News Shocker: Anti-War Right Boosts Ron Paul to Top GOP Q4 Fundraiser

Status
Not open for further replies.

xd9fan

New member
http://www.pensitoreview.com/2008/02...-money-leader/

News Shocker: Anti-War Right Boosts Ron Paul to Top GOP Q4 Fundraiser
Jon Ponder | Feb. 2, 2008

The campaigns have all released their fundraising reports from the fourth quarter of 2007, and the results show that three candidates who oppose the endless occupation of Iraq raised the most money.

There is real energy and excitement among the small minority of Republicans who oppose the endless occupation of Iraq.

Democrat Hillary Clinton led the field in both parties with $26.5 million, followed by Barack Obama with $22.8 million. (The Obama campaign says it has already raised $32 million in January alone.)

But the headline that ought to be in 40-point type is the fact the only Republican supporter of withdrawal from Iraq, Ron Paul, trounced his GOP rivals in the fourth quarter by raising nearly $20 million. As a Los Angeles Times blogger put it, it is a “news shocker“:

Well, it’s official, ladies and gentlemen. Believe it or not, Rep. Ron Paul, the 72-year-old Texan who hardly ever gets mentioned in Republican political news and the one-time libertarian who always gets the least time on TV debates if he isn’t barred completely, was, in fact, the most successful Republican fundraiser in the last three months of 2007.

By the thousands, Paul’s fervent followers donated $19.95 million to the “Ron Paul Revolution.” He spent $17.75 million, and at year’s end, had $7.8 million cash on hand, making him the only Republican candidate to increase his fundraising totals in every quarter of 2007. According to his website, Paul’s Paulunteers have contributed another $4.1 million this month…

Compare that impressive financial success with, say, ex-candidate Rudy Giuliani, who raised only $14.4 million from Oct. 1 to Dec. 31 and spent $18.2 million.

Or the departed Fred Thompson, who collected $8.9 million and spent $13.9 million.

Or even the newly-minted Republican front-runner Sen. John McCain, who raked in only $9.9 million, spent $10.5 million and had only $2.9 million cash in hand. Of course, McCain’s string of primary victories in January will have boosted his financial fortunes. Everybody loves a winner.

Mitt Romney actually raised only $9.2 million from other people last quarter, less than half of Paul’s haul. However, the former Massachusetts governor — and if he keeps spending at this rate, the quite possibly former multimillionaire — gave himself $18 million more of his own money last fall for a total of $27.2 million and $2.4 million cash on hand.

Former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, who’s had trouble raising money … [According to the Federal Election Commission website] he raised about $6.7 million, a third of Paul’s sum, while spending $7.08 million, leaving him on New Year’s Eve with cash on hand of only $651,300.68…

Paul, who’s done well in some symbolic straw polls and little-noticed state caucuses until his best showing so far as a second-place finisher to Romney in the Nevada caucuses, has repeatedly disavowed a third-party effort if his bid to be the Republican nominee in St. Paul next summer falls short.

His determined followers maintain that a news media conspiracy is holding down Paul’s success at the polls, although obviously word has gotten out to somebody for him to raise such sums. Paul’s outspoken stands, including withdrawal from Iraq and drastic downsizing of the federal government, run counter to each of his GOP competitors.

As for Paul’s campaign, his loyal troops plan another “money bomb,” a big fundraising day, today in honor of Ron and Carol Paul’s 51st wedding anniversary. One of the obvious gifts: the undisputed GOP fundraising championship for the last three months of 2007.

Paul also leads the GOP field in cash on hand with $8 million. MccCain has $3 million; Romney, $2.4 million; and Huckabee, $2 million.

This is strong indicator that there is real energy and excitement among the small minority of Republicans who oppose the occupation of Iraq.
 
Dr. Paul is well on his way to exceeding his goal for the first quarter of this year, go Ron.

Also, Ron Paul is the only candidate with reduced spending proposed for his presidency based on programs (and their elimination)
screen3-vi.jpg


In the high roller candidate category, Rudy Giuliani spent around $49 million, and received one delegate.

This beats John Connally's long-standing record when he spent $12.6 million for a single delegate in 1980.
 
sure are some big Govt-loving moderate voters in the party.......

Hey Moderates, if all you got is more foreign war and domestically your response to the dems big Govt programs are "Well me too" then the GOP is dead.

If I asked on this board If Ron would raise the most money in the 4th quarter 2007........how many moderates here (and ones that call themselves "conservatives) would have bet against me?
 
Ron Paul has a big first quarter....so what. He is done. He hasn't won a state primary and he is not going to. It appears that McCain will be the nomination at this point. Ron Paul can pack up and go home, he has no chance at all. He never had a chance.
 
Yeah, let's celebrate Ron Paul not having a chance, just kick him to the curb. The one candidate supporting the Constitution. Yeah, let's just kick it to the curb, too. Oh, nevermind, we already did.
 
This would have been a better come-back if you had learned to type.

True, however the point (which you all understood) remains the same.

Paul could get 100 million tomorrow (or at the beginning of his campaign) and it wouldn't have gotten him any more votes.

For better or for worse, the people don't like Paul. Maybe instead of dragging out a crotchety old relic like Paul, the republican party could find someone younger, just as constitutional, and without the dangrous foreign policy ideas.

Not every principled person running for office has to be so abrasive.
 
If I asked on this board If Ron would raise the most money in the 4th quarter 2007........how many moderates here (and ones that call themselves "conservatives) would have bet against me?

And I asked on this board if Paul would win the nomination... how many of you supporters had been saying he would for months, and yet refused to take me up on the bet?
 
at least 11 delegates have commited to Paul from ME. There caucus is non binding votes, even 17 year olds vote! Delegates are free to choose the candidate.
We'd all like to predict this or that, but it's still early, Huckabee can still win, Paul can still win, McCain can win, Romney can win! We'll know after Super Tuesday, simple as that.
 
Ron Paul has a big first quarter....so what. He is done. He hasn't won a state primary and he is not going to.
That's not true, he won LA and has come in second, what, 3 or 4 times. Plus those delegates won by those who've dropped out are now at-large, and may vote for him.

Ron Paul remains a viable candidate.

Ron Paul remains the only conservative in the race.

Ron Paul remains the best friend gun rights advocates could ever want in a candidate.
 
Can't argue that. He is perhaps the most conservative ever to run. He has a great strategy despite MSM reporting. He's slated all his ads while the other guys couldn't due to lack of funds.
His message is strong and while others are losing supporters regularly, Paul is still gaining many! 1000's of new donors and first time donors to his campaign recently! I think he'll do at least well enough to keep going Super Tuesday. Even after that there's 19 states to go!!
Lot's of delegates are now free to support RP at their will. He's got a broader support base than anyone else. Young, old, anti war, libertarian, republican, independent and yes, some crazies...Say what you will about the mentally challenge that support Ron Paul, but they at least make a great choice for their vote.
 
I'm surprised people are still talking about Dr. Paul. I am not for or against him...it really doesn't matter to me but it looks like a snowball would have a better chance of surviving a 100 degree day in South Texas than he has of running for President...for the Republicans anyway.

How about Dr. Paul and Ralph Nader hook up and run together as independents. Not sure they'd pull any substantial votes but it would be pretty interesting.
 
All anyone has to do is watch Ron Paul come completely apart at the seems in a debate to know that he is simply outmatched by the other republican candidates.

Hillary would chew paul up and spit him out in a race. Paul is no match for Hillary, or obama. Paul has no stage presence at all. He gets frustrated way to easy, and just simply can't handle the questions when the moderators are baiting him.

I would say Paul is done, but the fact is, he never got started.
 
Boy, I'd like to take a gander at Paul's donor list....I'll bet there's some interesting names and groups in there.
 
Please do, Mr. Fremmer, it's a public document on file with the FEC.

Take your time, it has more names on it than any other candidate, so I've been told.
 
More military supporters too, in fact more than all the others totaled. Those will be votes soon!
Not that this matters, just thought I'd share it, Drew Carry donated $2300 to Ron Paul today... I haven't seen the list otherwise.
The guys posting he has no chance are the same guys who said Thompson would win, Giulaini was a front runner....etc. Like McCain, saying the war would be easy and quick, then 4 years later telling people they we're lead to believe the war would be easy and quick...clueless and arrogant.
 
Maybe instead of dragging out a crotchety old relic like Paul, the republican party could find someone younger, just as constitutional, and without the dangrous foreign policy ideas.

Outstanding idea, but who the hell is this young constitutionalist foreign-policy wunderkind you speak of? That description does not match any candidate in the race.

Paul is the least bad choice from a bad list until your fictional perfect politician shows up.
 
"Maybe instead of dragging out a crotchety old relic like Paul, the republican party could find someone younger, just as constitutional, and without the dangrous foreign policy ideas"

Maybe if things get bad enough Superman will come save us.... Does anyone honestly think that we'll be worse off with RP as president?? He's worth a chance anyway, not much left to lose.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top