PDA

View Full Version : Positives and negatives of another money bomb.




Matthew Zak
12-19-2007, 07:17 PM
Positives:

-If planned well, it could generate a lot of money.
-Even more media attention.
-Ron's campaign could do lots of cool things with the money.
-Give us an indication of how much support he's gained since the last money bomb.

Negatives:

-The media won't be surprised by the next one.
-If the last two didn't turn into votes, the 3rd won't either.
-If the next money bomb doesn't raise 6 mil+ it will be a dud.
-The campaign needs to spend the money now which means the donations need to keep coming.

If there is going to be another money bomb, it would be foolish to hold it any time before mid February. Any time before that is too soon, and couldn't possibly generate the support, attention, or money that the last couple have. Besides, not to be negative, but the proposed themes are really weak.

We should plan it out much more effectively, or scrap it.

.

Paulitical Correctness
12-19-2007, 07:19 PM
Need to keep things new and fresh.

Money bombs are old news.

How about a charity bomb? There's a sub forum that's gotten no attention so far.

RoamZero
12-19-2007, 07:20 PM
It all depends on how well he does in Iowa and New Hampshire. The only push right now that I think is a good idea is to get over 20 million. The next opportunity for a money bomb will be sometime before Feb. 5 and after Iowa and New Hampshire, so I think it depends on that.

Vendico
12-19-2007, 07:20 PM
there is such a thing of over doing it. Another MB is over doing it. Stop while we're ahead.

Rahl
12-19-2007, 07:21 PM
why not "bomb" operationnh and the blimp with money ?

John E
12-19-2007, 07:21 PM
I think our focus needs to turn towards brining awareness of Ron Paul to the general public. The campaign has enough money to hold them until Dr. Paul wins the primaries.

jrich4rpaul
12-19-2007, 07:24 PM
We. Need. Voters.

Raise money at a steady pace! We can't have these one day a month things anymore!

IT'S THE PRIMARIES!

Matthew Zak
12-19-2007, 07:24 PM
I think our focus needs to turn towards brining awareness of Ron Paul to the general public. The campaign has enough money to hold them until Dr. Paul wins the primaries.

I totally, and whole heartedly agree with you. I just want to make sure that if there IS going to be a money bomb, that it's done right. There are enough supporters to do it with or without many of us supporting the idea.

There for, if there's a money bomb, how about Valentine's day? Very easy to remember. And it fits with the "Revolution" them.

February 14th.

klamath
12-19-2007, 07:25 PM
It is my belief that any other bombs would be a media dud unless it was an astronomical increase. The main point of the money bombs was to get media attention and with that gone they serve no purpose except to hold up the donation rate. The first ones the media attention far outweighted this but not anymore.
They were fantastic ideas that worked great but that is the great part of our grass roots campaign we are flexble and can come up with new ideas when the old one no longer work.

rich34
12-19-2007, 07:27 PM
Well imo, it wouldn't be bad to have another money bomb in mid January so we can help the campaign fund ads in ALL the super Tuesday states. Of course it's all going to depend on how Iowa and NH turn out. But if we can pull off a win in NH we're going to need all the money we can get to carry the momentum and help ward off the oncoming attacks that will most likely come immediately.

Spirit of '76
12-19-2007, 07:30 PM
No more moneybombs, please! :o

Matthew Zak
12-19-2007, 07:32 PM
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=60690

Cinnaboo
12-19-2007, 07:34 PM
I agree.

The anniversaries being proposed aren't even relevant to his campaign, and it feels like we've dropped the revolution theme entirely -- unless you count some boring birthday.


There for, if there's a money bomb, how about Valentine's day? Very easy to remember. And it fits with the "Revolution" them.It's about a martyr who died because he refused to deny Christ, right? Why does that fit?

Matthew Zak
12-19-2007, 07:35 PM
I agree.

The anniversaries being proposed aren't even relevant to his campaign, and it feels like we've dropped the revolution theme entirely -- unless you count some boring birthday.

It's about a martyr who died because he refused to deny Christ, right? Why does that fit?

90% of people don't know or care about the history of Valentine's day. It's about LOVE.

LOVE bomb.

tanstaafl
12-19-2007, 07:37 PM
why not "bomb" operationnh and the blimp with money ?

The Ron Paul headquarters has been an extreme disappointment in their ability to generate high quality, essential media to deliver the Ron Paul message effectively.

Until they fix this critical incompetence, I am not intending to give them any more money.

The Jeremiah Black organization, which I think is behind operationnh.com ... or is, at least, creating the high quality, effective TV spots, is dying for lack of funding even while the Ron Paul headquarters does... what? Next to nothing.

I heartily second the idea of an operationnh.com/ Jeremiah Black "money bomb".

A million in THEIR hands could quite likely turn these primaries...but we are almost out of time.

Would someone with more pull then me, more contacts, figure out how we can organize an effective campaign to fund these folks?

Or, even better, could someone give the Ron Paul Campaign headquarters a badly needed kick in the ass and get THEM to provide the funding??????

Rebel Resource
12-19-2007, 07:42 PM
I feel we need to allow enough time to ensure a $6m+ bomb.

We know we can't overdo them, and people will be donating just fine until the time is right for the next bomb. Thankfully we are not desperate for funds.

