Will you pledge for November 5th?

[SwordOfShannarah]

http://www.ThisNovember5th.com

I've set up a multi-candidate money bomb. I can add more candidates, spend time promoting, etc. But is this something people want to participate in? Would people want to pledge in this event or would people rather hold separate money bombs and just let them all fall where they will?

The best way to vote yes is to go to http://www.ThisNovember5th.com and pledge for a candidate. But after all the money bombs maybe it's too much to think about for many - so please vote yes or no to whether or not you'll be pledging in this event. If need to see support in order to justify spending any more time with it.

Thank you!

[Young Paleocon]

I think this is a tremendous idea. If i get payed before then I will pledge. Possibly to multiple candidates.

[Magicman]

I love this idea. I posted it already to a few Ron Paul supporters.

[SwordOfShannarah]

hmm- that's what people are saying but no one is pledging. Maybe it's just too soon for people to think about just yet with all the fundraising that has been going on recently. I guess I can just leave it up there until people come around- but I can't really justify adding more candidates until it gets some traction.

[Cowlesy]

i pledged

[amy31416]

Oops--I'm multitasking (that's my excuse), and I meant to pledge for Rand and a couple others, but put my email in for Brogdon because it was the first spot on the site. Not that there's anything wrong with Brogdon, I just don't know anything about him.

[Deborah K]

I will most definitely participate in this!

[Deborah K]

bumpity

[brandon]

Seems pointless. The main advantage of a money bomb over gradual fundraising is the value add from media coverage of the event. With a multi candidate money bomb no candidate will raise enough money to get the extra media.

That said, I will have a few hundred more for Rand during this quarter and I have no problem spending it on the 5th if no other Rand money bombs look more tempting.

[Deborah K]

Seems pointless. The main advantage of a money bomb over gradual fundraising is the value add from media coverage of the event. With a multi candidate money bomb no candidate will raise enough money to get the extra media.

That said, I will have a few hundred more for Rand during this quarter and I have no problem spending it on the 5th if no other Rand money bombs look more tempting.

Dispersion shouldn't concern anyone. The goal should be to spread information far and wide about who is running against the status quo in every category: local, state, and federal. We need a central location for people to learn that information. The more people who know, the more money will be donated. Give people the choice for who they want to vote for.

For example, people can put some of their money on the under-dogs and the rest in candidates running in their own states.

Trying to single out certain candidates while excluding others minimizes our chances of taking the majority away from the socialists running the country right now.

Bottom line is we need a central hub for all opposition and we need to disseminate that hub ASAP!
__________________

[Kotin]

Dispersion shouldn't concern anyone. The goal should be to spread information far and wide about who is running against the status quo in every category: local, state, and federal. We need a central location for people to learn that information. The more people who know, the more money will be donated. Give people the choice for who they want to vote for.

For example, people can put some of their money on the under-dogs and the rest in candidates running in their own states.

Trying to single out certain candidates while excluding others minimizes our chances of taking the majority away from the socialists running the country right now.

Bottom line is we need a central hub for all opposition and we need to disseminate that hub ASAP!
__________________

a central hub?? I dont know if I like the sound of that..


sorry but this just sounds to me like a major error.. to dilute our one true power, the money bomb, is foolish..

the money bomb works because its one candidate, so that we can all concentrate our efforts towards one..

thats the only way it is effective..

now that we have a good establishment of fundraising for both peter and rand, I think it may be ok to stray into such practices, albeit at a minimum..

if all our moneybombs had been multi candidate bombs, they would have never worked in the first place..

I know we want to give everyone a chance to raise some money.. but let us be realistic.

the more we stretch out donor base, the weaker these things become..

we have tried multi candidate bombs in the past.. THEY DON'T WORK!!!!!!

each candidate ends up with like 5 dollars..

