Ron Paul on track to be biggest fundraiser (politico)

Politico ^ | 11/30/07 | Jeanne Cummings

[traviskicks]

Ron Paul may not win his party’s 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 quarter’s Dec. 31st deadline, a sum New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani couldn’t achieve in the third quarter when fundraising events still dominated his schedule.

Paul’s chief e-bundler, music promoter Trevor Lyman, hopes to raise $2.5 million by day’s end with the campaign’s 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 Paul’s striking, eleventh-hour surge may have come too late to dramatically change the campaign dynamics.

Nevertheless, Paul’s 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?

Paul’s last stand provides fresh evidence of how the Internet can transform a dark horse candidate and make him harder to knock off.

“It’s highly improbable that he will get into the first tier. But he’s colorful,” says David Gergen, a former White House adviser.

He’s certainly not the Republican Party’s 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 party’s 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.

“It’s a tremendous burden put on us and a responsibility,” Paul told MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough recently.

“We have all this money now. We didn’t 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 man’s 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 haven’t really planned for it.

Howard Dean raised $41 million in 2003 in the first campaign to fully employ the Internet.

By year’s 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.

[steve86]

I think we all agree on the one-year chart but the future is cloudy.

[samtheman]

You ROFL at your own questions? That’s pretty idiotic.

As for being worried about it, that’s you saying that, not me.

I’m just saying I’m sure this nitwit is going 3rd party, I don’t care what you think he told his wife.

But I’m not worried about it. Like I said, his 3rd party candidacy won’t impact the results of the election and will only make him and his very foolish followers end up looking more foolish than they do now. If that’s possible.

[MinnesotaLibertarian]

I mostly handle retirement accounts, so I always think in the long term. Because of its volatility, I never encourage clients to invest in currency. However, I think it’s safe to say that if we continue to borrow more and more money, the value of the dollar will continue to decline.

[samtheman]

Yup. L Ron Paul and Dennis “the Alien” Kucinich.

A match made in... area 51?

[napscoordinator]

If nobody believes this guy is running as third party than we are all crazy. He will run. What will he do with all that money if he doesn’t.

[End Times Crusader]

You ROFL at your own questions? That’s pretty idiotic.

Well, if he doesn't laugh at his own questions, who else will?

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

Paul calls Kucinich veep speculation "premature" [will think about it in 3 or 4 months]

Wow, another smear. Thanks for adding in your comments which aren't true.

Jesse Benton, Paul's campaign director, already shot this down.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

One, I'm not your pal and have no interest in being your pal, so save the condescension for someone who falls for that sort of crap.

Well, my heart's broken I guess. < /S >

Two, all of your claims are still just your opinion, and obviously you're welcome to it.

The bullet points I outlined are facts. Refute them or keep remaining in denial.

Mine is that he has no chance at all to garner the nomination for the reasons I've mentioned in previous posts, and I'll stick to that, thanks.

I told you already I don't care if he's not nominated. He WILL win a few primaries & the GOP WILL be forced to adopt some of his issues and return back to their conservative roots. I guarantee you that if the GOP and you guys keep antagonizing Paul rather than appreciating that he's helping the party over the long run, you can kiss the GOP goodbye.

[SJackson]

Wow, another smear. Thanks for adding in your comments which aren't true....Jesse Benton, Paul's campaign director, already shot this down.

Wow, another outright lie from a Paul supporter.

Jessie Benton shot it down?

How, was that an imposter speaking? Did the neocons hijack Paul's brain? An implant perhaps.

For the rational thread readers, aka Paul haters in paulite terminology, the thread.

Paul calls Kucinich veep speculation "premature" [will think about it in 3 or 4 months]

Click it, or just click the original link, http://blog.cleveland.com/openers/2007/11/paul_calls_kucinich_veep_specu.html.

In response to a question about running as Kucinich's VP on a 3rd party ticket, Paul clearly states that's a decision for 3 or 4 months down the road. Also notes that he likes Dennis, who I'm sure is a likeable guy, and agrees with him on the war (out now), government abuses, and economic issues.

Yes, economic issues.

From the mouth of Ron Paul.

EEE, not very nice to accuse your candidate of smearing himself.

we'll think about that in 3 or 4 months and find our where we are.
Ron Paul

In fairness, Latika may have had control of Paul's brain.

[samtheman]

:)

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

You ROFL at your own questions? That’s pretty idiotic.

Learn to read. I'm laughing at your even discussing the 3rd party crap, if you're not worried about him running.

As for being worried about it, that’s you saying that, not me.

