PDA

View Full Version : Tancredo Qualifies For Federal Matching Funds




ghemminger
09-13-2007, 02:38 PM
http://cbs4denver.com/topstories/local_story_256143309.html

(AP) DENVER Republican presidential hopeful Tom Tancredo has qualified to begin receiving matching federal funds, bolstering his campaign at least through the first group of primaries, a campaign spokesman said Thursday.

The Colorado congressman, who has built his bid on an anti-illegal immigration platform, raised $3.4 million as of Thursday, campaign spokesman Alan Moore said.

"It should extend the campaign through the early primaries," he said. "It all depends on momentum and how we do in Iowa, of course."

In the early 1970s, Congress created a public financing system for presidential elections to reduce dependence on money from individual donors and groups. Primary candidates get a matching amount of public money based on their fundraising.

To qualify, a candidate must collect at least $100,000 with donations that include $5,000 raised in each of 20 states.

Chester Copperpot
09-13-2007, 02:40 PM
http://cbs4denver.com/topstories/local_story_256143309.html

(AP) DENVER Republican presidential hopeful Tom Tancredo has qualified to begin receiving matching federal funds, bolstering his campaign at least through the first group of primaries, a campaign spokesman said Thursday.

The Colorado congressman, who has built his bid on an anti-illegal immigration platform, raised $3.4 million as of Thursday, campaign spokesman Alan Moore said.

"It should extend the campaign through the early primaries," he said. "It all depends on momentum and how we do in Iowa, of course."

In the early 1970s, Congress created a public financing system for presidential elections to reduce dependence on money from individual donors and groups. Primary candidates get a matching amount of public money based on their fundraising.


To qualify, a candidate must collect at least $100,000 with donations that include $5,000 raised in each of 20 states.

Good keep em all in the race - better for Ron Paul

DjLoTi
09-13-2007, 02:41 PM
No, I want Tancredo to drop. I hope he doesn't do this.

Brasil Branco
09-13-2007, 02:41 PM
Does Paul qualify for that as well?

Chester Copperpot
09-13-2007, 02:41 PM
No, I want Tancredo to drop. I hope he doesn't do this.

Why? The more Pro-War people the better dont ya think?

Chester Copperpot
09-13-2007, 02:42 PM
Does Paul qualify for that as well?

He has to.. hes raised more money than Tancredo.. Dont expect him to take matching funds though.. hes already said "we dont need to"

Cowlesy
09-13-2007, 02:43 PM
Ron Paul start taking money from the Federal Government?

hah!

DjLoTi
09-13-2007, 02:43 PM
I don't think it would make a big difference. I think we'd be able to get more votes for Ron Paul then we'd be able to siphon votes from the other candidates.

ctb619
09-13-2007, 02:43 PM
$3.4 million raised for Tancredo? More than I would have guessed

saku39
09-13-2007, 02:44 PM
I hope he goes for the funds. Not only will it make him look like a beggar, I want Tancredo to stay in because he is crappy and he help siphon more people away from Frudy McRomson.

honkywill
09-13-2007, 02:45 PM
I want more time for Ron Paul at the debates.

I want it to be Romney, Ghouliani, Thompson, Huckabee and The good doctor.

born2drv
09-13-2007, 02:46 PM
I'd rather he drop out as well, we need to thin the herd if RP is going to be seen as trying to rise above the rest.

Green Mountain Boy
09-13-2007, 02:47 PM
I don't think it's about siphoning off votes from other candidates, It's about clearing the playing field so the cream can rise to the top. Right now there are too many doofuses with no support who are blocking the way. I think people know of the 3 stooges I'm talking about. DROP OUT ALREADY! YOU'RE JUST PROLONGING THE INEVITABLE

SeanEdwards
09-13-2007, 02:47 PM
FYI - accepting federal matching funds is what losers do who can't compete. You won't see any serious contenders accepting gubmint welfare to run their campaign.

Johnnybags
09-13-2007, 02:53 PM
FYI - accepting federal matching funds is what losers do who can't compete. You won't see any serious contenders accepting gubmint welfare to run their campaign.


I hope all the doofuses stay in, Paul draws the crowds, next debate since Fox silenced him when he is introduced all Paul fans outta clap and scream for 2 minutes. He had the most cheers in NH. Clap for noone else.

Lord Xar
09-13-2007, 02:56 PM
"why" wouldn't you take matching funds?.... the problem is, IF he stays in, that is less time in debates and such... If you take matching funds, wouldn't that put one in a better position to ADVERTISE and promote ones agenda?

njandrewg
09-13-2007, 02:57 PM
in Q1 and Q2 he raised 2.8mm...that means in Q3 he only raised 600k so far. Huge drop compared to Q2 when he raised 1.5mm

Green Mountain Boy
09-13-2007, 03:00 PM
I think everyone can agree that Paul's biggest obstacle is name recognition. It's simple. The less candidates out there, the more attention Ron Paul will get.

mconder
09-13-2007, 03:02 PM
I think the fact that Ron Paul won't except federally matching funds is worthy of national news in and of itself.

