Ron Paul raises $9 million in 2 months

Seattle Times ^ | 11/23/07

[traviskicks]

In another sign of Rep. Ron Paul's online fundraising prowess, the Republican presidential candidate from Texas said in a TV interview Friday that he has raised more than $9 million during the past two months and expects to raise a total of at least $12 million for the fourth quarter.

Paul, speaking on Bloomberg Television's "Political Capital with Al Hunt," said he considers his recent fundraising success "astounding."

He added that his campaign plans another "special" fundraising day Dec. 16. On Nov. 5, Paul supporters raised $4.3 million, one of the biggest single-day showings of any candidate in history.

[rineaux]

“As I understand it, Ron Paul never left the states during his stretch of service.” Not true.

A flight surgeon stationed in South Korea, Middle East, and Africa from 62-65. Did not receive order to go to Vietnam. I am sure a lot of pilots appreciated his services.

[rineaux]

Thanks for the ping.

9.126 million plus dollars as of this post.

[traviskicks]

During the last 4.3 million day drive over 30,000 people donated an average $103, so this Soros conspiracy stuff isn’t going to cut it.

[Albertafriend]

Is there any possibliity that he and his campaign could be lying about finances as a way of drumming up emotional support? I’m asking this because I have no idea how these things work in the US.

[MadameAxe]

Paul votes more like a democrat than a republican.

If true, that is a sadder reflection on the republicans than it is on Dr. Paul, since he restricts his "yes" votes to legislation which he believes is authorized by the Constitution.

“The resolution recognized “the Islamic faith as one of the great religions of the world,” rejected “hatred, bigotry and violence directed against Muslims, both in the United States and worldwide”

Are you suggesting that a good republican should be in favor of hatred, bigotry and violence?

[rineaux]

“30,000 people donated an average $103, so this Soros conspiracy stuff isn’t going to cut it.”

Just more useless scud fodder shot toward RP. Always misses the target, but they keep hurling the same crap. Too funny.

[Hunterite]

How much of it is being funded by Big Marijuana and other special interests?

Big Marijuana?

*********************

lol

[GraniteStateConservative]

Well, Dean was a prolific spender of campaign money, too. I don’t think that applies to Paul.

[Hunterite]

“Exactly, they don’t want people to know that Paul is pro-life and saw a late term abortion up close as an ob/gyn and was morally repulsed.”

*********************************

Who wouldn’t be morally repulsed by a late term abortion. I haven’t seen it, but I surely believe the descriptions in literature.

Maybe all Democrats and Libertarians should be forced to watch a partial birth abortion.

See thats the difference. Some of us have faith, some have to see with their own eyes. Who would you rather have lead the country? Someone who has to see with their own eyes, or someone who can make a logical judgement on any situation by making effective judgements on 3rd person advisement?

[Hunterite]

“I wouldn’t put to much credence in a straw poll in which Hunter and Paul were two of the top three..... “

************************

They were earlier polls, in which people were more brave and ideological. Before the “Electability theory,” browbeat all the goats.

[steve86]

Is there any possibliity that he and his campaign could be lying about finances as a way of drumming up emotional support? I’m asking this because I have no idea how these things work in the US

Why, is it routine to lie in Canada about such things?

[Eric Blair 2084]

I think anyone who believes that Gubmint exists to protect life and liberty would be repulsed at the thought of sticking sharp objects into unborn children.

You don’t have to believe in Jesus, Moses, Muhammed, Vishnu or Buddha and be religious to see that. It’s not just a religious issue, although that is how the secular progressives paint it.

[rineaux]

“Why, is it routine to lie in Canada about such things?”

LOL.

[billbears]

If Paul’s support is so broad based that it can raise this sort of money without tapping Soros type fat cats, how it that this supposed “wide spread” support is not being reflected in any of the polling data?

You got me Johnnie. George Soros sent me a check just last week. The reason the numbers are there are for several reasons I believe. A very small (300-600) number are polled. Most of them were registered Republican in the last big Republican push (2004). And very few of those people are supporting Dr. Paul. He is getting his support from people that either didn't vote in '04 or voted for another party.

But let's get to the heart of the matter shall we? What's really disturbing you is that Dr. Paul's funds aren't coming from the corners that Republicans usually get funds (big business, fat cats, etc.). What's really disturbing you is that there are more than a few old school conservatives out there who have sat on the sidelines while Tweedledee and Tweedledumber have fought over the government. What's really disturbing you is that support for Shrub has never really been there in the grassroots. The old conservatives who remember Goldwater, Reagan, etc.