[ForLiberty-RonPaul]

i like the idea of the multi-candidate moneybomb, but i still think nov 5 is too soon. I understand the significance of that date and I think we should have something going on then. What if we had a one specific candidate moneybomb for nov 5 and had a multi bomb about a month later? We should really focus on the candidates that will dethrone some powerful people like Pelosi, Perry, McCain, etc. Paul and Kokesh got their 3rd quarter bombs (both a success - and I think Dr. Paul is already getting press) Picking one candidate for nov 5 gives us something to advertise for, while at the same time allowing us more time to advertise for the second date as the first big multi-money bomb.

[MRoCkEd]

a central hub?? I dont know if I like the sound of that..


sorry but this just sounds to me like a major error.. to dilute our one true power, the money bomb, is foolish..

the money bomb works because its one candidate, so that we can all concentrate our efforts towards one..

thats the only way it is effective..

now that we have a good establishment of fundraising for both peter and rand, I think it may be ok to stray into such practices, albeit at a minimum..

if all our moneybombs had been multi candidate bombs, they would have never worked in the first place..

I know we want to give everyone a chance to raise some money.. but let us be realistic.

the more we stretch out donor base, the weaker these things become..

we have tried multi candidate bombs in the past.. THEY DON'T WORK!!!!!!

each candidate ends up with like 5 dollars..
What he said.

[itshappening]

I like this idea as a one off and see no reason why people shouldn't support it!

I also think Schiff supporters should pick a date in November and Rand can have Dec 16th to hopefully get him done.

[Deborah K]

a central hub?? I dont know if I like the sound of that..


sorry but this just sounds to me like a major error.. to dilute our one true power, the money bomb, is foolish..

the money bomb works because its one candidate, so that we can all concentrate our efforts towards one..

thats the only way it is effective..

now that we have a good establishment of fundraising for both peter and rand, I think it may be ok to stray into such practices, albeit at a minimum..

if all our moneybombs had been multi candidate bombs, they would have never worked in the first place..

I know we want to give everyone a chance to raise some money.. but let us be realistic.

the more we stretch out donor base, the weaker these things become..

we have tried multi candidate bombs in the past.. THEY DON'T WORK!!!!!!

each candidate ends up with like 5 dollars..

If everyone sends the website out on their lists, facebooks, and twitters, and asks everyone they send it to, to send it, people can pick who they want to donate too. We need 20 seats in the Senate and 40 in the house. Singling out a couple of candidates is useless. Disseminating who is running will help get more people elected. I am only donating to a couple of people, but I am passing the information on so that others will know and can donate to whom they choose.

[ronpaulhawaii]

The reason I first picked up a RP sign and walked 130 miles, in 5 days, knocking on doors, in July 07, was because I was sick of hearing people think press is all that matters. Yes it is important, but traditional campaigning is much more so. Press is what people make it, it's not like very many reporters write stories anymore, it is all based on releases. The fact that one's candidate was part of a novel fund-raising event will get press regardless (depending on the media staff.)

The reasons the other multi-bomb failed had little to do with the fact that they were multi-bombs and more to do with bickering... Again, I am only pushing for the two anniversaries of the MB, Mark my words, there will be bickering if any one candidate claims those dates.

This will make money, and increase exposure for many candidates, I find that VERY important. No avg voters in NM could give a crap if some race in a far off state raises a boatload of money. A multi-bomb that raises a boatload of money nationwide will get national attention, and will be noticed by voters in the respective states

[ForLiberty-RonPaul]

good point

[low preference guy]

Seems pointless. The main advantage of a money bomb over gradual fundraising is the value add from media coverage of the event. With a multi candidate money bomb no candidate will raise enough money to get the extra media.

+1

[dr. hfn]

The reason I first picked up a RP sign and walked 130 miles, in 5 days, knocking on doors, in July 07, was because I was sick of hearing people think press is all that matters. Yes it is important, but traditional campaigning is much more so. Press is what people make it, it's not like very many reporters write stories anymore, it is all based on releases. The fact that one's candidate was part of a novel fund-raising event will get press regardless (depending on the media staff.)

