PDA

View Full Version : The money bomb approach in general




BillyDkid
11-04-2007, 06:06 PM
I"m all for tomorrow's money bomb, but is it a good idea to keep having perpetual money bombs like we seem to be having? We should be able to make a nice splash with tomorrow's money bomb, but I was kind of thinking we would go back all supporters donating what they can when they can. I think of money bombing as a great way to make a statement, not the best way to raise money for the campaign. Am I wrong in thinking continual money bombing my be less productive ultimately than the way we raised money all along? Maybe I'm full of it, I don't know, but I don't think of money bombing as the most efficient way to raise money regularly.

Chester Copperpot
11-04-2007, 06:14 PM
Watch the movie 'Zulu' compare the regiments shooting by rank as opposed to 'indepedent fire at will'.... Both have advantages.. but when you want to charge ahead you have to fire by rank... the bombing is firing by rank.. Imagine a monthly money bomb of $100 every 5th of every month just like the weekly one.. on top of that new people coming in and donating at will.

TechnoGuyRob
11-04-2007, 06:14 PM
Money bombs are generally only for the hardest of hardcore Ron Paul supporters. November 5th is the only money bomb that will consist mostly of new donors and mild Ron Paul supporters, not just the hardcore ones.

FluxCapacitor
11-04-2007, 06:16 PM
1) It makes it more fun, and that's important. Hope for America. Be a part of it! Take back your country and enjoy yourself while you do it.

2 The media attention can be more useful than whatever ads would be purchased with the money. The only reason I'm here on this forum is because I heard that Ron Paul raised over 5 million dollars in the third quarter and I decided to check it out. Now I'm donating too. The impressive fundraising effort in September led to news coverage in October, which lead to more people hearing the message and donating their own time and money to bring that message to even more people.

KoozieChaz
11-04-2007, 06:17 PM
I think people have been "saving up" for Nov. 5th and putting off donations that may have come sooner. Maybe this should be a one time thing to allow a more constant donation flow, or at least wait until after a primary or two to ramp up for another, bigger one.

BillyDkid
11-04-2007, 06:20 PM
I think people have been "saving up" for Nov. 5th and putting off donations that may have come sooner. Maybe this should be a one time thing to allow a more constant donation flow, or at least wait until after a primary or two to ramp up for another, bigger one.That's kind of where I am coming from - that people should donate when they get urge in case, for whatever reason, they spend the money on something else.

TruckinMike
11-04-2007, 06:37 PM
This MONEY bOMb is what gave me the inspiration to send money in. Otherwise I wouldn't be making this donation.

Its TEN times more exciting when you donate this way... it satisfies the "whats in it for me" question. We all have a selfish, stingy streak, this helps to bust through it for a lot of folks.

Truckinmike

bbachtung
11-04-2007, 06:40 PM
Watch the movie 'Zulu' compare the regiments shooting by rank as opposed to 'indepedent fire at will'.... Both have advantages.. but when you want to charge ahead you have to fire by rank... the bombing is firing by rank.. Imagine a monthly money bomb of $100 every 5th of every month just like the weekly one.. on top of that new people coming in and donating at will.

Zulu's a great movie.

NewEnd
11-04-2007, 06:49 PM
This MONEY bOMb is what gave me the inspiration to send money in. Otherwise I wouldn't be making this donation.

Its TEN times more exciting when you donate this way... it satisfies the "whats in it for me" question. We all have a selfish, stingy streak, this helps to bust through it for a lot of folks.

Truckinmike

Same here.

walt
11-04-2007, 06:51 PM
I"m all for tomorrow's money bomb, but is it a good idea to keep having perpetual money bombs like we seem to be having? We should be able to make a nice splash with tomorrow's money bomb, but I was kind of thinking we would go back all supporters donating what they can when they can. I think of money bombing as a great way to make a statement, not the best way to raise money for the campaign. Am I wrong in thinking continual money bombing my be less productive ultimately than the way we raised money all along? Maybe I'm full of it, I don't know, but I don't think of money bombing as the most efficient way to raise money regularly.

we need voters, not money bombs.

kylejack
11-04-2007, 06:51 PM
It presses people to actually make a donation. Many have good intentions but always say "Maybe I'll do it tomorrow." This presses them to commit to a future date to donate.

scbissler
11-04-2007, 06:51 PM
Watch the movie 'Zulu' compare the regiments shooting by rank as opposed to 'indepedent fire at will'.... Both have advantages.. but when you want to charge ahead you have to fire by rank... the bombing is firing by rank.. Imagine a monthly money bomb of $100 every 5th of every month just like the weekly one.. on top of that new people coming in and donating at will.

Zulu is one of my all time favorite movies! To have that now connected with the events of the 5th is icing on the cake. Way to go.:)

NewEnd
11-04-2007, 06:55 PM
we need voters, not money bombs.

:rolleyes: