RON PAUL DID IT AGAIN!
Paul’s money train steamrolls on
THEHILL-Insurgent White House hopeful Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) is on pace to shatter his own one-day GOP online fundraising record, taking in an eye-popping $3 million through the first 14 hours of Sunday, his campaign said.
Paul, who raised $4.2 million in a single day in November, is poised to eclipse that total. He started the day with slightly less than $11.5 million raised in the fourth quarter, according to an aide. At 2:30 p.m., the contribution total on the campaign’s website said that the total was now $14.6 million and climbing steadily.
“Today’s fundraising boom is yet another example Dr. Paul’s tremendous grassroots support across America,” said Paul spokesman Jesse Benton.
While Paul is not considered to be among the frontrunners for the GOP presidential nomination, he is firmly entrenching himself in the top tier when it comes to raising funds. The latest haul might put the Texas lawmaker ahead of all of his rivals for the fourth quarter.
UPDATE
Ron Paul becomes $6 million man
POLITICO-Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) raised an astounding $6 million and change Sunday, his campaign said, almost certainly guaranteeing he’ll outraise his rivals for the Republican nomination in the fourth quarter and likely will be able to fund a presence in many of states that vote Feb. 5.
John, one beautiful link. It brought tears to my eyes. One link of true hope. This revolution is much, much bigger than Dr. Paul, but he is such a sincere, eloquent spokesman. And he has been consistent throughout his career.
I saw Russert this morning on Meet the Press grilling Romney on his numerous flip flops. And of course Giuliani and the rest mostly all put their moist fingers in the air trying to sense what the voters want to hear. They all change their message depending on their audience. But their records tell the true story. And their records are of sorry traitors!
Hugh
I agree this one great link all should see!
He is at 16.1 million at 6:40 central time. He is going to break 6million, his own record of 4.3 million, and people will be forced to take notice! That money will buy national ads, and soon he will become mainstream like the MSM approved frontrunners. The revolution will be televised.
Thanks for the update!
FROM USATODY
Ron Paul meets — and exceeds — 4Q fundraising goal two weeks early
At $13.8 million and counting, the presidential campaign of Republican Rep. Ron Paul says it has already topped its fourth-quarter goal of raising $12 million.
The campaign just sent out the word in an e-mail blast to reporters.
“The outpouring of support is astounding. Americans are rallying to Dr. Paul’s message and showing that they want a government that respects their rights and protects their freedoms,” Paul campaign manager Lew Moore says in that press releas
‘cept for one l’il thing. . . .
money *AINT* votes !!!!
Can anyone say Dean, or maybe say Huffington
Gene out!!!
Gene: money *AINT* votes !!!!
But straw polls ARE.
The Chicago Attorney was right – Dr. Paul raised in excess of $6 million yesterday. 58 thousand individual donors, 24 thousand of which were new donors.
Earlier in the year he was called the 6 Million Dollar Man. But I had no idea he would ever be able to raise this much in one day!
http://youtube.com/watch?v=woOLEEu8RLI
FROM POLITICO
Ron Paul becomes $6 million man
Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) raised an astounding $6 million and change Sunday, his campaign said, almost certainly guaranteeing he’ll outraise his rivals for the Republican nomination in the fourth quarter and likely will be able to fund a presence in many of states that vote Feb. 5.
Paul’s campaign spokesman late Sunday announced the campaign had eclipsed the $5.7 million that John Kerry raised the day after he locked up the 2004 Democratic presidential nomination – arguably the largest single-day fundraising haul in U.S. political history.
Paul, whose campaign has been embraced by a zealous community of online supporters, raised eyebrows when donors acting independently of the campaign dropped $4.2 million into his campaign coffers Nov. 5.
Still, the libertarian-leaning Paul is considered a distant long-shot by conventional political calculations and has languished in the mid-single digits in most national polls.
His campaign spokesman Jesse Benton said Sunday’s haul put the campaign over $18 million in fundraising since Oct. 1, 50 percent more than its goal of $12 million.
He said the extra funds would be used to pay new staffers and air more ads in early states.
He said the campaign planned to bring 300 students to Iowa to canvass over winter break.
“We have a lot of time to close in the polls,” Benton said, and he asserted traditional polls “underestimate … Paul’s real support.”
That’s partly because they attempt to query folks who have voted Republican, and Benton asserted that Paul’s base draws heavily from those who have shied away from the party or were not previously politically active.
For instance, he said 24,940 new donors contributed during the Dec. 16 haul.
It was timed for the 234th anniversary of the Boston Tea Party, a day meant to resonant with the Libertarian sensibilities of his supporters.
The man who engineered it — a 37-year-old music promoter named Trevor Lyman — has no official ties to the campaign and had no political experience to speak of before he engineered the innovative model for the Nov. 5 fundraising haul.
He set up a website that solicited pledges for contributions to be made directly to the Paul campaign on that day — a technique that became known as a “money bomb,” which he used again to such great effect Sunday.
In an interview late last month, he told Politico.com he thought it was “bad for the country” that fundraising played such a prominent role in American politics.
“The democratic process should be based on candidates’ ideas, but we had to go within the system,” he said. “We have to use the money to get people to pay attention to what [Paul] actually stands for.”
At the end of the election, Ron Paul will have proved a few things: 1-the grassroots/small-time guy can become a factor, 2-raising a ton of money doesn’t buy a victory, and 3-you can have (mostly) solid positions but if you look and sound like a rat you won’t get elected.
“We have separation.”
Aubrey,
Which TRAITOR are you supporting? I can ask that question since you are obviously not supporting Dr. Paul, and of course, he is not a Traitor.
Hugh,
I like Fred Thompson.
