Ron Paul Ranks 4th in total funds raised

[JasonM]

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/07/16/campaign-cash-rankings-contributions-campaign-to-date/

CONTRIBUTIONS FROM INDIVIDUALS, CAMPAIGN-TO-DATE

REPUBLICANS:
Romney R $34,757,438.80
Giuliani R $33,327,384.28
McCain R $24,531,069.92
Paul R $3,002,817.57
Tancredo R $2,700,756.38
Brownback R $2,695,147.96
Huckabee R $1,274,797.78
Hunter R $1,268,433.76
Thompson R $757,008.04
Gilmore R $348,636.16

We're moving up people :D

[berkeleybound]

We've made it to the top of the "second tier" and established credibility. Not "top-tier" yet though. We need to get some more momentum.



http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/07/16/campaign-cash-rankings-contributions-campaign-to-date/

CONTRIBUTIONS FROM INDIVIDUALS, CAMPAIGN-TO-DATE

REPUBLICANS:
Romney R $34,757,438.80
Giuliani R $33,327,384.28
McCain R $24,531,069.92
Paul R $3,002,817.57
Tancredo R $2,700,756.38
Brownback R $2,695,147.96
Huckabee R $1,274,797.78
Hunter R $1,268,433.76
Thompson R $757,008.04
Gilmore R $348,636.16

We're moving up people :D

[buffalokid777]

Yes we're moving up!

I hope the Ron Paul campaign will consider investing in some advertising that will pay them the most dividends!

Sometimes you have to spend money to make money!

I'm proud of Ron....he's been VERY frugal with the money given him!

But I REALLY hope the Ron Paul campaign will look into and research where they could spend some money on advertising that will bring the most amount of contributions from targeted ads.....

Most of the top tier candidates spend money on advertising like drunken sailors where they DON'T get the best return for their investment in it. (SEE JOHN MCCAIN, MITT ROMNEY)

Most businesses spend 10% on advertising....I'd really like to see him spend 10% of donations on advertising, just as long as it is in the most likely place to see a return on the investment!

It is a way to not only get MORE donations...but MORE name recognition! With a little research, I'm sure the Ron Paul campaign could find the places where spending some donations on advertisement would get a better return on that investment!

[ghemminger]

What are the trajectories of everyone....where will Ron P be in 3 months?????

[Lord Xar]

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/07/16/campaign-cash-rankings-contributions-campaign-to-date/

CONTRIBUTIONS FROM INDIVIDUALS, CAMPAIGN-TO-DATE

REPUBLICANS:
Romney R $34,757,438.80
Giuliani R $33,327,384.28
McCain R $24,531,069.92
Paul R $3,002,817.57
Tancredo R $2,700,756.38
Brownback R $2,695,147.96
Huckabee R $1,274,797.78
Hunter R $1,268,433.76
Thompson R $757,008.04
Gilmore R $348,636.16

We're moving up people :D

I am curious here on How TANCREDO almost made as much as Paul, yet doens't even have close to the groundswell?

Someone created a chart and I'd like to see a side by side comparision of total donors, ave. donor amount and escalation of donations etc..

I just am just curious how ALL OF THIS homegrown support only amounted to 300,000 extra..... What is Tancredo doing, Paul isn't? More stopoffs, better first quarter, what?

[akalucas]

What are the trajectories of everyone....where will Ron P be in 3 months?????

Probably around Bill Richardson (http://query.nictusa.com/pres/2007/Q2/C00431577.html) level of fundraising. A lot will depend on the straw polls and how he spends his money to get his name out there.

[buffalokid777]

I am curious here on How TANCREDO almost made as much as Paul, yet doens't even have close to the groundswell?

Someone created a chart and I'd like to see a side by side comparision of total donors, ave. donor amount and escalation of donations etc..

I just am just curious how ALL OF THIS homegrown support only amounted to 300,000 extra..... What is Tancredo doing, Paul isn't? More stopoffs, better first quarter, what?

STAUNCH opposition to amnesty! That's HIS big issue like Ron's is following the constitution and freedom!

90% of Americans didn't want the shamnesty bill = xtra $ for Tancredo.

