Skip to comments.Reports: Rick Perry Raised $17,000,000 In 49 Days
Posted on 10/05/2011 6:20:36 AM PDT by Clairity
Both Hot Air and The Drudge Report are reporting that the Perry campaign will report that it raised a fairly impressive $17 million during the 49 days of the 3rd quarter that the campaign was active.
Ed Morrissey breaks the numbers down:
The pace is even more impressive. Perry had 49 days in which to raise funds, rather than the full 92 days of the quarter, a rate of about $349,000 a day. The final debate in September didn't hurt Perry's fundraising rate, either. In the 42 days prior to the Orlando debate, their rate was $323K per day; in the eight days following the Orlando debate, that escalated to $478K per day. Perry's on-line operation did well, too, drawing in $1.1 million - despite, as my source says, not driving contributions with their on-line ads.
(Excerpt) Read more at outsidethebeltway.com ...
OK, I went back and re-read and posted the quote and it was 60% of the donors, not 60% of the amount.
That is why I went back to the ‘Hot Air’ thread and got the full quote and posted it. I had read it wrong.
I might also mention, the large, mega, (evil) Oil and Gas company I work for, (bought and paid for) just made a 7 figure commitment to the Perry campaign. Not because he will do what they want him to do, but because he has done things that are good for the industry as a whole and has helped create millions of jobs for American families and Conservatives like myself.
But I'm sure that some of the Populist activists here will define that to be the very opposite of what it actually is.
“”in the eight days following the Orlando debate, that escalated to $478K per day””
For the Perry-Bashers this is not a good news day. When the bashers counted Perry down and out, his supporters were more supportive than ever.
It does appear Perry is still the heir apparent to be the Republican nominee.
The NWO, open border, globalists and crony capitalists want to make certain that there boy gets the nomination.
Like Romney is not going to have to pay to play? Like Cain or any other candidate is not going to have to pay to play?
Give me a break.
I forgot to ping you to post 51.
Some of it is...but it takes big donors to fund a presidential campaign...and a lot of them.
“Pointing out he facts is your definition of hysteria?”
Yeah. Seeing as how I didn’t have a cat and all the rest of the spittle aimed my way. Damn straight. Dodging the spray isn’t how I want to spend my time.
What FACT did you post in that entire spew?
LOL...well, there are plenty of those types here at FR these days. I was at another forum and this MIT genius graduate kept stalking me. At first, I didn’t notice after several months...I thought he is stalking me!!!
A problem I have with Palin is that she has tried to demonize "big oil" and that is destructive to our economy and jobs. I LOVE big oil.
Who's the Tea Party?
This part or the article suggests otherwise:
In the 42 days prior to the Orlando debate, their rate was $323K per day; in the eight days following the Orlando debate, that escalated to $478K per day.
“Seeing as how I didnât have a cat”
Seeing that you don’t have a sense of humor, do not understand sarcasm... Pity.
Virginia Ridgerunner, it's customary to ping the person you quote.
I do wonder what you mean by posting Mr. Robinson's quote like that?
We have always had lively debate and disagreement on FR, as long as it's polite and based on facts.
I've met Mr. Robinson several times over the years at FR events. And, as a long time active member and supporter of FR (and the Governor), I replied to Mr. Robinson that I disagree with his opinion:
The Texas Legislature gave the Governor the authority when they delegated the mandating of vaccines to the Executive Branch. He used his lawful authority. They balked, changed the law for one vaccine and only one vaccine, but left his opt out provision alone.
He gave that opt out provision more publicity than all the anti-vaccination advocates ever had - while easing the burden that parents faced.
Governor Perry has fought for control of the border all along. Hes cut spending, protected life and marriage, and knocked the RINOs off their bureaucratic pedestals in Texas."
329 posted on Saturday, March 05, 2011 1:17:48 PM by PSYCHO-FREEP (Patriotic by Proxy! (Cause I'm a nutcase and it's someone Else's' fault!....))
What's wrong with oil money?
That you refer to them as 'big oil' is kinda telling...
The NWO, open border, globalists and crony capitalists would be quite happy and well served by either Perry or Romney.
You have every right to keep believing that... get back to me around the first of the year... he is dead in the water and sinking.
I would especially like to thank the state of Ohio and West Virginia for letting me in to rape and pillage all the evil profits we are taking from under the ground there. Then we can take our corrupt money and buy up all the politicians in Washington, you know, so we can keep all the money for ourselves! ROFL!