SeanEdwards
09-13-2007, 03:02 PM
"why" wouldn't you take matching funds?.... the problem is, IF he stays in, that is less time in debates and such... If you take matching funds, wouldn't that put one in a better position to ADVERTISE and promote ones agenda?

If you accept federal matching funds, then you get slapped with a bunch of rules that limit how much you can raise and spend.

None of the serious contenders ever take matching funds. It's a sign of a failing campaign.

Green Mountain Boy
09-13-2007, 03:04 PM
If you accept federal matching funds, then you get slapped with a bunch of rules that limit how much you can raise and spend.

None of the serious contenders ever take matching funds. It's a sign of a failing campaign.

Candidates also must agree to:

Limit campaign spending for all primary elections to $10 million plus a cost-of-living adjustment (COLA).6 This is called the national spending limit.
Limit campaign spending in each state to $200,000 plus COLA, or to a specified amount based on the number of voting age individuals in the state (plus COLA), whichever is greater.
Limit spending from personal funds to $50,000.
http://www.fec.gov/pages/brochures/pubfund.shtml#Primary

Lord Xar
09-13-2007, 03:05 PM
I read that McCain took matching funds too....

JosephTheLibertarian
09-13-2007, 03:06 PM
Tancredo is an asshole... forcing tax payers to match his funds

Green Mountain Boy
09-13-2007, 03:06 PM
I read that McCain took matching funds too....

Make that 4 doofuses that need to drop out NOW!

Spirit of '76
09-13-2007, 03:13 PM
Tancredo is an asshole... forcing tax payers to match his funds

Actually, no one forces taxpayers to participate in this program.

There's a little check box on your tax reporting form that asks if you want to contribute, and if you check it, you add three dollars to the pool.

JosephTheLibertarian
09-13-2007, 03:14 PM
Actually, no one forces taxpayers to participate in this program.

There's a little check box on your tax reporting form that asks if you want to contribute, and if you check it, you add three dollars to the pool.

so? it's immoral

Cowlesy
09-13-2007, 03:15 PM
If Ron Paul took matching funds, I'd just consider that all my taxes I've paid the past 10 years in the workforce were part of those matching funds, and I'd be happy that my tax dollars were actually going to a good cause.

JosephTheLibertarian
09-13-2007, 03:15 PM
If Ron Paul took matching funds, I'd just consider that all my taxes I've paid the past 10 years in the workforce were part of those matching funds, and I'd be happy that my tax dollars were actually going to a good cause.

yeah, why doesn't RP do it?

SeanEdwards
09-13-2007, 03:16 PM
yeah, why doesn't RP do it?

Because he's actually still in the race?

JosephTheLibertarian
09-13-2007, 03:32 PM
Because he's actually still in the race?

more money doesn't hurt?

theseus51
09-13-2007, 03:36 PM
yeah, why doesn't RP do it?

If you think Ron Paul would take federal matching funds, I'm not sure you quite understand his philosophy towards the federal government.

JosephTheLibertarian
09-13-2007, 03:42 PM
If you think Ron Paul would take federal matching funds, I'm not sure you quite understand his philosophy towards the federal government.

then don't justify Tancredo doing so ;)

SeanEdwards
09-13-2007, 03:45 PM
more money doesn't hurt?

You need to read the rest of this thread.

When a campaign accepts the government welfare, they also agree to spending limits. Big spending limits. NO serious candidates ever take this junk. Ron Paul even made jokes about the losers who need it. Paul intends to raise and spend far more money than would be possible if he accepted the gubmint cheese.

Candidates also must agree to:

Limit campaign spending for all primary elections to $10 million plus a cost-of-living adjustment (COLA).6 This is called the national spending limit.
Limit campaign spending in each state to $200,000 plus COLA, or to a specified amount based on the number of voting age individuals in the state (plus COLA), whichever is greater.
Limit spending from personal funds to $50,000.
http://www.fec.gov/pages/brochures/p....shtml#Primary

Harry96
09-13-2007, 03:50 PM
There's no way RP is taking matching funds, and I'd probably quit supporting him if he did. Besides, he can't go around saying he wants to cut the government so drastically if he's taking matching funds. Look at how the media jumped on him asking for earmarks that he didn't even vote for.

For our sake, Tancredo, Hunter and Brownback should drop out. They're polling low enough that the amount of time they divert from RP in the debates outweighs any further split they make in the pro-war vote.

Cowlesy
09-13-2007, 03:51 PM
All 3 of those guys still honestly believe they can win.

It's all about ego.

Danny Molina
09-13-2007, 04:08 PM
Tancredo needed to take matching funds. He couldn't expect to raise all his campaign money from his white supremacists constituents alone.

SeanEdwards
09-13-2007, 04:10 PM
All 3 of those guys still honestly believe they can win.

It's all about ego.

Or a play for VP?

ghemminger
09-13-2007, 04:11 PM
Tancredo for VP?LOL

JosephTheLibertarian
09-13-2007, 04:12 PM
Tancredo wants to bomb muslim cities lol how do you think American muslims will react to this?

