jrich4rpaul
01-06-2008, 05:40 AM
There are many debates going on about moneybombs. When we need them, how much to pledge, and who will run them.
There are also debates that we need money at a steady pace, and money bombs won't do that.
What I (a former moneybomb naysayer) have realized is that there are at least 6 money bombs between now and the 23rd.
www.ronpaulmoneybomb.com (1 per week)
www.ronpaulspayday.com (1 each Friday)
www.benjaminsforpaul.com (1/17)
www.freeatlast2008.com (1/21)
Talk about consistancy, I think 2 or 3 moneybombs per week is pretty consistant.
Plus we could have minibombs today for the Fox debate and on Tuesday for the New Hampshire primary, as well as any primary afterwards.
The campaign has stated that it needs 23 million dollars some time before Super Tuesday (2/5)
We're bringing in about 50k per day. That won't get us anywhere close to 23 million (it would actually be around 800k by the 23rd. We need the moneybombs.
We can do this. We can raise 23 million by 1/23.
Operation 23:
Instead of debating money bombs, support every single one, and new ones that pop up spontaneously. We know that moneybombs motivate people to donate who normally wouldn't. Why should we take that away? Spread each one around like wildfire. Donate on a day you like, or donate for all of them. But help spread the word and these are guaranteed to bring in new donors along with us every time.
Say we have 7 moneybombs (if we count today's Fox debate as a reason to moneybomb). That would give us 16 non-moneybomb days before the 23rd, bringing in 800k. That would mean we'd have to raise 22.2 million with moneybombs. 7 moneybombs means we'd have to average at 3.17 million for each of those days.
Is that realistic? Not really. RonPaulsPayDay won't bring in 3+ million a pop.
But this math is only based on bringing in 50k on the average day. If we can do more, the average we'd need to raise per moneybomb would drop. Not to mention that if we do well in primaries we'll see some money pour in.
I think it's possible, but only if we get behind it. People like moneybombs so the media can say "x amount of money raised in one day... amazing". But can you imagine the coverage of 23 million in 23 days?
If you support the idea, please, by all means, share it ASAP.
I also think each moneybomb site would need to work together instead of trying to go it alone, as well as mention that we need to reach 23 million, as opposed to setting goals such as "100k people for 10 million in one day" because that just won't happen with such short notice.
To sum it up:
Step 1: Pick a moneybomb and get behind it
Step 2: Donate what you can
Step 3: Go out and spread Ron Paul's message while you still can
There are also debates that we need money at a steady pace, and money bombs won't do that.
What I (a former moneybomb naysayer) have realized is that there are at least 6 money bombs between now and the 23rd.
www.ronpaulmoneybomb.com (1 per week)
www.ronpaulspayday.com (1 each Friday)
www.benjaminsforpaul.com (1/17)
www.freeatlast2008.com (1/21)
Talk about consistancy, I think 2 or 3 moneybombs per week is pretty consistant.
Plus we could have minibombs today for the Fox debate and on Tuesday for the New Hampshire primary, as well as any primary afterwards.
The campaign has stated that it needs 23 million dollars some time before Super Tuesday (2/5)
We're bringing in about 50k per day. That won't get us anywhere close to 23 million (it would actually be around 800k by the 23rd. We need the moneybombs.
We can do this. We can raise 23 million by 1/23.
Operation 23:
Instead of debating money bombs, support every single one, and new ones that pop up spontaneously. We know that moneybombs motivate people to donate who normally wouldn't. Why should we take that away? Spread each one around like wildfire. Donate on a day you like, or donate for all of them. But help spread the word and these are guaranteed to bring in new donors along with us every time.
Say we have 7 moneybombs (if we count today's Fox debate as a reason to moneybomb). That would give us 16 non-moneybomb days before the 23rd, bringing in 800k. That would mean we'd have to raise 22.2 million with moneybombs. 7 moneybombs means we'd have to average at 3.17 million for each of those days.
Is that realistic? Not really. RonPaulsPayDay won't bring in 3+ million a pop.
But this math is only based on bringing in 50k on the average day. If we can do more, the average we'd need to raise per moneybomb would drop. Not to mention that if we do well in primaries we'll see some money pour in.
I think it's possible, but only if we get behind it. People like moneybombs so the media can say "x amount of money raised in one day... amazing". But can you imagine the coverage of 23 million in 23 days?
If you support the idea, please, by all means, share it ASAP.
I also think each moneybomb site would need to work together instead of trying to go it alone, as well as mention that we need to reach 23 million, as opposed to setting goals such as "100k people for 10 million in one day" because that just won't happen with such short notice.
To sum it up:
Step 1: Pick a moneybomb and get behind it
Step 2: Donate what you can
Step 3: Go out and spread Ron Paul's message while you still can