I really hope Ron gets MORE vocal about securing the border as a secondary message! He rarely goes on much about this point from most interviews I've seen and heard. You can really gain conservative primary votes on this issue if your against shamnesty and for better border security and vocal about it.

[Slugg]

Probably around Bill Richardson (http://query.nictusa.com/pres/2007/Q2/C00431577.html) level of fundraising. A lot will depend on the straw polls and how he spends his money to get his name out there.

Now that would be GREAT!!!! I think if we keep it up and the campaign has some serious money, we could overtake the "front-runners" by Christmas!!!!!

[Lord Xar]

STAUNCH opposition to amnesty! That's HIS big issue like Ron's is following the constitution and freedom!

90% of Americans didn't want the shamnesty bill = xtra $ for Tancredo.

I really hope Ron gets MORE vocal about securing the border as a secondary message! He rarely goes on much about this point from most interviews I've seen and heard. You can really gain conservative primary votes on this issue if your against shamnesty and for better border security and vocal about it.

Then Why Doesn't Ron Paul wise up to this. I have been talking about this for weeks now and many posters here feel the same way, yet he keeps talking about the same message and glosses over this major issue.

Sorta irritating.. because TANCREDO is taking his immigration position AND his NAU/SPP/NAFTA angle too.... Paul needs to wise up and start rallying around this too as he does with his Foreign Policy and Tax issue..

And another thing, he is almost as tough as Tancredo (Hunter too) on it, yet he doens't even approach it.. very very weird... maybe he has a gameplan.

[j650]

Now that i'm looking at the right info, here's a link to Ron Paul's contributions by employer.

http://query.nictusa.com/pres/2007/Q2/C00432914/A_EMPLOYER_C00432914.html

And Tancredo's

http://query.nictusa.com/pres/2007/Q2/C00431619/A_EMPLOYER_C00431619.html

I didn't count them, but Ron Paul obviously has more. I don't think this includes individual donors under $200 and judging by that $964,000 on Tancredo's top line, we can probably assume that Dr. Paul has a lot more contributors.

[SeanEdwards]

I think Ron is in a great spot right now. In fact, I'm a little worried about Ron peaking prematurely. When Ron is a legitimate front runner he will come under serious concerted attack. Pacing the stumbling campaigns of the media darlings like this is perfect for Ron. He gets to remain the intriguing dark horse and spread his message, without fearing significant challenges from the other candidates. None of them want to blunder like Rudy did and elevate Paul's standing by engaging him, so they will just try to uncomfortably ignore him, while maybe saying "Constitution" a few times in a weak effort to co-opt the Paul message.

I bet the GOP powerbrokers are crapping their pants right about now. They're probably desperately trying to put together an effective smear campaign on Paul. Maybe more than one.

[JasonM]

Indeed indeed.

I think we should call and email the campaign about this and mention this to them.

Try to suggest that Ron Paul should concentrate more on securing the boarders, amnesty, and the immigration issue in general. It's a shame that Ron Paul is so conservative on so many issues, but then some conservatives just write him off because he's anti war. I think a lot of conservatives would overlook his stance on Iraq if he talked more about securing the boarders.

[Bradley in DC]

I am curious here on How TANCREDO almost made as much as Paul, yet doens't even have close to the groundswell?

Someone created a chart and I'd like to see a side by side comparision of total donors, ave. donor amount and escalation of donations etc..

I just am just curious how ALL OF THIS homegrown support only amounted to 300,000 extra..... What is Tancredo doing, Paul isn't? More stopoffs, better first quarter, what?

Tancredo raised twice as much money as Dr. Paul in the first quarter.

[Bradley in DC]

Indeed indeed.

I think we should call and email the campaign about this and mention this to them.

Try to suggest that Ron Paul should concentrate more on securing the boarders, amnesty, and the immigration issue in general. It's a shame that Ron Paul is so conservative on so many issues, but then some conservatives just write him off because he's anti war. I think a lot of conservatives would overlook his stance on Iraq if he talked more about securing the boarders.

No, do NOT call/email the campaign. The small staff is already overwhelmed with supporters comments and they're moving offices this week.

[CJLauderdale4]

How does it work when a candidate dropping out of a race "endorses" another candidate? Can campaign funds be transfered to the other candidate??

