Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ron Paul says he raised nearly $20 million in final quarter of 2007
Boston Globe ^ | 01.01.08 | Foon Rhee

Posted on 01/01/2008 12:39:23 PM PST by rface

Edited on 01/01/2008 12:48:40 PM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]

Ron Paul said today his presidential campaign raised nearly $20 million in the last three months of 2007 from 130,000 donors.

Ron Paul brought in nearly $5.3 million that quarter.

Paul's campaign said that more than 107,000 donors were new and the average donation was about $90. More than half of the total came from two 24-hour online fund-raising events organized by supporters -- one on Nov. 5, and the second centered in Boston on Dec. 16.


(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: fundraising; ronpaul; sorosmoney
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-222 next last

1 posted on 01/01/2008 12:39:25 PM PST by rface
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: rface
So all 130,000 nationwide that would vote for this certified nut case has given money to him. Plus, those in the Marxist Dimocrat party that are giving to him to get him to win. This fool is NO republican and certainly NO conservative.
2 posted on 01/01/2008 12:41:09 PM PST by RetiredArmy (Better prepare, come Nov 08, we have a Marxist Commissar President and Marxist Congress.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rface

Stormfront is really coming through for him.


3 posted on 01/01/2008 12:41:13 PM PST by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RetiredArmy

48 hours till the proof in the pudding.


4 posted on 01/01/2008 12:42:44 PM PST by Rb ver. 2.0 (Global warming is the new Marxism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Rb ver. 2.0

I don’t particularly care for nuts in my pudding


5 posted on 01/01/2008 12:43:28 PM PST by digger48
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: RetiredArmy

Paul supporters are like oompa-loompas on meth.


6 posted on 01/01/2008 12:43:46 PM PST by Free Vulcan (Hey Iowans: the only opinions that matter are the ones in the room voting January 3rd.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: rface
I would vote for Ron Paul if he was a bit more pragmatic about our foreign policy.

If this was 1996, I would probably vote for him.

7 posted on 01/01/2008 12:44:02 PM PST by MinorityRepublican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rface

8 posted on 01/01/2008 12:44:02 PM PST by reagan_fanatic (Ron Paul put the cuckoo in my Cocoa Puffs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rface

I resent his fact that he blames us for 911.


9 posted on 01/01/2008 12:45:45 PM PST by eyedigress
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mnehrling

“Stormfront is really coming through for him.”

That guy supported Reagan and Bush too. Nobody expected the Gipper to get elected either.

Sorry that Paul isn’t RINO enough for you.


10 posted on 01/01/2008 12:46:14 PM PST by FreeInWV
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: RetiredArmy

code pink and George soros are 19,000,000 dollars poorer also. Coincidence hmmmmmm


11 posted on 01/01/2008 12:47:22 PM PST by italianquaker (Is there anything Ron Paul doesn't blame the USA for?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: rface

FReepers, say what you want but $20MM in a fiscal quarter is a lot of money. Must be getting the “insane uncle” vote from around the nation.


12 posted on 01/01/2008 12:48:29 PM PST by Zuben Elgenubi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rb ver. 2.0

48 hours until he is knocked out of the race.


13 posted on 01/01/2008 12:48:32 PM PST by rdl6989 (FRed Thompson '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: rface

Wow, that sure is alot of Soros money.


14 posted on 01/01/2008 12:48:58 PM PST by KC_Conspirator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rface

The real message is that so many people looking at all the choice, choose to put their money on somebody that might actually change things and not just give “change” lip service.


15 posted on 01/01/2008 12:50:45 PM PST by glorgau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: glorgau

anti-war money for an anti-war guy


16 posted on 01/01/2008 12:52:35 PM PST by gusopol3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: italianquaker

Yeah, I can’t wait til I get my refund check from Soros. You know we get 25% on top of what we donated back. It’s a pretty sweet deal.

Come off it there bud, you just sound stupid with comments like that.


17 posted on 01/01/2008 12:53:37 PM PST by Bastiat_Fan (Please don't call me a PaulTard... Surrender Monkey is so much more pleasing to the ears!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: FreeInWV
“Sorry that Paul isn’t RINO enough for you.”

That’s pretty ironic...

What do you think RINO stands for?

Talk about Republican in name only... Can you say Libertarian? They have their own party he can run in without slapping the Republican label on him.

18 posted on 01/01/2008 12:54:03 PM PST by DB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: FreeInWV

I got my problems with RP on the foreign policy side so he’s not my guy. That said, you are very correct in saying that we’ve got too many RINOs running at this time - McCain, Guiliani and Romney to name them. Huck, well he’s a populist, not a Republican (in spite of his party registration).

The smear job by the pro-Israel wing of the GOP (aided and abetted by the M$M) is really all about the benjamins. RP wants to end all foreign aid, and that bothers those in the party (and out) who feel that we should be continuing to give Israel money. The guilt by association tactic has been pretty successful so far - to those who aren’t really paying attention. The hypocrisy is pretty blatant since no other candidates are held to the same standard.


19 posted on 01/01/2008 12:54:13 PM PST by RKV (He who has the guns makes the rules)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: RetiredArmy
Just a drop in the bucket for George Soros and the moveon gang. If he had any true Republican support he be be over 2% of Republican backing. The other support comes from the far left blame America first anti-Americans.
20 posted on 01/01/2008 12:55:09 PM PST by rideharddiefast
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: FreeInWV
That guy, you mean David Duke who first ran against Reagan in 88 as a Democrat and who actually supported Buchanan?

Paul is very RINO, that is why he had an ACU rating of only 76%. He is a moderate libertarian with ZERO accomplishments in his decades in office other that lately selling out to the anti-American left, troofers and neo-nazis.

The Paul coalition
Cindy Sheehan and Stormfront Leader Jamie Kelso at a Ron Paul rally.

Ron Paul with Stormfront leader Don Black

21 posted on 01/01/2008 12:55:24 PM PST by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: rface

All that money really does is illustrate that you cannot buy votes.

Dollars do not equal votes.


22 posted on 01/01/2008 12:56:54 PM PST by Martins kid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RKV

Who or what are the “benjamins”?


23 posted on 01/01/2008 12:57:41 PM PST by svcw (ncmi.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: RKV

his lies about Lincoln put him outside of the Republican fold


24 posted on 01/01/2008 12:57:50 PM PST by gusopol3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: FreeInWV
Sorry that Paul isn’t RINO enough for you.

The problem with cut and run he is too anti-American for most Republicans. He fits in nicely with the Moveon.org gang.
25 posted on 01/01/2008 12:57:59 PM PST by rideharddiefast
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: RKV
Actually, if it was a normal guilt by association smear job, then it would be one way as they are implying. This isn’t one way, this is a relationship, which is two way. Ron Paul chooses to associate himself with Alex Jones and has even taken part in troofer documentaries with him. Jamie Kelso of Stormfront is given unprecedented access to the Ron Paul campaign, better access than most of the press.

This isn’t guilt by association, this is relationships that are making themselves more and more apparent as time goes on.

26 posted on 01/01/2008 12:58:20 PM PST by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: RetiredArmy

Ron Paul is a Libertarian, he has NEVER claimed to be a conservative.

On some things, libertairians and conservatives agree. Ron Paul has not chosen to emphasize these areas of common belief, but has wandered off into some fever swamp where paranoia and suspicion of everybody else’s motives are paramount.

There is some question about WHERE the influx of cash is coming from. I would suspect some major benefactor like H. Ross Perot, but there is no Bush in this race. And George Soros is directing his efforts elsewhere.


27 posted on 01/01/2008 12:58:37 PM PST by alloysteel (The enormity of the truth is incredible. You could not make this stuff up.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: rface

My only fear, is that Ron Paul will think he has enough support to make his mark, and still run as a third party ticket.

But it’s his life, he can do what he wants.

I miss having conservatives in the Republican party.


28 posted on 01/01/2008 1:00:20 PM PST by PureSolace (God save us all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DB

So RP hasn’t been elected to Congress as a Republican ten times. That doesn’t appear to be enough for you. I’ve got my problems with him from a policy standpoint, but to say he ain’t Republican just isn’t true. He represents a side of Republican policy thought that you disagree with, but he isn’t off the reservation on many of our key issues. Lower taxes? Yep. Smaller government? Yep. (or like too many so called conservatives have you forgotten that one?) Eliminate gun control? Yep. Pro-life? Yep, and consistently so over a long period of time (and you can’t say the same about Mitt). And so on.


29 posted on 01/01/2008 1:00:21 PM PST by RKV (He who has the guns makes the rules)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: alloysteel

“not chosen to emphasize these areas of common belief” Flat out untrue.


30 posted on 01/01/2008 1:01:36 PM PST by RKV (He who has the guns makes the rules)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: RKV
elected to Congress as a Republican ten times

was his district competitive, or do you just have to have the R after your name. As far as i know, we don't owe him any thanks.

31 posted on 01/01/2008 1:03:16 PM PST by gusopol3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: RKV

David Duke was elected to congress in Louisiana and ran on the same platform of small government, low taxes, etc, that doesn’t mean he is a true Conservative Republican.


32 posted on 01/01/2008 1:05:39 PM PST by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: rface

$20 Million?

See, this is why I keep saying that a proscription, on the model of the Romans, would be the best way for dealing with traitors.

