sailingaway
05-16-2012, 09:04 PM
except for the 'essentially ended his bid, it's a great write up by open secrets:
http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2012/05/ron-pauls-unorthodox-fundraising.html
in part:
The most frequently listed employers of Paul's donors also looked very different. The top five organizations contributing to Paul's campaign (meaning their employees contributed and/or their PACs did) were the U.S. Army, the U.S. Air Force, the U.S. Navy, Google and the Department of Defense. Paul always had strong support from members of the military, largely because of his anti-war stance, and even though Obama picked up some momentum recently with that demographic, Paul continued to be hands-down the top choice among Republican candidates.
In stark contrast, the top organizations giving to Romney are Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Morgan Stanley and Credit Suisse. Obama's top five list includes Microsoft Corp., DLA Piper, University of California, Sidley Austin LLP and Google.
Paul's campaign also relied very little on what has become standard operating procedure for Republican primary candidates: Let a heavy-hitting super PAC, funded by a handful of wealthy individuals, spend big on ads attacking your rivals.
A few outside spending groups supported Paul, but the largest, a super PAC called Endorse Liberty, spent just $3.8 million. All of that went to support Paul, not to attack other candidates. In contrast, Restore Our Future, the pro-Romney super PAC, has spent $46.5 million (more than Paul's campaign and all pro-Paul outside spending put together) -- $39.7 million of that on attacks against other candidates.
also, even at the end when people just by giving more small donations went over $200, 45% of Ron's donors are small, under $200 donors.
http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2012/05/ron-pauls-unorthodox-fundraising.html
in part:
The most frequently listed employers of Paul's donors also looked very different. The top five organizations contributing to Paul's campaign (meaning their employees contributed and/or their PACs did) were the U.S. Army, the U.S. Air Force, the U.S. Navy, Google and the Department of Defense. Paul always had strong support from members of the military, largely because of his anti-war stance, and even though Obama picked up some momentum recently with that demographic, Paul continued to be hands-down the top choice among Republican candidates.
In stark contrast, the top organizations giving to Romney are Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Morgan Stanley and Credit Suisse. Obama's top five list includes Microsoft Corp., DLA Piper, University of California, Sidley Austin LLP and Google.
Paul's campaign also relied very little on what has become standard operating procedure for Republican primary candidates: Let a heavy-hitting super PAC, funded by a handful of wealthy individuals, spend big on ads attacking your rivals.
A few outside spending groups supported Paul, but the largest, a super PAC called Endorse Liberty, spent just $3.8 million. All of that went to support Paul, not to attack other candidates. In contrast, Restore Our Future, the pro-Romney super PAC, has spent $46.5 million (more than Paul's campaign and all pro-Paul outside spending put together) -- $39.7 million of that on attacks against other candidates.
also, even at the end when people just by giving more small donations went over $200, 45% of Ron's donors are small, under $200 donors.