Even if not, I think we could get some endorsements from candiates who may be dropping out. I truly hope the Ron Paul campaign cordially calls up the lower candidates who may drop out and asks them if they would endorse him if they drop out. They may want to wait until after the Iowa Straw Poll. But This would be a big boost.

However, all supporters who migrate to Ron Paul would need to endorse a non-interventio, non-preventive war policy. Not sure how many Hunter, Brownback, or Huckabee supporters would go for this. Thompson and Tancredo supporters maybe....

Thoughts???

[paulitics]

The 2 issues RP needs to drive home:
1) Border security
2) Bin Laden in Pakistan

None of the other candidates are tough on this. Why? because they are bought and paid for, and do not care about anything more thanm a globalist agenda.

And yes we should call. I truly believe the election can be won on this. And it would be better for RP to talk about this now before the smear campaign starts.

[B964]

If you took into account the time and money spent by supporters on thier own, his fund is alot more than 3 million. I have spent far more on campaigning than I have donated.
A friend of mine asked why I made my own yard signs,"Don't they send you FREE ones?". I said why would I donate money to him, to have him send it back in the form of a sign?

[Scribbler de Stebbing]

Most businesses spend 10% on advertising....I'd really like to see him spend 10% of donations on advertising, just as long as it is in the most likely place to see a return on the investment!

Right now, the best investment would be in Iowa, before the Straw Poll. If he can do well in the straw poll, contributions will roll in.

If he does not do well there, we're just another struggling 2nd-tier campaign, no different than 6 other 2nd tier campaigns, most of which will drop out after the straw poll.

[Original_Intent]

Yes we're moving up!

I hope the Ron Paul campaign will consider investing in some advertising that will pay them the most dividends!

Sometimes you have to spend money to make money!

I'm proud of Ron....he's been VERY frugal with the money given him!

But I REALLY hope the Ron Paul campaign will look into and research where they could spend some money on advertising that will bring the most amount of contributions from targeted ads.....

Most of the top tier candidates spend money on advertising like drunken sailors where they DON'T get the best return for their investment in it. (SEE JOHN MCCAIN, MITT ROMNEY)

Most businesses spend 10% on advertising....I'd really like to see him spend 10% of donations on advertising, just as long as it is in the most likely place to see a return on the investment!

It is a way to not only get MORE donations...but MORE name recognition! With a little research, I'm sure the Ron Paul campaign could find the places where spending some donations on advertisement would get a better return on that investment!

I think Ron probably gets the basic idea of spending money to make money. :rolleyes:

In Q2 he spent his end of Q1 balance. If he continues this pattern that would mean he will spend 4 times as much this quarter as last quarter. This is really smart both becuase it is fiscally responsible but it also feeds the growth curve.

I am sure at this point it becomes a question of: Do we spend a LOT in Iowa and NH and get the national attention that a good showing there generates? Or do you spread the money around the country to get his name out to the maximum number of people per dollar spent? Or something else? I( am sure there are hundreds of considerations,b ut I trust the good doctor to make those decisions with his campaign team.

I feel a little bit too much "armchair quarterbacking" going on here, people are all like "Ron Paul should do this" or "the campaign better do this or else". I am sure the campaign is open to suggestions, and certainly we each in our own sphere of influence can do whatever we each feel is most beneficial.

[Original_Intent]

If you took into account the time and money spent by supporters on thier own, his fund is alot more than 3 million. I have spent far more on campaigning than I have donated.
A friend of mine asked why I made my own yard signs,"Don't they send you FREE ones?". I said why would I donate money to him, to have him send it back in the form of a sign?

I am sure we could add a million in choroplast and Tyvek and probably another million in spray paint and who knows how much in donated time! :) :) :)

[ecliptic]

I really hope Ron gets MORE vocal about securing the border as a secondary message! He rarely goes on much about this point from most interviews I've seen and heard. You can really gain conservative primary votes on this issue if your against shamnesty and for better border security and vocal about it.

I strongly disagree with rhetoric about "secure the border" as this implies building a ridiculous taxpayer boondoggle 2,000 mile wall... ( and another one to the north???) Building border walls is paranoid and will continue to be ineffective. How about we simply strike the roots of the problem?