Print out a list of Ron Paul donors and others, nail it to the door of the Capitol, and then let those who deal with the problem keep a percentage of the profits, with the rest going to fund the war effort.


33 posted on 01/01/2008 1:10:09 PM PST by furquhart (John S. McCain for President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gusopol3
was his district competitive, or do you just have to have the R after your name

I don't know. If he's such a poor Republican and there are no Democrats in his district, is it really true that they couldn't come up with a single other Republican to run against him in a primary for Congress that would be more to your satisfaction?

I think it's more likely that yes, he's been elected to Congress lots of times, and yes, that's because people in his district like him.

34 posted on 01/01/2008 1:11:58 PM PST by mhx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

Comment #35 Removed by Moderator

To: alloysteel
And I NEVER said he did claim to be a conservative! I said he wasn’t. I don’t care if he calls himself a libertarian. I call him a fool and a nut case.
36 posted on 01/01/2008 1:12:37 PM PST by RetiredArmy (Better prepare, come Nov 08, we have a Marxist Commissar President and Marxist Congress.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: mhx
That’s because he hasn’t had a real good challenger until this year and he is known to bring the pork back to his district. Paul leads all other Texas congressmen in earmark requests.

Time for a change, let’s get a real conservative in that district.
http://www.chrispeden.org

37 posted on 01/01/2008 1:13:25 PM PST by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: mhx

In most of the Roman proscriptions, the marked individuals also had the option of fleeing into exile and abandoning their property.


38 posted on 01/01/2008 1:15:19 PM PST by furquhart (John S. McCain for President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: mhx

then he was of no benefit to Republicans outside of his district. Let him continue to run there or , if he’s primaried , another Republican will represent his district. What’s the difference to the rest of us?


39 posted on 01/01/2008 1:18:29 PM PST by gusopol3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: mnehrling

“That guy, you mean David Duke ...”

No. Must I spell it out for you? I mean the guy in your picture (Don Black) who actively supported & contributed to Reagan in ‘80. So are you calling everyone in Reagan’s coalition a neonazi? Are you saying that Don Black’s support influenced Reagan in any way?

ACU ratings are nice but they also include votes on topics that have nothing to do with conservatism or constitutionality, such as the Patriot Act & S 3930 (Roll Call 508) a bill authorizing military tribunals to try unlawful enemy combatants in the war on terror. Paul votes against bills that he feels are contrary to the constitution.

Paul’s lifetime rating is still 82.3%. Perhaps in ‘05 & ‘06 when he got 76% he thought unconstitutional legislation was being passed.


40 posted on 01/01/2008 1:19:32 PM PST by FreeInWV
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: FreeInWV
See post #26, there is a difference between someone supporting and a relationship.
BTW, his ACU rating of 76% was last year, he has been falling for the past decade as he embraces the anti-american rhetoric over the Conservative values he used to hold dear.
41 posted on 01/01/2008 1:21:24 PM PST by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: rface
Image hosted by Photobucket.com i still say RuPaul has a better shot...
42 posted on 01/01/2008 1:29:11 PM PST by Chode (American Hedonist )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bastiat_Fan

no, paul the skid for prez sounds stupid bud


43 posted on 01/01/2008 1:30:37 PM PST by italianquaker (Is there anything Ron Paul doesn't blame the USA for?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: furquhart

I don’t think John McCain would endorse threatening other people with murder to force them to flee the country. I’m pretty sure that he thinks that in the marketplace of ideas, he can win. I think that’s why we have elections instead of tyrants. You can’t really believe what you’re saying, you just must think it’s a line that sounds funny. It really just sounds pathetic.

You (not you specifically, but people reading here) are either afraid Ron Paul can win, or you’re not. If you’re not, who cares? He can’t win. If you think he can win, why do you think he can win? Because a majority of the people are insane?

What I am seeing is that Paul’s supporters are more enthusiastic than the supporters of the other Republican candidates. What I have to keep asking myself is — why? If the Ron Paul supporters are able to put themselves at the top of the online polls, and there are so many more Giuliani supporters than Ron Paul supporters, why aren’t the Giuliani supporters doing anything about it? Where are the Thompson supporters beating up on Ron Paul voters all day long in the AOL straw poll? People here invented the concept of Freeping, for crying out loud. Where are Fred Thompson’s hundreds of thousands of online donors?

I mean, I’m sincerely curious about this. Given that the other Republican candidates are indeed so far ahead in the polls, why don’t they beat the Ron Paul guys in ever measure of online fundraising that there is? Or in online polls? It ought to be easy for them to do, they’re way ahead in the polls so they must have a lot of supporters. They just don’t care? They’re not that enthusiastic? I don’t see that as a good thing, and it’s not a good omen for a Republican winning in 2008. If it’s true that all of Ron Paul’s supporters are Democrats (which is a questionable assertion) then I think it’s a wake up call to all of us to see how much energy Democrats are putting into this election compared to what Republicans are doing.