Danny Molina
09-13-2007, 04:13 PM
Tancredo would be like Cheney v2.0 (in Italian)

Joe Knows
09-13-2007, 04:24 PM
I hope all the doofuses stay in, Paul draws the crowds, next debate since Fox silenced him when he is introduced all Paul fans outta clap and scream for 2 minutes. He had the most cheers in NH. Clap for noone else.

I think that it would be interesting to see what would happen if Ron Paul supporters at a debate "spontaneously" gave Dr. Paul a standing ovation along with their applause. Would some of the other sheep in the audience stand also?

Joe Knows
09-13-2007, 04:30 PM
If you accept federal matching funds, then you get slapped with a bunch of rules that limit how much you can raise and spend.

None of the serious contenders ever take matching funds. It's a sign of a failing campaign.

I think he should apply to get federal funds. He doesn't necessarily have to take the money. But you could use the publicity that applying would bring. It would also scare a lot of neocons, because Ron Paul would have access to a few extra million he could use on Super Tuesday. If the rules are not prohibitive on money being spent in the primary, Ron could take the money and hold a national news conference and give the money back to help pay off the national debt.

LibertyEagle
09-13-2007, 04:30 PM
If you think Ron Paul would take federal matching funds, I'm not sure you quite understand his philosophy towards the federal government.

No. It isn't that, because the money is freely donated for this purpose. Last I heard, the campaign has not decided whether they will accept the matching funds or not. Primarily because of all the rules that are imposed if you do. Those are noted further up in the thread.

jpa
09-13-2007, 04:48 PM
Ron Paul start taking money from the Federal Government?

hah!


Not from the Fed exactly. From taxpayers who volunteered their money to level the playing field.

This isn't tax money, this is voluntary donations to any/every campaign

JosephTheLibertarian
09-13-2007, 05:41 PM
Tancredo would be like Cheney v2.0 (in Italian)

that's the difference between Cheney and Tancredo... Cheney is serving his corporate masters. Tancredo, however, will bomb muslim cities for the hell of it... 1 billion muslims around the world will HATE us if we elect that guy.

theseus51
09-13-2007, 05:44 PM
then don't justify Tancredo doing so ;)

Oh, I wasn't justifying anyone doing it. But I do see now that it isn't fed gov money, so I guess it's not horrible if Ron Paul takes it.

speciallyblend
09-13-2007, 05:57 PM
Would it be possible to apply then after being excepted deny it,imagine the media circus,out of principle Ron Paul would say flat no,but imagine the coverage of him applying then on principle calling the other 4 out ,then saying he will refuse the money out of principle,would be priceless:) RON PAUL 2008

JosephTheLibertarian
09-13-2007, 05:58 PM
Would it be possible to apply then after being excepted deny it,imagine the media circus,out of principle Ron Paul would say flat no,but imagine the coverage of him applying then on principle calling the other 4 out ,then saying he will refuse the money out of principle,would be priceless:) RON PAUL 2008

I have no idea what you just said... but I like it ;)

speciallyblend
09-13-2007, 06:03 PM
i guess i should of elaborated ,but i was talking about the matching funds then having ron paul apply,then actually turn around and refuse them on principle. Then i guess they would call him a flip-flopper:) sarcasm there at the end;)

quickmike
09-13-2007, 06:44 PM
Hmmmm....................... Tancredo, the welfare recipient!!!

Has a nice ring to it. Just what a republican candidate for president needs.

I like it.

wgadget
09-13-2007, 08:32 PM
Well, hopefully Ron will bring up his opposition to taking this welfare in the Values Voter Debate on Monday.

Richandler
09-13-2007, 08:48 PM
I wish there was a rule that if you didn't take the matching funds you could take larger public donations.

james1844
09-13-2007, 09:08 PM
Receiving federal matching funds also comes with strings attached. It means there is a maximum amount you can spend. I think its 20 million or thereabouts, which is far less than than 100 million or so thats needed for a credible campaign.

Taking matching funds is therefore generally regarded as a bad thing.

Best,

James

Spirit of '76
09-13-2007, 10:16 PM
so? it's immoral

It's immoral to voluntarily donate to a pool of funds that any candidate can access? :confused:

JosephTheLibertarian
09-13-2007, 10:19 PM
It's immoral to voluntarily donate to a pool of funds that any candidate can access? :confused:

not through the government.

njandrewg
09-13-2007, 10:22 PM
federal matching funds limit you to spend at most 200K per state. So 10 million for the whole campaign. 200K on 1 state is a joke

Spirit of '76
09-13-2007, 10:23 PM
not through the government.

Uh...

JosephTheLibertarian
09-13-2007, 10:28 PM
Uh...

uh is right

Donate to the individual.. not some government program

Spirit of '76
09-13-2007, 10:38 PM
uh is right

Donate to the individual.. not some government program

Whether you think that the government should be in the business of soliciting funds to be made available to any candidate who qualifies or not, it's pretty silly to say that the people who voluntarily donate to said fund are "immoral".

Now if they donate to Hillary...