Skip to comments.Ron Paul on track to be biggest fundraiser (politico)
Posted on 11/30/2007 9:07:21 AM PST by traviskicks
Ron Paul may not win his partys primary, but he is on track to capture another big title: Top Republican fundraiser for the final quarter of the money-obsessed 2008 presidential primary.
In the first two months of the quarter that began Oct. 1, Paul already has raised more than $9.75 million, putting him easily within range to best the amount rival Mitt Romney received from donors during the entire third quarter.
The Texas congressman has set a goal of raising $12 million before the fourth quarters Dec. 31st deadline, a sum New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani couldnt achieve in the third quarter when fundraising events still dominated his schedule.
Pauls chief e-bundler, music promoter Trevor Lyman, hopes to raise $2.5 million by days end with the campaigns second online money bomb.
Of course, Romney can still buy the fourth quarter title by making a multi-million dollar donation to himself, which is widely expected.
And it could be that Pauls striking, eleventh-hour surge may have come too late to dramatically change the campaign dynamics.
Nevertheless, Pauls staff is racing to put up more advertisements before the Christmas season shuts down campaigning in Iowa and New Hampshire, where Paul threatens to peel away libertarian-minded Independent voters sought by now less well-funded rival John McCain.
And Republicans find themselves asking an unexpected question: Could Ron Paul have a real impact on who the party nominates?
Pauls last stand provides fresh evidence of how the Internet can transform a dark horse candidate and make him harder to knock off.
Its highly improbable that he will get into the first tier. But hes colorful, says David Gergen, a former White House adviser.
Hes certainly not the Republican Partys first renegade. Indeed, there is a certain familiarity to the rebellious rank-and-file pushback inside the Paul insurgency.
Think Pat Buchanan circa 1992 and his launch of the cultural wars against gays and feminists; and Buchanan again circa 1996 when he upset Bob Dole in New Hampshire with the cry: All the peasants are coming with pitchforks. We're going to take this over the top."
Think John McCain circa 2000 and his Straight Talk Express and upset victory in New Hampshire over Bush that prompted the first-recorded gusher of online giving.
Given the right candidate or call to action, populist Republicans have a colorful history of shaking off the party yoke and reveling in a wild-and-crazy moment.
That helps explain why a quirky Texas congressman who opposes the Iraq war got into the race in the first place.
Same goes for Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo, who had hoped to use immigration as the launching pad for an insurgent campaign.
What makes the Paul phenomenon unique this cycle is that there is no clear front-runner who can simply ride out the rowdy rabble until the partys top-down instincts silence them.
That is creating an intriguing choice for the 72-year-old doctor: plow ahead on what still seems a quixotic quest for the White House or play spoiler by using his millions to help take out one of the front-runners.
Thus far, Paul is playing it safe, still absorbing what seems to be his dumb luck.
His financial windfalls have come from spontaneous Internet giving or big, online donation days organized by supporters outside his campaign.
Earlier this month, those outsiders orchestrated a one-day $4 million donation dump, now nicknamed a money bomb.
Another is scheduled to take place today and a third later this month.
Its a tremendous burden put on us and a responsibility, Paul told MSNBCs Joe Scarborough recently.
We have all this money now. We didnt plan to have this much money. Our obligation is to figure out how to spend it. We are doing our best.
Before the first infusion of cash, Paul had begun a modest $1.1 million television ad drive, mostly in New Hampshire.
Since then, the ad campaign has been expanded in Iowa. Pre-money-bomb, Paul was airing three radio ads; now he has more than ten running.
His television messages are mostly biographical, noting his career as a doctor, his record of never voting for a tax increase, and his opposition to the Iraq war.
The radio ads have a slightly tougher edge, accusing his opponents of supporting amnesty for illegal aliens (a shot at McCain) and flip-flopping on issues (a dart at Romney).
But some Paul supporters grumble that the advertisements lack punch and they are pressuring the campaign to take on an edgier tone.
His first television commercial showed supporters, some sitting around a diner table, talking up his candidacy. Look, the mans a doctor; he understand the health care mess, says one woman.
OMG! Common Guys! This is a terrible ad! My goodness. The Ron Paul revolution means a lot more than this, bemoaned one supporter in a blog posting.
I got nothin but love for Ron Paul, but this is pretty bad, responded another.
As Paul climbed to fourth place in some New Hampshire polls, his rivals have sensed the new threat.
McCain has stepped up his attacks on his less-known rival and more incoming is sure to follow.
And, of course, there are inherent hazards in having money when you havent really planned for it.
Howard Dean raised $41 million in 2003 in the first campaign to fully employ the Internet.
By years end, his early advertising campaigns and rapidly expanding operation had eaten all but about $9 million of that cash.