The downside of this is, that there are more and more people being created that are like me. Who are buying nice houses, large chunks of land and SUV’s! You know, that corrupt capitalist kind of individual who wants to live better. And especially the kind who donate to causes they consider good for their well being. (Of the most EVIL kind.) /s
(Do they even have a clue how they come across?)
Usually, "pay to play" is viewed as running in the other direction, where the elected policy maker "requires" payment in order to advocate policies that suit whoever paid 'im.
The person in the position of policy and political power is the one being bought off.
That’s crap. Perry is every bit as bought and paid for by members of the “kingmaker” class as Romney. The real test would be to nominate someone like a Cain or Palin and have Perry and Romney unite behind the nominee along with their money and work to elect a real candidate. Would I expect that to happen? Nope; they will lose the nomination and then will pack up their money and support teams and ignore the nominee. They care about being elected to power, not about the country or the Constitution. Most of our founders gave up or put at risk their wealth and influence to build a country with new ideals but these guys don’t seem capable of giving up their next paid speech or risk anything to try to save the Constitution and the Republic.
I'm not suggesting that Romney would be better, but Cain and others are more interested in a good business climate for all than rewarding donors in a tit for tat scheme.
Perry has a huge problem with this cronyism thing, it has been with him from the beginning, and you can be sure it will be with him if he wins. It also takes a huge issue off the table if he is the nominee against Bambi.
The article doesn't give enough information to reach a conclusion as to public/mass popularity. it could be that the bigger donors were more heavily represented in the last eight days, while the number of small donors per day dropped off.
I don't know which way it went (or if it went as described as a possibility just above), just saying that the daily money rate doesn't tell the daily popularity rate.
The attacks on Perry by other candidates, Bachmann, Rommey, Santorum, and now Cain were hollow, and they will pay the price.
People don't take to vicious one liner attacks, ie Bachmann and the mandated shot, Santorum and the fence, Romney and instate tuition, Cain and the rock. IMO, Perry, though not as eloquent as the MSM thinks he should have been, has logic and reason on his side.
Same with the talking heads. They'll work to maintain the established circles of power. Follow the money; and note too, how 90% of the population is damned scared of radical change. Eliminate the Department of Education? Why, that just can't be! Repeat with any federal bureaucracy.
I agree with your bottom line on Perry. He's with the "in" crowd, and is probably more skilled than most at obtaining personal advantage, working the levers of power, etc. than most.
Fine. Let’s just dispense with this charade and set up a no campaign, no primary run for the nomination, just privately pander to whatever donor groups you can pry money from. Start it on January 1 of the specified year and the one who raises the most money by July 1 is the nominee.
The primary system and buying the nomination is corrupt, does not work well and results in in crap like McCain. It has nothing to do with common people, the Constitution, and choice and everything to do with big money influence, political dynasty and career (mostly criminal) politicians.
No, she hasn’t. She has called out CORRUPTION within certain industries as well as corruption WITHIN political parties. But don’t let that stand in the way of your establishment party-loving hypocrisy.
Don't ask me...ask Jim.
The oil industry is just as corrupt as the two major political parties in this country. That's why Palin put their feet to the fire in Alaska and sent a couple of corrupt GOP hacks to jail up there. And it's why she beat Murkowski for governor in the first place, because together, the Alaska GOP and the oil companies were robbing the state blind.
Perhaps it’s from both the small donors as it was stated in one article I read and frustrated business owners who understand that Perry is pro business, pro tort reform, gutting the out of control EPA, pro drilling, free market solutions, repealing 0bamacare not just giving waivers like Romney has said he would do and border security which Perry’s governing record reflects.
Guess what, the TEA Party isn’t the only demographic out there that votes and detests what 0bama is doing to this country!
This election is still about the economy and jobs. It’s not about immigration, tardisil, painted rocks and whatever distracting argument people throw out there.
Bottom line it’s the economy stupid! all over again.
I read in the other thread on this that over 60% of that amount was donations of $250 or less.
So you could have one $1000 donation, nine $10 donations, and announce that 90% of donations are small, instead of pointing out that 90%+ of the money came from one fat-cat. They all do it. Be suspicious.
Are you paying royalties to the people from under whose properties you are extracting the natural gas? I doubt it.
What debates were YOU watching? What issues did he win on? Forced vaccinations of young girls? The lie about the poor lady who died from cervical cancer? The heartless lot of us Americans who don’t agree with his policies on illegals? Please.
Never mind what other, even more atrocious, candidates said about him. It’s what he said about himself that cost him.