"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root."
– Henry David Thoreau



The root of the immigration problem lies in economic incentives. Read "Freakonomics" for an excellent alternative viewpoint on the subject of economic incentives. No wall and no amount of armed sentries can overcome the power of the economic incentives for illegal immigrants to cross, tunnel, fly over, swim around, or otherwise circumvent any wall no matter how ridiculously expensive that wall is. The debate about securing the borders is just another step towards totalitarianism and fear-mongering. Yes illegal immigrants are slowing reducing the standard of living for the middle class while simultaneously enriching the top 1% upper class. The economic incentives begin with the deplorable excessive birth rates in Catholic Mexico. The excess population's needs cannot be met by the Mexican economy. The United States then offers tremendous economic incentives to cross the border in the form of federal handouts to these illegals. The incentive to have a child in America is absurd. Until the issue of the welfare state is injected forcefully into the immigration debate the dialogue will remain paranoid and no real progress will be made. Walls are for failing fascist dictatorships, not free countries.

[PatriotOne]

I agree with that whole-heartedly. Not only does it make total sense when a viewer hears the reasoning as to why the illegal immigration problem is, well, such a problem, it exposes who really is at fault for the problem (our Goverment pandering to Corporations who want sweat shop labor and ultimately the NAU). Most people just point the finger at all the illegals, but don't make the connection that we actually incentivize them. I know when I heard Dr. Paul briefly speak to this a big ole lightbulb went on for me. We don't need a wall, we need to decentivize by taking away Welfare benefits and severely punish those employee's who hire them. Problem solved for the bulk of it.


I strongly disagree with rhetoric about "secure the border" as this implies building a ridiculous taxpayer boondoggle 2,000 mile wall... ( and another one to the north???) Building border walls is paranoid and will continue to be ineffective. How about we simply strike the roots of the problem?

"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root."
– Henry David Thoreau



The root of the immigration problem lies in economic incentives. Read "Freakonomics" for an excellent alternative viewpoint on the subject of economic incentives. No wall and no amount of armed sentries can overcome the power of the economic incentives for illegal immigrants to cross, tunnel, fly over, swim around, or otherwise circumvent any wall no matter how ridiculously expensive that wall is. The debate about securing the borders is just another step towards totalitarianism and fear-mongering. Yes illegal immigrants are slowing reducing the standard of living for the middle class while simultaneously enriching the top 1% upper class. The economic incentives begin with the deplorable excessive birth rates in Catholic Mexico. The excess population's needs cannot be met by the Mexican economy. The United States then offers tremendous economic incentives to cross the border in the form of federal handouts to these illegals. The incentive to have a child in America is absurd. Until the issue of the welfare state is injected forcefully into the immigration debate the dialogue will remain paranoid and no real progress will be made. Walls are for failing fascist dictatorships, not free countries.

[Bradley in DC]

I agree with that whole-heartedly. Not only does it make total sense when a viewer hears the reasoning as to why the illegal immigration problem is, well, such a problem, it exposes who really is at fault for the problem (our Goverment pandering to Corporations who want sweat shop labor and ultimately the NAU). Most people just point the finger at all the illegals, but don't make the connection that we actually incentivize them. I know when I heard Dr. Paul briefly speak to this a big ole lightbulb went on for me. We don't need a wall, we need to decentivize by taking away Welfare benefits and severely punish those employee's who hire them. Problem solved for the bulk of it.

Exactly: we need to focus on causes, not symptoms. Besides, Dr. Paul is far from a single issue-candidacy.

[jj111]

I am curious here on How TANCREDO almost made as much as Paul, yet doens't even have close to the groundswell?

Someone created a chart and I'd like to see a side by side comparision of total donors, ave. donor amount and escalation of donations etc..

I just am just curious how ALL OF THIS homegrown support only amounted to 300,000 extra..... What is Tancredo doing, Paul isn't? More stopoffs, better first quarter, what?

SEC 2nd Quarter figures were not good for Tancredo.

7. Total Receipts: Paul $2.4 M vs. Tancredo $1.5 M
10. Cash on hand minus 12. Debts On June 30: Paul $2.4 M vs. Tancredo: $583k

http://query.nictusa.com/pres/2007/Q2/

http://files.meetup.com/496508/Ron%20Paul%20SEC%20Q2%202007%20Campaign%20Finance%