No skin off my back one way or the other. I know that if turd Rudy or nanny-stater Huckster is nominated, I'm staying home. I know that if Fred! or Flipper Mitt is nominated, they're going to need to reach out to independents tired of the war, and to fiscal conservatives/libertarians tired of big government. My advice for Fred or Mitt is to reach out to Paul supporters on a few issues and get Paul's endorsement to prevent most of his supporters from going 3rd party or staying home. Otherwise, low voter turnout will result in a Hillary victory.

I’m just saying I’m sure this nitwit is going 3rd party, I don’t care what you think he told his wife.

Whatever, if you want to believe in this crap go ahead.

But I’m not worried about it. Like I said, his 3rd party candidacy won’t impact the results of the election and will only make him and his very foolish followers end up looking more foolish than they do now. If that’s possible.

Paul would destroy the GOP nominee because he would take the libertarian and independent voters. It's possible that in such a 3-way race, the GOP candidate would finish 3rd, with Paul either winning or narrowly being beaten by Hillary because the GOP nominee would be the spoiler, not Paul.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

Wow, another outright lie from a Paul supporter. Jessie Benton shot it down?

"Dr. Paul and Rep. Kucinich are friends and there is a lot of mutual respect," Paul communications director Jesse Benton said in an e-mail when asked whether a running-mate spot on the Kucinich ticket would be attractive to Paul. "They have worked, and will continue to work, together on the ending the war and protecting civil liberties.

• "However, Ron wants to substantially cut the size and scope of the federal government. There are too many differences on issues such as taxes and spending to think a joint ticket would be possible."

JESSE BENTON, PAUL CAMPAIGN

In response to a question about running as Kucinich's VP on a 3rd party ticket, Paul clearly states that's a decision for 3 or 4 months down the road.

Read into it all you want. Maybe you can dig into another garbage can showing them together holding hands. It ain't happening. The two of them are like night & day.

Also notes that he likes Dennis, who I'm sure is a likeable guy, and agrees with him on the war (out now), government abuses, and economic issues.

BFD. The populist left and the old-right have traditionally been together on these issues. I have more respect for Kucinich than I do for the other Democrats and Rudy.

[SubGeniusX]

Paul would destroy the GOP nominee because he would take the libertarian and independent voters. It's possible that in such a 3-way race, the GOP candidate would finish 3rd, with Paul either winning or narrowly being beaten by Hillary because the GOP nominee would be the spoiler, not Paul.

but, but, but ...Triple E ... "they" keep telling me that RP supporters like you and me are moonbats ... so would it nat naturally follw that RP would draw from the Hillary vote ...

surely you can't mean to imply that pricipled folk who believe in the Constitution would ever vote for anyone without the beloved (R) ...

heh....

[SubGeniusX]

Todays Donations

From: Ron Paul's Realtime Donation Graphs and Statistics for Q4

[the irate magistrate]

Good answer traviskicks!

[Jokelahoma]

Yes, yes, Ron Paul is the [i]only savior[/i] and all that. We get it. It's just that hose of us who don't necessarily agree with Paul's policies don't believe that to be the case, regardless of any guarantees you wish to make.

The bullet points you listed are your opinions. Provide evidence of every poll being incorrect, other than anecdotal "lots of people show up at rallies" stuff. No poll reaches every supporter of every candidate, yet the numbers are typically accurate enough. Accurate enough, at least, so that 5% in a poll doesn't really equate to 25% in the real world. There is no reason to believe there's some conspiracy to underreport Paul's support, and no reason to believe it isn't really within the margin of error of the middle single digits where it's being reported in poll after poll after poll. You may close your eyes really tight, click the heels on your slippers all day long, and cross every finger you have, but that doesn't make your points facts. And that whole wishing upon a star thing? Jiminy Cricket lied to you.

If the GOP has to adopt any of Paul's more fringe ideas, such as isolationism (regardless of what he chooses to call it... a rose by any other name and all that), the gold standard, etc. in order to survive, then I'd rather see the GOP die. Of course, it isn't really the case that the GOP has to adopt any of those to survive, so the point is moot -- again, regardless of your guarantees.

Look, I happen to agree with a few of Paul's domestic policies. But he's wrapped them so tightly in such an unacceptable foreign policy package deal that I cannot and will not vote for the man. I mean, even the crazy guy on my street who mumbles to himself and drools a lot occasionally says things that make sense. That doesn't qualify him to serve as mayor, now does it?