Among his expenditures: Stacks of cell phones for Iowa volunteers that wound up stored in an office unused.
Ron's weekly message [5 minutes audio, every Monday]
• Podcast • Weekly archive • Toll-free 888-322-1414 •
|Free Republic Ron Paul Ping List: Join/Leave|
Interesting how my leftwing sites are interested in pumping up Paul.....
It is, though, entertaining to see so many lefties give their money to an anti-war libertarian with absolutely no chance of garnering the nomination. That's like preparing for battle by passing all your ammunition to a three-year-old with a cap gun.
Senator Lamont and President Forbes both show us that the most important metric is the amount of money a candidate has...
Thats not why they are doing it, anymore than they were in support of McCain in 2000.
You miss a key difference. Lamont, Forbes, and Romney spent their own money. Ron Paul’s money nearly all comes from small donors. Most of it was not even raised by his campaign. Paul’s money indicates a much higher level of enthusiasm compared to the other candidates you mention.
yea, sometimes I think the grassroots would have been better off keeping their money and spending it on their own... IMO, this will be the future of political campaigns.
Perhaps but the "campaign" had little to do with the signs. They were put up by people on their own initiative. That is the secret of Paul's success thus far.
This nitwit, and his legions of nitwit supporters, are going to go third party. Which is fine. They’re all a bunch of jihadist-boot-lickers who would never vote for a strong-military candidate anyway. If there was no L Ron, they’d all talk themselves into voting for the beast.
Is this a retirement trick? He won’t win his congresssional seat again next year. He has a scam going. The way to go is to convert his funds into Swiss Francs. You have to wonder who is screwing who’s wife here.
This “nitwit” has been elected to ten terms in a conservative Texas district despite consistent oppostion from GWB and the rest of the party leadership in his home state. You obviously hate him but a “nitwit” could never pull off that feet.
A fool and his money...
well, as was said on another thread:
“Wouldn’t you prefer that leftists be tricked into voting for someone who respects the Constitution, rather than we Republicans being tricked into voting for a gun-grabbing RINO like Guiliani?”
I think the minority of Paul supporters who are leftists are simply blinded by their opposition to the Iraq war, above all else. Then again, ironically, most conservative opponents of Paul’s may fall into a similar category too...
Most ‘conservative opponents’ of Ron Paul understand that contraryism isn’t a valid substitute for creativity.
Not a chance I would vote for Hillary ... but you can have fun voting for Rudy in the Generals
You can pull someone’s leg, and you can pull off a feat, but you don’t normally “pull off that feet”.
As far as being re-elected. So was Murtha. They’re both a couple of pork kings and unfortunately pork buys votes.
As far as future re-elections, from what I understand, now that his nitwit pro-jihadist sympathies are out there in the open, he might have trouble the next time he tries getting re-elected from his district.
Maybe he’ll bring Murtha in to assist in his campaign. They’re birds of a feather.
You're right. They don't.
If they can hurt the good Republican candidates in the primaries by pumping a loon, then so be it.
Apparently, you would you prefer someone like Huck, Hillary, Rudy who each have 1,001 "creative" ways to plan your life.
‘If they can hurt the good Republican candidates in the primaries by pumping a loon, then so be it.’
Watch in the first quarter of next year, and they encourage Ron Paul to run third party...it won’t hurt the GOP, but they aren’t bright enough to figure that part out.
If his support is so high, why is he not doing better in the national polls?
What is he spending all his money on?
Is the money even real?
Does he get to use what he doesn’t spend on a nice retirement?
The sad thing is that they actually believe Ron Paul can win. Howard Dean actually led the polls before his flameout.
If Ron Paul has any guts, which I doubt, he should not file for re-election to his House seat by the January deadline.
Exactly. McCain shoved Ron Paul's head in a toilet when he said "Your isolationist approach is why Hitler came to power". Thompson is just biding his time patiently. He knows when it's time to say things.
McCain shoved Ron Paul's head in a toilet when he said "Your isolationist approach is why Hitler came to power".Good imagery. The head is a good place for the heads of Murtha and Paul.
‘So you think that support for free markets, liberty, and individual rights across the board is nothing more than “contraryism?” ‘
Could you please cut and paste the post where I said this?
The polls exclude Paul's name & they are polling the same registered Republicans who voted in 2004, on land-line phones. Many of Paul's supporters are independents and newcomers.
Money doesn't necessarily help one shed the "Blame American First", "Gold Standard NOW!" lunatic image he's worked so hard to cultivate, does it?
Labels unfairly assigned to him by the establishment media and GOP party hacks.
It is, though, entertaining to see so many lefties give their money to an anti-war libertarian with absolutely no chance of garnering the nomination
They can give and give to their heart's content, but they are supporting someone who opposes all of their goals.
He may also be on track to another record, most spent on a primary Loser :)
Politico is pretty much a DBM outlet from the last few days. Hardly the stellar credibility source.
Honestly, the time has come for a purge of Ron Paul’s traitorous supporters from this site. They are disruptive and dangerous to the American cause.
Ironic how Free Republic was leading the charge against military interventionism in Bosnia under Clinton’s command.
Interesting how this Paulbot supporter’s hit piece sounds exactly like a Democrat hit piece. Must be because those ‘quaker’ members write the scripts, among other things mentioned on another thread.
Sorry but it's just not happening. Paul has stated millions of times that he's not going to run 3rd party, as he learned from his bid in 1988.
Which is fine. Theyre all a bunch of jihadist-boot-lickers who would never vote for a strong-military candidate anyway.
Misread the electorate at your own will. Many people are concerned about the war and do not want a long-term commitment in Iraq. Personally, I disagree with Paul on an immediate withdrawal, but we don't need to stay there for generations with permanent bases and such. The war is costing billions of dollars a year. Why do you think the dollar is falling?
If there was no L Ron, theyd all talk themselves into voting for the beast.
Actually, they'd probably just stay home or vote 3rd party like they've always done, and then we can enjoy another election of GOP flacks and their lock-steppers whining about those evil "Losertarians" causing their RINO to lose.
odd, I dont picture long hair unemployed maggot types as having alot of extra cabbage to donate.(sarc)
Correct me if I am wrong. I thought you said that Ron Paul was characterized by contraryism. If not, what were you saying?
No, it's you asking a ridiculous question.
He wont win his congresssional seat again next year.
Get real. Democrats don't even field candidates against Paul anymore. If they can't beat him, what makes you think another Republican can?
He has a scam going. The way to go is to convert his funds into Swiss Francs. You have to wonder who is screwing whos wife here.
You're talking about a man who refused to participate in the lucrative Congressional retirement pension and has been married to the same woman for 50 years. Lay off the sauce.
I live in Ron Paul’s congressional district. There is no evidence of any support for his presidential campaign here that I can see.
I’ve seen a couple of bumper stickers for him on cars in the Montrose section of town. (Think San Francisco).
He stands no chance of even carrying his district, much less the state of Texas.
So, ask yourself. Why is he running?
He's no "Doctor". He hasn't touched a person for 40 years, probably since the obsolete dinosaur medical school training he had. Just because he keeps paying association dues, doesn't mean he's a doctor, nor does it mean he understands health care issues, even his own.
But, Paulbots, desperate to pump up his image any way they can, call him "Dr. Paul". HAHAHAHA! I have to laugh every time I hear that.
Then your beef is with Jim Rob, who has not carried out your lovely “purge,” not with “Paul’s “traitorous supporters.” The Paulists merely advocate the same views that characterized freepers when they opposed Clinton’s war in Kosovo.
Question to All:
Is Ron Paul accepting donations in the form of US Treasury Notes or in Gold and other hard currency? I really hope he isn’t fueling the great Federal Reserve Hoax or Credit Hoax by participating, I would hope his supporters would be giving him donations in the form of Gold, Pelts or Beads...
Flame away, but you KNOW I am right!!! Go Fred!
I’ll put it another way.
Ron Paul uses contrarism as others use creativity.
Bottom line is he votes against things, then when questioned about it cites ‘its not in the Constitution’ as if thats a viable explanation.
Its not, its a dodge.
Especially if you’ve glanced at the Constitution, and noted there is no mention of shrimp subsidies....
Soros and his Dim buddies love TehRon.
DIAF... Have you noticed that most of the RP supporters on this site have been FReepers MUCH longer than you...
I could almost understand your sentiment if it was a bunch of Trolling Newbs... but we are not...
many of us still truly believe in the concept of a Free Republic...
not the Socialist Conservative Nanny State of which you appear to desire...
I am so very sorry that you are so fearful of the Ideas of Freedom and Personal Responsibility the we espouse that you must resort to name calling and whining for a purge...
Is that the best you can do on his voting record? Just keep hammering on shrimp?
The polls are excluding Paul's name & they are polling the same small pool of registered Republicans who voted in 2004. Go to the website thecaseforronpaul.com that completely demolishes the polls and other BS about Paul.
What is he spending all his money on?
Basically, nothing. He doesn't need to spend money, except on traditional print and TV ads. All of his support is generated from the grassroots who spend their OWN money and their OWN time supporting Paul. Such support is worth millions, that other campaigns would die for.
Is the money even real?
With the way the dollar is free-falling...
Does he get to use what he doesnt spend on a nice retirement?
He has his military pension and money from investments from his Congressional salary. He has a nice retirement setup, and even if he does use the campaign money for himself, who cares? The money is HIS, it was freely given to him.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.