What's really disturbing to you is that if Dr. Paul isn't the nominee most of them will sit at home again while Tweedledee and Tweedledumber argue over semantics of how they're going to grow the government. And as much as you scream, type in caps, call names, you can't change that. And that upsets you because perhaps your choice between the two equally irrelevant parties won't win. And no one cares anymore...

[Eric Blair 2084]

BTW, you assume incorrectly that libertarians believe in killing babies. A true libertarian understands that Gubmint’s function is to protect life and liberty....not to redistribute wealth, perform social engineering or legislate morality.

Abortion is a crime that violates the Constitution.

[Hunterite]

BTW, you assume incorrectly that libertarians believe in killing babies. A true libertarian understands that Gubmint’s function is to protect life and liberty....not to redistribute wealth, perform social engineering or legislate morality.

Abortion is a crime that violates the Constitution.

**********************

Official National Libertarian Party Platform

http://www.lp.org/issues/platform_all.shtml#reprodright

“I.8 Reproductive Rights

The Issue: The tragedies caused by unplanned, unwanted pregnancies are aggravated and sometimes created by government policies of censorship, restriction, regulation and prohibition.
Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on both sides, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration.

The Principle: Individual rights should not be denied nor abridged on the basis of sex, age, dependency, or location. Taxpayers should not be forced to pay for other people’s abortions, nor should any government or individual force a woman to have an abortion. It is the right and obligation of the pregnant woman regardless of age, not the state, to decide the desirability or appropriateness of prenatal testing, Caesarean births, fetal surgery, voluntary surrogacy arrangements and/or home births.

Solutions: We oppose government actions that either compel or prohibit abortion, sterilization or any other form of birth control. Specifically we condemn the practice of forced sterilization of welfare recipients, or of mentally retarded or “genetically defective” individual. We support the voluntary exchange of goods, services or information regarding human sexuality, reproduction, birth control or related medical or biological technologies. We oppose government laws and policies that restrict the opportunity to choose alternatives to abortion.

Transitional Action: We support an end to all subsidies for childbearing or child prevention built into our present laws.”

[Eric Blair 2084]

I've read the LP platform. You are correct that Libertarians in the sense of a party basically "punt" on the issue, wash their hands and take no position.

I'm talking about libertarians with a small l like myself and my adopted Grandfather.

"If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals–if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is. Now, I can’t say that I will agree with all the things that the present group who call themselves Libertarians in the sense of a party say, because I think that like in any political movement there are shades, and there are libertarians who are almost over at the point of wanting no government at all or anarchy. I believe there are legitimate government functions. There is a legitimate need in an orderly society for some government to maintain freedom or we will have tyranny by individuals. The strongest man on the block will run the neighborhood. We have government to insure that we don’t each one of us have to carry a club to defend ourselves. But again, I stand on my statement that I think that libertarianism and conservatism are travelling the same path".

--Ronald Reagan

Inside Ronald Reagan: A Reason Interview from July 1975

[traditional1]

"over 30,000 people donated an average $103, so this Soros conspiracy stuff isn’t going to cut it."

Fine: dishwashers for Paul, Car Washers for Paul, Homeless for Paul, GLBT'ers for Paul, etc, etc.....

We know how that works.

Paul is backed by the Lefties and Libertarians (both), and could only assure a Hildabeast victory.

The Loonie Left shows up at ALL the Paul rallies for a reason.....he's one of 'em!

[jmeagan]

****And THAT is why a third-tier candidate with zero chance of the nomination is the top target of Freepers. Nobody with the slightest understanding of politics is worried about Ron Paul actually winning the nomination. People ARE worried about him getting Republicans to ask questions, though. They are worried that Ron Paul might expose the fact that the GOP has almost literally stolen the Dems play book for the last 7 years.***

I wouldn’t say Ron Paul has no chance. I put his current chances at about 10-20 to 1. Primaries, tradionally, have low turn outs. Ron Paul is going to get upwards of 80% of his supporters to the polls, giving him a big edge verses the polls.

After Iowa and NH, we will probably have 5 candidates still running. Giuliani, Romney, Huckabee(but with almost no money), Thompson and Paul. If Thompson doesn’t come in first or second in S. Car., he will probably quit. The more candidates left in the race for super Tuesday, the better it will be for Ron Paul. He will concentrate his resources on the open and semi open primaries and hope to squeak through in one or two of the closed primaries.

The intensity of Ron Paul supporters might be able to carry him in a 3-4 way race.

A decent showing in Iowa and a good showing in NH will bring many more millions into Ron Pual’s campaign. It will allow him to go the distance.

[Stevieboy]

Go Ron go! You exemplify everything that was intented for a place called America! Something Canadians should look to, and mimic.