Map of US where Ron Paul is getting Money.

[lx43]

The west gives rp the most contribution.


http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/.shared/image.html?/photos/uncategorized/2007/10/16/ronpaulamerica.jpg

This is Patrick Ruffini's map of where Ron Paul is getting his money. The strength in the Mountain West is impressive, if unsurprising. The hostility of the South to his message of individual liberty is also no big whup. Stuart Benjamin notices how evenly spread Paul's money-base is compared with many others:

His campaign contributions are spread out quite evenly (he's done better in Texas than elsewhere, which is not surprising, but his Texas total is only three times his haul from the state of Washington and a bit smaller than funds from California). And his receipts come from all over. Indeed, and perhaps unsurprisingly, he does better in smaller states, which may have a higher percentage of people who lean libertarian. He has received more money from North Dakota, for example, than either Romney or Giuliani. You can decide for yourself whether this means we should consider him to be the only candidate with a true 50-state appeal, or the candidate for people in sparsely populated and over-represented (in the Senate) states.
Two interesting factoids: New Hampshire is first in donors per capita in the country. I think his support may be under-estimated in that state. The second surprise is that his second strongest "state" is Washington D.C., where a lot of disenchanted libertarian Republicans reside. Ahem.

[lx43]

I'm retarded. I can't get the image to post.

[Johnnybags]

Why on earth a near bankrupt state would want ot maintain the status quo is bryond me, where are Ohioans?

[SwooshOU]

I'd love to see a county by county map.

[Nash]

Note this only accounts for online donations. States with older demo's are probably underrepresented in this graphic. That might explain partially at least why the south is so weak right now.

[Broadlighter]

Alabama is making great economic sense. They hardly raised anything for RP and yet he kicks absolute ass in that state's straw polls.

[BarryDonegan]

yeah this map shows nothing. RP won all the major straw polls in some of those "whited out" southern states and lost them by a landslide in the north central.

alabama is probably one of the strongest pro-ron paul states, bear in mind its not a high population state either so its not going to be financially competitive. and Tennessee and Georgia are the bible belts population centers.

anti-government sentiment is ALWAYS stronger in the south. remember that the south generally votes republican over things like 2nd ammendment rights, and economic liberty... the south is one of the few places in America where the evils of big federal government actually resulted in mass death and violation of property rights ;)

[Alabama Supporter]

Alabama is a Fred Thompson state...for now.

[cjhowe]

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/10/16/ronpaulamerica.jpg

You're link wasn't to an image, it was to an html doc that contained the image

[steph3n]

btw this is online only, and probably won't be updated due to bandwidth limits on cowda's server.

[Paulitician]

The New York Times has nice pages about the finances, a map included.

http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/finances/index.html

[surf]

Blue Washington looks good in Ron Paul deep-red
(i sent out an email last night with the subject: "Congratulations Washingtonians!")

[hornet]

The hostility of the South to his message of individual liberty is also no big whup.

uh, florida is about as far south as you can get and here in the sunshine state we love his message! (just messin' with you lx43 thanks for the map!)

also, with rp just having that resounding straw poll success in alabama i'm surprised its not redder than what it is.........

[lx43]

Quit alright. lol I think everyone would love his message if they would just take the time to hear it and think for themselves. I know some diehard democrats who like his message.

[daviddee]

...

[hornet]

come on 'bama show us a REAL red tide! just cause the gators whipped your butts ain't no reason to get cheap! get off them wallets! i wanta see red dammit!

[Give me liberty]

The New York Times has nice pages about the finances, a map included.

http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/finances/index.html

There is no way in hell that Hillary made that much money from those states :mad:
and whooping of 50 Million in a matter of time? i bet the bankers paid her that much money.

[Paulitician]

There is no way in hell that Hillary made that much money from those states :mad:
and whooping of 50 Million in a matter of time? i bet the bankers paid her that much money.
Bankers, corporations... anyone with deep pockets. She's a slave to them. Remember when she was trying to justify being influenced by lobbyists and special interest groups? The American people need to seriously wake up. It's right in front of their eyes, yet they still can't see it.

[iskimtsnow]

The details tab of the NYT map says it all. The "frontrunners" of any political campaign are merely the selections of a few rich and powerful, looking to keep things just they way they are. Looking down the list you see the "frontrunners get nearly 1/2 their cash from $2300 donors.:mad: :eek: :(

[Paulitician]

The details tab of the NYT map says it all. The "frontrunners" of any political campaign are merely the selections of a few rich and powerful, looking to keep things just they way they are. Looking down the list you see the "frontrunners get nearly 1/2 their cash from $2300 donors.:mad: :eek: :(
Exactly. The media knows this, since even the corporations that own them are giving money to these "frontrunners" (e.g. Murdoch having ties to Giuliani; Murdoch giving money both to Giuliani and Hillary; Israeli special interest groups giving the highest ratings to Giuliani on the Republican side, Hillary on the Democratic side etc.). Yet they put on this charade, and everyone else is fooled into believing that Ron Paul has no support. It's funny, because out of all the candidates except Obama, he probably has the most support from We The People.

It's all the corporate agenda. People still don't get it. Sad.