The reasons the other multi-bomb failed had little to do with the fact that they were multi-bombs and more to do with bickering... Again, I am only pushing for the two anniversaries of the MB, Mark my words, there will be bickering if any one candidate claims those dates.

This will make money, and increase exposure for many candidates, I find that VERY important. No avg voters in NM could give a crap if some race in a far off state raises a boatload of money. A multi-bomb that raises a boatload of money nationwide will get national attention, and will be noticed by voters in the
respective states

+1

[JK/SEA]

I like this idea. Also, it doesn't mean we will be 'locked in' to just doing it this way, as i think trying different things is a good idea, like the single payer money bomb...lol...sorry, couldn't resist.

[Kotin]

If everyone sends the website out on their lists, facebooks, and twitters, and asks everyone they send it to, to send it, people can pick who they want to donate too. We need 20 seats in the Senate and 40 in the house. Singling out a couple of candidates is useless. Disseminating who is running will help get more people elected. I am only donating to a couple of people, but I am passing the information on so that others will know and can donate to whom they choose.

are you saying getting Rand and Peter a million each is useless?! that is ridiculous.. if they did not have that money they would have no chance.. and they are our greatest chance at high elected office.. if we had a multi candidate bomb then, they would be in a terrible position.. sorry thats plain wrong.

we do not have the fund rasing force to fund that many candidates.. I do not care how many facebook bulitins you post.. it does not matter. we are not the government, we do have limited funds.

The reason I first picked up a RP sign and walked 130 miles, in 5 days, knocking on doors, in July 07, was because I was sick of hearing people think press is all that matters. Yes it is important, but traditional campaigning is much more so. Press is what people make it, it's not like very many reporters write stories anymore, it is all based on releases. The fact that one's candidate was part of a novel fund-raising event will get press regardless (depending on the media staff.)

The reasons the other multi-bomb failed had little to do with the fact that they were multi-bombs and more to do with bickering... Again, I am only pushing for the two anniversaries of the MB, Mark my words, there will be bickering if any one candidate claims those dates.

This will make money, and increase exposure for many candidates, I find that VERY important. No avg voters in NM could give a crap if some race in a far off state raises a boatload of money. A multi-bomb that raises a boatload of money nationwide will get national attention, and will be noticed by voters in the respective states


sorry but a fundraiser that raises a dismal amount of money for each candidate does not give any exposure at all, the exposure it does get actually discredits you off the bat.. like I have said.. you are only taken seriously if you get alot of money..

the only reason the money bomb gains exposure is because of the amount raised and the time frame.. not the act in itself..


this will not gain exposure or help anybody.. it dilutes... nothing more.

[SwordOfShannarah]

As for this event being a media miss because no one candidate would make enough money- I think the opposite is true. I think it will be a media hit that no one candidate could ever hope to make on their own. Individual money bombs haven't even hit the half million mark, but this money bomb has the added advantage of being able to boast the combined total as the fund raising number- making a money bomb day of one million or even millions much more feasible. In my mind the headlines will read "millions raised for Ron Paul inspired candidates".

Only by joining together and making a big splash can we hope to get the media attention we deserve- imo.

[Kotin]

As for this event being a media miss because no one candidate would make enough money- I think the opposite is true. I think it will be a media hit that no one candidate could ever hope to make on their own. Individual money bombs haven't even hit the half million mark, but this money bomb has the added advantage of being able to boast the combined total as the fund raising number- making a money bomb day of one million or even millions much more feasible. In my mind the headlines will read "millions raised for Ron Paul inspired candidates".

Only by joining together and making a big splash can we hope to get the media attention we deserve- imo.

I will watch and see how it goes.. if your goal is met and it is successful in the way you describe, it may be a good thing.. though I still don't think it should ever be our primary means of doing a money bomb..

and of course I will participate..