And that's why his numbers fell off the cliff?
I can only ask *you* about “what you mean.”
And, again: it’s customary and polite to ping a person when you quote or refer to him.
I have news for you, the tea party conservatives aren’t the only legitimate voters who detest what 0bama is doing to this country and they are needed to defeat him in the general election. It is also going to take the big bucks to win since zer0 is wanting a $1 billion war chest.
Looks like it's Lowe's for me from now on.
Even in the case were the landowner does not have Mineral Rights, the land-use/Lease access agreement is very lucrative for the landowner.
Sorry to ruin your image of us you are selling, you thought we were stealing milk from babies and taking little old ladies walkers away from them so they can't get to church on Sunday. But there is hope for the insanely jealous after all, for those who seek it.
His numbers haven't fallen off the cliff in Texas.
I strongly disagree with your premise that Governor Perry is “bought and paid for.” He is under attack because he has proven the opposite.
Furthermore, you misrepresent those of us who support Governor Perry because he is pro-life, pro-marriage, and pro-Constitution.
Our cause is simple: to restore the balance of power intended by our Founders but forsaken by secular progressives determined to say what government will do for the people rather than allowing people to do what they can do for themselves. Our goal is to take power away from Washington and instead empower states, communities, and individuals, because Americas future greatness is inextricably intertwined with states pushing back. p.16
Perry, Rick; Newt Gingrich (2010-11-15). Fed Up!: Our Fight to Save America from Washington (pp. 61-62). Little, Brown and Company. Kindle Edition.
Let me tell you a little story. I'm originally from Southwest Virginia, which is rich in coal and natural gas. About ten years ago, a prominent energy corporation cut a shady deal with the Board of Supervisors of my home county. The agreement was that the Supervisors would look the other way, in exchange for kick-backs, while the corporation's drillers moved deep into the mountains overnight and quietly began extracting natural gas using a sludge injection method. It was a virtual bonanza, and the operation went on for several years.
No property owners were notified about what was going on, nor given the opportunity to review the agreement nor claim royalties, and no one knew about it until after the deed was done and a lot of water wells went bad from the injected sludge. No one ever received any royalties and some bureaucrats and elected officials subsequently went to jail because of it.
My folks not only were robbed of the natural gas that sat under their property but lost their well because of the corruption of both our elected officials and the corporation.
So please pardon me when I decline to accept your rosy assertion at face value.
So the zero admin pays off HIS cronies and perry would pay off his. Which is better for this country? Corrupt unions that zero supports? Illegals working for big construction companies and developers that perry supports which got the sanctuary cities bill killed in Texas? laraza? cair? Red China? Cintra? You tell me. Seems to me, some of zero’s cronies are perry cronies as well.
Thanks for the article!
I was scrolling down the various posts in this thread, and I kept thinking: “Wow, don’t we get enough class warfare coming from Obama.. Now we have to listen to class-warfare comments from posters here on FR too!” LOL
Anyway, glad to see this. Thanks for posting!
What issues did he win on?
Forced vaccinations of young girls?
Forced? No one was.
The lie about the poor lady who died from cervical cancer?
Bachmann said that. Not Perry.
The heartless lot of us Americans who dont agree with his policies on illegals?
The state of Texas overwhelmingly approved instate tuition and Perry, like a good governor should, signed it. Perry is doing more than any other governor, in dealing with illegal immigration, doing what Obama should be doing.
Heartless, yes in a way. A student goes through 1st through 12th grade, his classmates go on to college, he can't, and you miles away, would take away his chance at a better life. All the while his family is working and building a better Texas.
Its what he said about himself that cost him.
Just what did he say about himself?
As Perry supporters on this forum showed, when Perry started getting slammed for his views, debate performance and issues their attempt at propping him up intensified. I think the money collected reflects that. Sending extra money was a way to show that he still had support. I will watch the next quarter as more and more begin to realize that the real support just isnt there.
>Forced vaccinations of young girls?
>>Forced? No one was.
But he tried.
>The lie about the poor lady who died from cervical cancer?
>>Bachmann said that. Not Perry.
Perry said that.
>The heartless lot of us Americans who dont agree with his policies on illegals?
>>The state of Texas overwhelmingly approved instate tuition and Perry, like a good governor should, signed it.
The PEOPLE of Texas didd NOT approve it and they still don’t.
The PEOPlE of Texas had no say in it at all.
>Its what he said about himself that cost him.
>>Just what did he say about himself?
All of the above.
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.