[kylejack]

The details tab of the NYT map says it all. The "frontrunners" of any political campaign are merely the selections of a few rich and powerful, looking to keep things just they way they are. Looking down the list you see the "frontrunners get nearly 1/2 their cash from $2300 donors.:mad: :eek: :(

Check out the <$200 donations. Ron Paul raised 4 million that way.
Fred: $4 million
Romney: $6 million
Giuliani: $6 million
McCain: $6 million


We're on their heels in small donations. Its just the big 2300s that are killing us. Which means...their donors are funds-exhausted while ours are just powering up.

[jd603]

Go New Hampshire! :)



The west gives rp the most contribution.


http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/.shared/image.html?/photos/uncategorized/2007/10/16/ronpaulamerica.jpg

This is Patrick Ruffini's map of where Ron Paul is getting his money. The strength in the Mountain West is impressive, if unsurprising. The hostility of the South to his message of individual liberty is also no big whup. Stuart Benjamin notices how evenly spread Paul's money-base is compared with many others:

His campaign contributions are spread out quite evenly (he's done better in Texas than elsewhere, which is not surprising, but his Texas total is only three times his haul from the state of Washington and a bit smaller than funds from California). And his receipts come from all over. Indeed, and perhaps unsurprisingly, he does better in smaller states, which may have a higher percentage of people who lean libertarian. He has received more money from North Dakota, for example, than either Romney or Giuliani. You can decide for yourself whether this means we should consider him to be the only candidate with a true 50-state appeal, or the candidate for people in sparsely populated and over-represented (in the Senate) states.
Two interesting factoids: New Hampshire is first in donors per capita in the country. I think his support may be under-estimated in that state. The second surprise is that his second strongest "state" is Washington D.C., where a lot of disenchanted libertarian Republicans reside. Ahem.

[libertarian4321]

The west gives rp the most contribution.


http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/.shared/image.html?/photos/uncategorized/2007/10/16/ronpaulamerica.jpg

This is Patrick Ruffini's map of where Ron Paul is getting his money. The strength in the Mountain West is impressive, if unsurprising. The hostility of the South to his message of individual liberty is also no big whup. Stuart Benjamin notices how evenly spread Paul's money-base is compared with many others:

His campaign contributions are spread out quite evenly (he's done better in Texas than elsewhere, which is not surprising, but his Texas total is only three times his haul from the state of Washington and a bit smaller than funds from California). And his receipts come from all over. Indeed, and perhaps unsurprisingly, he does better in smaller states, which may have a higher percentage of people who lean libertarian. He has received more money from North Dakota, for example, than either Romney or Giuliani. You can decide for yourself whether this means we should consider him to be the only candidate with a true 50-state appeal, or the candidate for people in sparsely populated and over-represented (in the Senate) states.
Two interesting factoids: New Hampshire is first in donors per capita in the country. I think his support may be under-estimated in that state. The second surprise is that his second strongest "state" is Washington D.C., where a lot of disenchanted libertarian Republicans reside. Ahem.

I expected New Hampshire to be strong- its very libertarian. Thats why the "Free State Project " chose NH.

[cjhowe]

Check out the <$200 donations. Ron Paul raised 4 million that way.
Fred: $4 million
Romney: $6 million
Giuliani: $6 million
McCain: $6 million


We're on their heels in small donations. Its just the big 2300s that are killing us. Which means...their donors are funds-exhausted while ours are just powering up.

Giuliani:.........3,841,160
Paul:..............4,105,410
Thompson:....4,224,640
Romney:.........6,066,240
McCain:..........6,581,000

And for only Q3...

McCain:.........1,184,024
Giuliani:.........1,405,805
Romney:.........1,740,265
Paul:..............2,598,675
Thompson:....4,157,336 * Includes contributions before 07/01/2007

[mconder]

I knew there was a reason I've lived in deep red states for most of my adult life.

[GeorgiaRPFan]

Tennessee and Georgia are the bible belts population centers.

. . .which works in Ron Paul's favor. The religious right is looking for a solid pro-life candidate, and Giuliani is not. I doubt Southern Baptists and Evangelicals are keen on voting a Mormon into office. Like it or not, the evangelicals take personal religious beliefs into account.

[ronpaulhawaii]

Blue Washington looks good in Ron Paul deep-red
(i sent out an email last night with the subject: "Congratulations Washingtonians!")

Yeah, Washington kicked @$$. Thanks!

I can't help but notice that HI and AK are the forgotton stepchilds on the Map:(

We will be riding through the south and hope to get lots of advice/help/support in reaching these voters

and sign a pledge dang it;)

[Johnnybags]

Because it is this mindset that got them to where they are. Do not expect it to change... They are pro-portectionism, pro-union, etc etc instead of pro-innovation.

No offense to Ohio, but they are going through what Michigan is going through. Once huge manufacturing economies, big unions, big taxers, and big spenders.

They assumed for too long that they were the hub of the universe in manufacturing and did not spend 1 dime to diversify to other areas. The manufacturing jobs disappeared and so did the viability of the state.



How, on earth is staying with a Neocon NAU mentality going to help these people? I guess they want French socialism.