I am interested to see how to goes, I do not mean to stifle progress.. I am just trying to help :)

[ForLiberty-RonPaul]

As for this event being a media miss because no one candidate would make enough money- I think the opposite is true. I think it will be a media hit that no one candidate could ever hope to make on their own. Individual money bombs haven't even hit the half million mark, but this money bomb has the added advantage of being able to boast the combined total as the fund raising number- making a money bomb day of one million or even millions much more feasible. In my mind the headlines will read "millions raised for Ron Paul inspired candidates".

Only by joining together and making a big splash can we hope to get the media attention we deserve- imo.

for this to happen the candidates would have to come out for it together

[SwordOfShannarah]

for this to happen the candidates would have to come out for it together

I know a few candidates are excited for it, but the best way to get everyone excited for it is to pledge. :)

Also banners are added - http://thisnovember5th.com/Banners.html

[SwordOfShannarah]

I do not mean to stifle progress.. I am just trying to help :)

Of course and that is the way it was taken. It's good for us to share our thoughts.

Besides.. I think after two years in these forums everyone has gotten thicker skin. :D

[ForLiberty-RonPaul]

I know a few candidates are excited for it, but the best way to get everyone excited for it is to pledge. :)

Also banners are added - http://thisnovember5th.com/Banners.html

pledged for Medina

[tpreitzel]

Personally, I think the process should be changed slightly. Reduce the increments to $25 and allow a donor to specify more than one candidate. You'd get more participation * and a more realistic projection of who would receive any given amount. The latter condition should entice some friendly competition. ;)

* Nearly maximal participation which includes most potential donors; young, poor, rich, old ... If a donor has more to give, just increase the pledges in $25 increments. Hence, each donor needs the ability to specify the donated amount in $25 increments, e.g. $25, $50, $75, $100, etc., the total number of pledges in $25 increments, and who will receive those pledges of $25.

[Deborah K]

are you saying getting Rand and Peter a million each is useless?! that is ridiculous.. if they did not have that money they would have no chance.. and they are our greatest chance at high elected office.. if we had a multi candidate bomb then, they would be in a terrible position.. sorry thats plain wrong.

.

If this were the only fundraiser going on, you'd have a valid point. But it isn't, each campaign will be organizing their own fundraisers, and their grassroots supporters will be organizing money bombs for them. I see this as a way to get the word out virally about who is running against the status quo in every category: local, state, and national. It is extremely informative. It gives a supporter up to date information all in one area.

If I'm on the receiving end of an email that has this web site in it, I can donate to my local candidate, maybe an underdog in another state, and then pass the info along on my list and let my brother in Kentucky know that Rand is running and to please donate!

To concentrate all our efforts on just a few candidates is NOT going to win us the majority in Congress. We need to take the seats back and here's why: Everything that this Congress passes has to be funded through the house budget committee process. If we take back the majority, (we - meaning fiscally conservative representation) nothing will get funded when it goes through the budget committee.

Don't you see the beauty in this? I think Trevor's site should be a centralized location for every concerned citizen to see who's running against the status quo.

[bucfish]

Personally, I think the process should be changed slightly. Reduce the increments to $25 and allow a donor to specify more than one candidate. You'd get more participation * and a more realistic projection of who would receive any given amount. The latter condition should entice some friendly competition. ;)

* Nearly maximal participation which includes most potential donors; young, poor, rich, old ... If a donor has more to give, just increase the pledges in $25 increments. Hence, each donor needs the ability to specify the donated amount in $25 increments, e.g. $25, $50, $75, $100, etc., the total number of pledges in $25 increments, and who will receive those pledges of $25.


I agree for a multi candidate fundraiser $25 or even a $10 pledge for each candidate would be great. That way Instead of 1 candidate getting a pledge for $50 maybe 5 candidates get a pledge for $10. Which would grow the pledges