In the new year we should go all out again. I'm sure there will be mini-bombs, they are out of our hands, but the efforts should be concentrated for a January date.

So instead of falling short in a disappointing 2-3m December bomb, we can try to develop the momentum to go even better in mid-January.

Matthew Zak
12-19-2007, 07:47 PM
I feel we need to allow enough time to ensure a $6m+ bomb.

We know we can't overdo them, and people will be donating just fine until the time is right for the next bomb. Thankfully we are not desperate for funds.

In the new year we should go all out again. I'm sure there will be mini-bombs, they are out of our hands, but the efforts should be concentrated for a January date.

So instead of falling short in a disappointing 2-3m December bomb, we can try to develop the momentum to go even better in mid-January.

Mid January is less than 4 weeks away. It will NOT be effective. The Tea Party had over 6 weeks of hype. That's about a million/week. Even if people weren't broke, from already donating, and buying gifts for Christmas, there's just not nearly enough time to produce an effective money bomb in January.

Mid February at the EARLIEST, or scrap it, and donate continually.

Rebel Resource
12-19-2007, 07:49 PM
Mid January is less than 4 weeks away. It will NOT be effective. The Tea Party had over 6 weeks of hype. That's about a million/week. Even if people weren't broke, from already donating, and buying gifts for Christmas, there's just not nearly enough time to produce an effective money bomb in January.

Mid February at the EARLIEST, or scrap it, and donate continually.

OK, I only really got in tune with the RP campaign on that weekend, so had no idea!

Ara825
12-19-2007, 08:06 PM
Hi everybody, I'm a new member here. I've spent several days reading and getting the feel of the community here.

I believe one priority should be to keep the blimp in the air. If we fail to generate the money needed to do that then the msm will be all over it. I can just hear O'Reilly gleefully reporting "See there folks, I told you, the blimp was nothing more than a blip."

We can't afford to provide the msm with ammunition.

~Ara

Matthew Zak
12-19-2007, 08:08 PM
Hi everybody, I'm a new member here. I've spent several days reading and getting the feel of the community here.

I believe one priority should be to keep the blimp in the air. If we fail to generate the money needed to do that then the msm will be all over it. I can just hear O'Reilly gleefully reporting "See there folks, I told you, the blimp was nothing more than a blip."

We can't afford to provide the msm with ammunition.

~Ara

I personally agree with you.


What's the status with the blimp, anyway?

RPinSEAZ
12-19-2007, 08:13 PM
Complete and total waste of time and effort. We've already done everything we can do with fundraising gimmicks.

devil21
12-19-2007, 08:23 PM
No more bombs. Steady, daily donations is where the money should be coming from. Focus on chip-ins for good causes and raising even more awareness of RP. If I remember correctly, the original goal of Nov 5 was to raise money but to put RP on the national media! Those things have been done. Worry about another bomb after Super Tuesday.

Matthew Zak
12-19-2007, 08:28 PM
The only thing I want less than yet another money bomb, is another money bomb that sucks.

Antonius Stone
12-19-2007, 08:29 PM
i think we need to get famous people endorsements

Matthew Zak
12-19-2007, 08:55 PM
i think we need to get famous people endorsements

I'm sure they, whoever they are, can hear us loud and clear...

youngbuck
12-19-2007, 09:14 PM
I second the idea of better funding for the blimp, and grassroots operations in NH and IA. I think we need to focus as much as possible on NH and IA, and pick up any slack that the official campaign is leaving. Let's keep the blimp in the air, pay for billboards, and fund the folks that'll be on the ground before the primaries.

http://www.unitedforliberty.com/call4paul/
http://www.ronpaulbillboards.com/
http://ronpaulblimp.com/

robert4rp08
12-19-2007, 09:34 PM
The more money the better, but the campaign doesn't need "that much" more. What is needed are more people canvassing the early states, and canvassing materials. Focus should be given in these areas.

Matthew Zak
12-19-2007, 09:38 PM
The more money the better, but the campaign doesn't need "that much" more. What is needed are more people canvassing the early states, and canvassing materials. Focus should be given in these areas.

Agreed.

Man from La Mancha
12-19-2007, 09:42 PM
Positives:

-If planned well, it could generate a lot of money.
-Even more media attention.
-Ron's campaign could do lots of cool things with the money.
-Give us an indication of how much support he's gained since the last money bomb.

Negatives:

-The media won't be surprised by the next one.
-If the last two didn't turn into votes, the 3rd won't either.
-If the next money bomb doesn't raise 6 mil+ it will be a dud.
-The campaign needs to spend the money now which means the donations need to keep coming.

If there is going to be another money bomb, it would be foolish to hold it any time before mid February. Any time before that is too soon, and couldn't possibly generate the support, attention, or money that the last couple have. Besides, not to be negative, but the proposed themes are really weak.

We should plan it out much more effectively, or scrap it.

.Non secular, raising any money and getting new donors is only positive. The only negatives you give is one doesn't like to be associated with an embarrassment deemed by the MSM. Low self confidence I suppose

.

literatim
12-19-2007, 09:44 PM
If we are going to have a money bomb, it needs to be to fund the campaign, period.