I Used To Be Heavily Against Taking Matching Funds...

[jumpyg1258]

But with the finishes the campaign has had, Im starting to think maybe the campaign should look into taking the matching funds. By doing that now, the RP camp could swamp the USA with ads all over the place while the other guys have no cash to do anything.

[m72mc]

I used to think the same way. however there are drawbacks to it and I am sure ron knows best. I leave it to him.

[FSP-Rebel]

Dude, the media would rip us apart for taking these handouts.

[Bradley in DC]

I say take the money and run (all the way to the nomination)--and run on a platform of getting rid of it!

[jumpyg1258]

Dude, the media would rip us apart for taking these handouts.

Then we could mention that their media darling who they call the front runner now (McCain) also took the funds a while back.

[Paulitical Correctness]

He should buy a giant speedboat and drive off into the sunset with his middle finger held high while screaming "Screw this shit!". And laughing maniacally. Don't forget the laughter.

[UnitedWeStand]

What are the limitations when you do this?

I read that you have to sign some contract that includes choosing another candidate as your running mate?

[jumpyg1258]

What are the limitations when you do this?

I read that you have to sign some contract that includes choosing another candidate as your running mate?

If that is true then who did McCain choose?

[IPSecure]

Why not?

It is OUR Money!!!

[FSP-Rebel]

Then we could mention that their media darling who they call the front runner now (McCain) also took the funds a while back.
McCain isn't known as a man of principle, but Dr. Paul is. Why would Paul spend 20 years in Congress and give back a portion of his annual budget to Treasury to change his tune at his most popular point? I hope people aren't favoring public funds because we're too cheap to keep donating to the cause:(

[jumpyg1258]

I hope people aren't favoring public funds because we're too cheap to keep donating to the cause:(

Too cheap? I think not. This year Ive given about $800 towards the campaign so far. The most I have ever given to any campaign before was $0. The American sheeple are too dumb to even vote for the right guy when it comes to an anti-war stance (over half vote for mccain), what makes you think they will have a clue what taking matching funds is?

[Xenophage]

I say take the money and run (all the way to the nomination)--and run on a platform of getting rid of it!

I agree wholeheartedly. We're forced to work within a corrupt system, and I don't see any moral quagmire with taking the funds. I know some libertarians disagree.

[DealzOnWheelz]

LOOK FOR THE 100th time TAKING MATCHING FUNDS LIMITS THE USE as WELL AS THE AMOUNT YOU CAN ACCEPT IN CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS AKA

NO More Money Bombs.

You are limited in how much you can raise, how much you can spend and where you can spend it and on what.


THIS WOULD DESTROY THE RON PAUL CAMPAIGN


STOP ASKING ABOUT IT


THINK ABOUT IT

If it was a good idea; WHY WOULDN'T HILLARY TAKE THEM TO BUMP HER FROM $100 Million to $200 MILLION and flood the market with CRYING ADS

[Join The Paul Side]

McCain isn't known as a man of principle, but Dr. Paul is. Why would Paul spend 20 years in Congress and give back a portion of his annual budget to Treasury to change his tune at his most popular point? I hope people aren't favoring public funds because we're too cheap to keep donating to the cause:(


Dude I would guess a lot of people would give more if they could but have probably maxed out. We're not raising the money now like we were in the 4th quarter. If we could somehow step up the donations with those who haven't maxed out along with new donors and then take matching funds, we could possibly deliver a knock out blow to candidates ahead of us with less money.

I know Dr. Paul is a man of principle, but if anybody in this race deserves to take the money it's Dr. Paul. I truly hope he does.

[yongrel]

The matching funds come with a whole helluva lot of regulations.

[DealzOnWheelz]

LOOK FOR THE 100th time TAKING MATCHING FUNDS LIMITS THE USE as WELL AS THE AMOUNT YOU CAN ACCEPT IN CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS AKA

NO More Money Bombs.

You are limited in how much you can raise, how much you can spend and where you can spend it and on what.


THIS WOULD DESTROY THE RON PAUL CAMPAIGN


STOP ASKING ABOUT IT


THINK ABOUT IT

If it was a good idea; WHY WOULDN'T HILLARY TAKE THEM TO BUMP HER FROM $100 Million to $200 MILLION and flood the market with CRYING ADS

HAS ANYONE READ THIS POST

[JordanQ72]

LOOK FOR THE 100th time TAKING MATCHING FUNDS LIMITS THE USE as WELL AS THE AMOUNT YOU CAN ACCEPT IN CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS AKA

NO More Money Bombs.

You are limited in how much you can raise, how much you can spend and where you can spend it and on what.

Wrong

[michaelwise]

Dude, the media would rip us apart for taking these handouts.This is another reason why we need to do it. It would get us media attention for a change.