Let's make Dr. Paul's interview with Wolf Blitzer go viral! DIGG HERE!

TheEngineer

Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
434
Ron Paul hit another home run today when he appeared on Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer today. This appearance needs to go viral, IMO, so please digg it at http://digg.com/political_opinion/Sept_21_Ron_Paul_on_CNN_s_Late_Edition_with_Wolf_Blitzer .

It has 130 diggs in fewer than four hours, so it has a great shot at hitting if we all digg it up.

The interview itself is at www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qLefrvxbq8 .

Edit: There's one more Ron Paul interview ready to hit the front page. It's at http://digg.com/political_opinion/CNN_Ron_Paul_disucsses_the_financial_system_bailout .
 
Last edited:
I love that smirky comment at the end to the question who will you vote for - answer "neither of those two" with a smirk!!

dugg...
 
Zionist Wolf Blits with his stupid trick question and a straight face..... Ron Paul hit it out the park with a nice smirk :D
 
243 diggs and not popular yet (not buried, either)....the statists must be out keeping it down. I guess it will need just a few more.
 
Last edited:
of late Ron Paul is knocking ALL his interviews out of the park. If just listen to the man for just a few minutes he can slice through a life time of Pravda.
 
It just hit the front page.....after 350 diggs! Perhaps the new algorithm subtracts 200 diggs for the phrase "Ron Paul" in the title. :confused:

I guess we should be happy it got passed the statist bury brigade.
 
Top of the front page! Nice!

But for future reference, get a catchier title in there - maybe something like the title VotersThinkDOTORG used:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WbSRJRxV_WU

It just hit the front page.....after 350 diggs! Perhaps the new algorithm subtracts 200 diggs for the phrase "Ron Paul" in the title. :confused:

I guess we should be happy it got passed the statist bury brigade.

What do you mean "subtracts 200 Diggs"?

Was it higher?

Do you have proof?
 
Last edited:
Top of the front page! Nice!

But for future reference, get a catchier title in there - maybe something like the title VotersThinkDOTORG used:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WbSRJRxV_WU



What do you mean "subtracts 200 Diggs"?

Was it higher?

Do you have proof?

I was referring to the unusually high number of diggs it took to hit, then added a fun conspiracy angle.

The title was fine in this case, as it hit the front page in only nine hours. There's always room for title optimization, of course.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top