Look, you can get your feelings hurt or think about reality. Ron Paul is whimpy and whiny, sorry, but the country will not elect a little pip-sqeak man to the white house. And, like I said, mostly he’s right on target with his ideas; but, I think that most people understand that pulling out of Iraq immediately will create more chaos in the region and more animosity toward our nation than ever before. The fact that the other major candidates jokingly refer to him only serves to undercut his credence.
Piss and moan all you want but the guy isn’t electable.
Aubrey,
Beyond Iraq, Paul according to his own rhetoric would disengage from many other hot spots to avoid the imperialist label. He and Dennis Kucinich would make a great team.
Bart
The big government pork spending Republicans like you would have a problem with Ron Paul.
John,
If we left Iraq today, every last dude and dudette, do you think hatred for America would increase or decrease and why?
John,
Another question for you: Do you think the average person would feel safer with John Wayne or Don Knotts in a gun fight? (substitute anyone for John Wayne and Ron Paul for Don Knotts.)
BB,
I have nothing against Ron Paul but I believe that he is well suited for service in the Congress – just not in the oval office. He can surely broaden a set of perspectives in the Senate and be as radical or tame as he so desires…I think it’s probably good that he has as much of a voice now as he does to open Americans’ eyes to other ideas. He just doesn’t need to be the Executive for the exact reason you mentioned.
Aubrey,
I agree to some extent on Paul and his suitability for Congress — but as long as he seeks to isolate America from the rest of the world, he should not achieve the highest office in the land.
If he would only back off the cut and run rhetoric, the rest of his economic policy has merit. Unfortunately, most of the revenue he would use to decrease deficits and debt would come from defense/security and intelligence areas.
If we have no ability to defend ourselves, does underlying economic policy even matter?
John,
You left out ‘neocon’ big spending,….blah, blah, repetitive blah.
Who will you support when the Paul train is finally FUBAR?
I am still undecided. How about you?
Down to two — Fred or Mitt with Rudy a close third.
Interestingly, based on posts here, most would call all three ‘neocons’. Yet they are pretty far apart on the issues.
How can Fred, Mitt and Rudy be categorized as ‘neocons’ with such disparate views?
bb asked in his post #23:
“How can Fred, Mitt and Rudy be categorized as ‘neocons’ with such disparate views?”
Simple, they are all cowtowing to The Israel Lobby’s position on the Iraq War. And they really are very soft on “immigration” issues, by their records, not by their words (lies) on the stump. Remember, the Neo-Con intellectuals are Isralie Firsters!
http://tinyurl.com/2wuckd
John,
No answers to #s 17 and 18? What about you, Hugh?
bb,
You’re right on in #23.
correction: #20
Aubrey,
The violence is down because we following what I said years ago and giving local control and not pushing a strong federal government ie CONTAINMENT! This is a short term strategy that buys us time to get off Middle East oil!
Aubrey, in your post #25, you asked me to respond to your questions in posts # 17 and 18:
To your question #17 you asked:
“If we left Iraq today, every last dude and dudette, do you think hatred for America would increase or decrease and why?”
My response is that the hatred would decrease. We are no longer on their soil controlling things. We are out of their face. But to really help ease their hatred of us, we would also need to stop propping up their enemy, Israel. We need to not take sides. We need to be an honest broker.
To your question #18 you asked:
“Another question for you: Do you think the average person would feel safer with John Wayne or Don Knotts in a gun fight? (substitute anyone for John Wayne and Ron Paul for Don Knotts.)”
My response is that one should walk softly but carry a big stick. Ron Paul would take agressive action if necessary. But he’s not out and about itching for a fight. He’s not out and about picking fights that a third party requests. Have you seen Dr. Paul’s biography? He excelled in athletics, winning the state championship in a track event. He was a wrestler. He has the fortitude to do what is necessary. He will make the decisions necessary. He is not a “go along, get along” type who follows the PC approach of the day. Just look at his voting record. He stands by principle, even when misunderstood and unpopular. So, in essence, he is the John Wayne of the lot! He exudes strength!
Hugh,
I have to give you credit for a well said response. I don’t agree with your prediction on #17, though. The world already blames the U.S. for what we DON’T do; our absence in Iraq would only create an opportunity to blame our country for the mess we would be leaving behind. The next thing you know, we’d be sending the same amount of money to the region that we are currently spending there, and every penny would fall into an abyss of corruption and fuel increased hate towards America. No, Ron Paul is definetely wrong on this one. We broke it; we need to fix it (or make every effort to fix it).
John,
How about addressing the question posed in #23 — How can Fred, Mitt and Rudy be categorized as ‘neocons’ with such disparate views?
Bart
I do not understand the question? They are all for nation building.
bb, I answered your question in my post #24. I also included a very insightful link. I hope you read and considered my response as well as the link I provided.
Aubrey,
Thanks for your response in your post #30. Many of us on this blog have strong views, and the purpose should be to debate the views, not just throw around labels. And I’m guilty of using labels also. (You might have heard me use the term Neo-Con, at least once)
So let me get this straight; if you support ‘nation building’, Israel and illegal immigration, you are a neocon???
What about all the fundie stuff caroline refers to when labeling someone as a neocon…does that not matter?
Bart
Israel is strange issue because Jews are split on the solution.
John, excellent point, your #36. But unfortunately, that split is never discussed here in the U.S. and the rabid Zionists run the show here. I do believe the Jewish community could help itself immensely here in the U.S. if they would become vocal and denounce th rabid Zionists. By their staying silent, they risk getting lumped together with the rabid Zionists.
bb, I don’t think the “fundie stuff” relates to the Neo-Con platform. I think that’s a separate issue. In my opinion, Caroline might not be aware the fundamentalists are pawns in all this and really don’t have a clue- they are ignorant re so many issues, including the basis of their own religious beliefs! They are being used, big time, in my opinion.