actually a rather large number of paid right winger bloggers. But to be sure, left wing ones as well.

I think what's sort of fascinating about the whole bloggosphere anyway is that people on both sides basically just talk past each other. I'd also wonder exactly how much time is wasted doing this: Those on the right or left will never-ever convince the "other side" that they are wrong.

edvard2 says

Those on the right or left will never-ever convince the "other side" that they are wrong.

It's more about reinforcing the minds of those already on their side, or sitting on the fence.

Not paid, just prolific.

I could do that in quarter of the time with some effort

CaptainShuddup says

Which liberals then invented the War on Women to distract attention from their war on women.

BULLSHIT MOUNTAIN IS WIDE AND HIDE!!

You poor delusional fool. States run by Republicans started the war on woman passing over 1100 new state laws restriction abortion, contraception and womans health care choices.

TRANS VAGINA ULTRA SOUNDS!!! Government in your Vagina was a forced Republican law.

CaptainShuddup says

I liked Palin because she scared the shit out of everyone in Washington.

LMFAO!!!!! I don' think she could scare anyone in Washington. She is a lousy 1/2 term governor, she has spent more time being a FOX PUNDIT than any length of time in public service.

IDDQD says

121212 says

Not paid, just prolific.

I could do that in quarter of the time with some effort

На воре шапка горит. ;)

Listen Ruski, there is a clear conscience here. No worries .

IDDQD says

Could be, could be...

In his earlier carnation his tag line was social media guru.

CaptainShuddup says

social media guru

This is true.

I was going to say but he sucked so bad at it, you got fired and lost your best account. Then you got a job for Politicofact.com then came back talking smack, I called them and threatened to sue them over your verbal abuse, then they fired you as well. The whole point of what you do, is to be incognito and remain anonymous.

CaptainShuddup says

NO Palin was a game changer, and there was not a debate from the Liberals on why Palin was a bad candidate. There was an all out assault on the American family and family conservative women.

I liked Palin because she scared the shit out of everyone in Washington.

I will always have a soft spot in my heart for anyone that sends Washington scurrying

Palin was basically the reason McCain lost the election. There was plenty of discussion over Palin and her lack of clear qualifications. There was a sort of bafflement all around as to why McCain- whom many had some degree of respect for ( I'll go as far as to say before his campaign decided to go off the far right deep end, I was actually considering voting for him) why he made such an outright unsound decision. Palin had an appeal to the very fringy conservatives in the GOP and that was about it.

Lastly- let's not re-hash the old worn out fib that " ooooohhh Palin sure scared those liberals!".... because she didn't. As soon as she was named running mate most of us knew the race was over. To us she was a relief. McCain had no chance of winning after that point and we knew it.

But let me lend a piece of ancedotal reaction. My Dad, who at one time reliably always voted Republican wound up voting for Obama. The overwhelmingly large reason why he did so was based on McCain's decision to select Palin as his running mate. A LOT of people like my Dad did the same thing- hence yet another reason why choosing her was such a terrible decision.

edvard2 says

The overwhelmingly large reason why he did so was based on McCain's decision to select Palin as his running mate.

Sure it wasn't because she wasn't in Katie Couric's book of the month club?

No.... it was because after the decision to choose Palin was made my Dad then seriously doubted McCain's ability to make good decisions in general.

edvard2 says

it was because after the decision to choose Palin

You mean right after the decision was announced?

I rest my cases.

Call it Crazy says

At least Palin ran something, even if it was only a governor of a small populated state...

Tell me again, what qualifications does the current occupant of the White House have??... what did HE run ??

I'll give you she "ran" something. Just not very well. Obama is doing his job just fine and dandy, thank you.

Let me put it to some of you who are still scratching your heads as to why the GOP lost. See, the thing is that yes- I tend to lean liberal. BUT... if the GOP would actually put up a somewhat more moderate candidate- aka- someone who doesn't go off into the weeds in an attempt to try and cater to the outer fringy-fringe right wingers and their increasingly antiquated stances , I might actually just possibly give them a consideration. Its not like the GOP at one time wasn't like this. They simply decided to become the "conservative party" and not the Republican party. As long as they continue down that road they will keep losing elections and interest from people like me and my Dad.

Someone please make a short list of Right Wing blogs so I can give them hell.

CaptainShuddup says

there was not a debate from the Liberals on why Palin was a bad candidate.

Yes there was debate about Palin. She was the final straw that broke McCain's back.

McCain lost the election to Obama because McCain claimed he could give us a victory in Iraq. Obama's campaign was based on getting us out of Iraq, sending troops into Afganistan, and targeting Al Quida.

McCain also claimed he cares about veterans when most people know he just talks about his own military career.

When McCain picked Palin the debate was how much of a distraction she was from the issues of the campaign. No one talked about the issues any more, it was all about why, or how, McCain could pick Sarah Palin.

I voted for Reagan, then Bush, but had to vote for Clinton, because Bush was a disaster, I had to vote for Clinton twice before voting for Bush Junior twice.

The Republicans just don't have canidates to put into a race. It's all smoke, and mirrors, like Mitt Romney.

David Losh says

When McCain picked Palin the debate was how much of a distraction she was from the issues of the campaign. No one talked about the issues any more, it was all about why, or how, McCain could pick Sarah Palin.

Exactly. It even went both ways. Those who were Palin's cheerleaders drew attention away from McCain.

Shock!

APOCALYPSEFUCK is Shostakovich says

What's the big deal? I get paid to represent the Quaker perspective on patent. isn't everybody on here getting a subsidy?

I'm getting a cut from Hobbits for Second Dinners.