I'm as yet undecided as to for whom I'll vote. I'm watching as policy statements are released, and the differences in candidate positions are highlighted, and so forth. I'm leaning toward a couple candidates at this point, but that could still change. One thing I can tell you with absolute certainty is that given the behavior of Ron Paul supporters, both online and in public venues where I've witnessed them, well, they've driven me away from ever considering supporting Paul. If we're known by the company we keep, well, I'd rather not be known based on the behaviors of the rabid Paul people. They, almost as much as his foreign policy ideas, have turned me against their candidate. Even the threads here on FR have helped me make up my mind that I'll never support Paul. Yeah, other candidates have their jerks who support them. But in my opinion, Paul supporters reflect more poorly on their candidate than those of any other. The combination of his policies and his supporters just makes it impossible for me to consider him as eligible for my vote under any circumstances. You and others in here should join the ranks of those who boo veterans at debates, plaster road signs on property that doesn't belong to them, and generally behave poorly in support of your candidate in congratulating yourselves for running off potential fellow supporters. Not exactly how I thought campaigns were supposed to work, but I guess I just don't get this "Ron Paul Revolution". Lucky for me.

[Tarpon]

When it’s unlikely a lefty can get 50% you need some help from others to reduce the oppositions total. Why wouldn’t lefty shills give to ruPaul?

Hey Clinton had two terms of less than 50% and no one even spoke of the fact he had no mandate.

[sam_paine]

What I can’t figure is why people actually lay it out sooooo crystal clear, and still don’t get it.

Travis underscores it perfectly. Does anyone REALLY think the hardcore leftists support “limited govt, constitutionalist, true conservative principles?” OF COURSE NOT. So then why are they feeding money to Paul’s campaign? Becuase it increases their chance of winning!

If you’re George Soros....you spend money on Hillary commercials, you get incrementally nothing, because her base is saturated, and NOBODY is going to switch from Pubs directly to HER.

In fact, her poll numbers probably fall if you advertise her positions more.

But, if you’re Soros, and you get ONE Rudy or Thompson or Mitt voter to switch to Paul’s song, then that’s as good as a free vote for HER Hitleriness.

In a country that almost elected Algore and Kerry by slim 49/51% margins, it doesn’t take much, does it?

Why is that so hard to see?

[the irate magistrate]

Thank you EEE, CK and Traviskicks for fielding all of your eloquent answers.

Folks like you are the only reason that I continue to hang around this site anymore.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

Yes, yes, Ron Paul is the [i]only savior[/i] and all that. We get it. It's just that hose of us who don't necessarily agree with Paul's policies don't believe that to be the case, regardless of any guarantees you wish to make.

Not saying that he's a savior, just pointing out that he's the only candidate who can get a broad coalition together to defeat Hillary, and still retain the traditional GOP base. Which is why attacking Paul is counter-productive. Some of the liberal websites have joined the conservatives in attacking Paul. The lefties are angry that Paul doesn't buy into the global warming BS. CNN tried to ignore him and then trying to portray him as a nutcase with those questions.

The bullet points you listed are your opinions. Provide evidence of every poll being incorrect, other than anecdotal "lots of people show up at rallies" stuff. No poll reaches every supporter of every candidate, yet the numbers are typically accurate enough. Accurate enough, at least, so that 5% in a poll doesn't really equate to 25% in the real world.

Sorry, the evidence says otherwise. Paul wins straw polls, online polls, text polls, and have huge rallies, yet he's "stuck" at "2%?" Give me a break.

If the GOP has to adopt any of Paul's more fringe ideas, such as isolationism (regardless of what he chooses to call it... a rose by any other name and all that), the gold standard, etc. in order to survive, then I'd rather see the GOP die.

If the GOP DOESN'T adopt some of Paul's ideas, they're going to lose to Hillary, and the party will be fractured & the LP and CP will be strengthened as a result. They don't need to compromise with Paul on the immediate withdrawal aspect - but they do need to realize that people are tired of the war and want the troops to come home. Let's finish the job in Iraq and let these people go back to killing each other. How long do you want us to remain there?

One thing I can tell you with absolute certainty is that given the behavior of Ron Paul supporters, both online and in public venues where I've witnessed them, well, they've driven me away from ever considering supporting Paul.

What do you expect when supporters see their candidate getting smeared in the media and getting crapped on by the very party that's supposed to embrace his beliefs? I don't condone any of the nefarious acts that these supporters are doing, but you have to remember that they're newcomers to the political field and aren't as refined as FReepers are. On the other hand, you have Paul supporters who were banned from blogs like RedState just for posting the facts.

You and others in here should join the ranks of those who boo veterans at debates, plaster road signs on property that doesn't belong to them, and generally behave poorly in support of your candidate in congratulating yourselves for running off potential fellow supporters.

LOL. Military veterans make up a good segment of Paul's support. I've seen Paul's rallies and didn't see any of the blame-America firsters or 9/11 wackos in attendance. You have a handful of nuts who are trying to exploit his campaign, that's all. Now ask yourself this: Why is Paul generating the enthusiasm and support while the other GOP candidates aren't?