Is the best we’re going to do that we’re going to nominate a candidate that no one is excited about, and then say “well at least they’re not Hillary” and hope that they win?


44 posted on 01/01/2008 1:34:20 PM PST by mhx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: mnehrling

“as he embraces the anti-american rhetoric over the Conservative values he used to hold dear.”

Like supporting the Second Amendment when the sitting GOP president pushed congress to renew the AWB and increased the size of the BATF? Or when the leading GOP candidates ALL have supported some form of gun control, even going so far as posing for pictures with HCI?

The anti-America rhetoric that you mention is often criticizing policy much of which was set by holdovers from the Clinton administration.


45 posted on 01/01/2008 1:34:40 PM PST by FreeInWV
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: rface
The problem with Paul is that he is the one articulating the needed message of pushing back an intusive government.

A sane Republican candidate should have taken up this message, it is a needed message.
But Paul’s foreign policy ideas would be disastrous for our great nation.
We can not walk away from our role on the world stage.

46 posted on 01/01/2008 1:35:32 PM PST by HereInTheHeartland ("We have to drain the swamp" George Bush, September 2001)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreeInWV
Gun control is one area that Paul is good on and one that most of us don’t have a problem with, albeit, with that even he isn’t perfect.

Voted NO on prohibiting product misuse lawsuits on gun manufacturers. (Oct 2005)
Voted NO on prohibiting suing gunmakers & sellers for gun misuse. (Apr 2003)
Voted NO on decreasing gun waiting period from 3 days to 1. (Jun 1999)

Nor does his pretty good record on this overcome his leftist record on national security issues, his piss poor record on border security, his hundreds of millions in backdoor earmarks or his 19th century economic policy.

47 posted on 01/01/2008 1:38:07 PM PST by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: mnehrling

Thank you - Paul’s association with fringe groups should be noted. Some of that money has to come from them.


48 posted on 01/01/2008 1:40:00 PM PST by Martins kid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: FreeInWV; AuntB; SJackson
Don't be fooled.. Paul is no Conservative. Votes speak louder than rhetoric.

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

Ron Paul's 2006 American Conservative Union rating: 76% Lifetime Rating: 82.3%

Ron Paul's Voting Record (ya, ya, I know, there is an excuse for all of these, state's rights are more important than stopping abortion and fixing the border, Ronnie is making a statement, or everyone else was voting against it and he was just playing the game, yadda, yadda, yadda)

Here are some more ‘Conservative(sic)’ votes by Paul:

Voted NO on federal crime to harm fetus while committing other crimes.

Voted NO on forbidding human cloning for reproduction & medical research.

Voted NO on barring transporting minors to get an abortion.

Voted YES on funding for alternative sentencing instead of more prisons.

Voted NO on more prosecution and sentencing for juvenile crime.

Voted NO on military border patrols to battle drugs & terrorism.

Voted NO on allowing school prayer during the War on Terror.

Voted NO on allowing vouchers in DC schools.

Voted NO on passage of the Bush Administration national energy policy.

Voted NO on implementing Bush-Cheney national energy policy.

Voted YES on barring website promoting Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump.

Voted NO on speeding up approval of forest thinning projects.

Voted NO on reforming the UN by restricting US funding.

Voted NO on requiring lobbyist disclosure of bundled donations.

Voted NO on prohibiting lawsuits about obesity against food providers.

Voted NO on prohibiting product misuse lawsuits on gun manufacturers

Voted NO on prohibiting suing gunmakers & sellers for gun misuse.

Voted NO on decreasing gun waiting period from 3 days to 1.

Voted NO on emergency $78B for war in Iraq & Afghanistan.

Voted NO on $266 billion Defense Appropriations bill.

Voted YES on more immigrant visas for skilled workers.

Voted YES on providing $70 million for Section 8 Housing vouchers.

Voted NO on promoting work and marriage among TANF recipients.

Voted NO on treating religious organizations equally for tax breaks.

Let's also not forget Paul's Pork Projects (that he voted for before he voted against when he calls them unconstitutional but he is just playing the game when he submits them because everyone else does it.. yadda yadda yadda..)

Paul also supported the NAU superhighway by funding the TransTexas Corridor

49 posted on 01/01/2008 1:40:14 PM PST by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: mhx
I think it’s a wake up call to all of us to see how much energy Democrats are putting into this election compared to what Republicans are doing.

the Democrats know who they're running against, George W. Bush. When the Republicans know who they're running against, there'll bw more passion. BTW, Paul is running against Bush too.

50 posted on 01/01/2008 1:40:58 PM PST by gusopol3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-222 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson