Skip to comments.Ron Paul says he raised nearly $20 million in final quarter of 2007
Posted on 01/01/2008 12:39:23 PM PST by rfaceEdited 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 ...
Given John McCain’s actions against the first and second amendments, and his attempt to grant amnesty to 20-30 million illegal aliens, couldn’t his supporters also be branded as traitors?
I think you are way out of line calling people traitors for supporting a particular candidate.
This kind of rhetoric is part of what has gotten us into the political situation in which we find ourselves. It was started by the Democrats in the 1980s, when they pulled out all the stops to prevent Robert Bork from getting on the Supreme Court.
you must not have been there in the 70's when thy went after Nixon, or the 60's when they went after Goldwater.
Correct on Goldwater, but Nixon created his own problems through paranoia. A trait that is unfortunately shared by too many today.
Ron Paul refers to 60-70 years worth of foreign policy, not say, just the last decade or two. How would you argue differently?
Would you say that current US foreign policy (nation building and bases/troops in dozens of foreign countries, CIA involvement since the 1950s in dozens of foreign nations) is in line with the US Constitution or out of line with the US Constitution?
some of his own problems, yes, but persecuted nonetheless for having been an anti-communist for decades.
That's not the same as blaming America. In a nutshell, he's saying actions have consequences. That's basically it.
Was it our fault the Japanese attacked us? It was our foreign policy that stopped trade with them.
What does that have to do with the Middle East? That's a specious comparison and besides Paul told Russert we were right to declare war and fight Japan.
It is not a fringe minority, it is his almost his entire following.
A 130,000 people who donated to Paul in 4Q - All of them aren't white supremacists, truthers, and anti-war leftists there bub.
Where does our foreign policy defy our constitution?
you’ll need to go back further, to Spanish-American War, Phillipine War, Little Big Horn, Falling Timbers—
We are well on our way to looking as dumb as Demrats here.
It was worth it to end slavery.
All the more reason why we shouldn't have stuck our noses in there to begin with. We didn't need to beg for Musharraf's permission or give him $10 billion to hunt down AQ near his border...we should have just fricking went in there.
Ron Paul is actually SAVING the Republican Party...
Do you want the libertarians and independents to go 3rd party or vote Republican?
and he did called Reagan a failure...
he finds the Republican party so reprehensible, I don’t know why he wants to call himself a Republican. On the other hand, without the wide-open Republican primary process, who would have heard of him?
In fact they said no thank you... Which is not hard to say..
Yet every other Westernized country that has ended slavery did it without a civil war (more accurately, War of Northern Aggression or War Between the States).
Lincoln himself said if he could save the Union without freeing the slaves, he would.
Ermm...no declarations of war? Yet, Korea, Vietnam, Panama, Iraq, etc.
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.