PDA

View Full Version : Official Poll - 1/9/08 Should Ron Paul Accept Matching Funds?




dseisner
01-09-2008, 09:40 AM
We discussed matching funds in the summer and the consensus was that it is totally against what Ron Paul stands for and that they won't be accepted. Recent evidence might indicate that we need it and it could make an astronomical difference.

Besides, Ron Paul inserts earmarks for his district. It's against his beliefs but he understands that ultimately, the system is broken and he must return as much money as he can to his district's taxpayers.

Some have argued that there are too many restrictions on the money and it's not worth the 20+ million we'd be getting.

You make the call and we'll send it in to HQ.


*Please sticky - important issue we need everybody's opinion on.

ceakins
01-09-2008, 09:41 AM
I think he should.

groverblue
01-09-2008, 09:42 AM
Absolutely not!

exer51
01-09-2008, 09:42 AM
Hell yea. 20 Mil from "The Man" to help destroy them... How can we NOT take it? I understand not wanting to on principle, and I GUESS it could hurt him in the long run... But I'm still in favor I think.

Time for Change
01-09-2008, 09:42 AM
I'll second that he should.
It is OUR money anyway, so it is a contribution from the people.

unloud
01-09-2008, 09:47 AM
It's like the earmark issue. The money is there, why not use it in order to repeal the 16th amendment?

dseisner
01-09-2008, 09:48 AM
Vote in the poll you dummies.

unloud
01-09-2008, 09:51 AM
Could you please take the words off the poll other than "Yes" "no" and "I don't know"....I personally say yes because the funds are there and should be used, an option you don't have.

ceakins
01-09-2008, 09:55 AM
Absolutely not!


We need to play the game from here on out. The good old boy are entrenched, and this is war. We have to pull out all the stops from here on out. Leave nothing off the table.

LoveTheCoast
01-09-2008, 10:00 AM
Dr. Paul *must* use matching funds. The current establishment makes this legal and as long as RP stays within boundries of current laws, he is doing nothing wrong -- and in my opinon, is doing everything right.

The best way to make change is to become a part of the establishment and use the methods and resources of that establishment. I don't think any of us agree with matching funds, as it shuts out the "little" guy even more, but the only way to make change is to get into the power position.

dseisner
01-09-2008, 10:02 AM
Could you please take the words off the poll other than "Yes" "no" and "I don't know"....I personally say yes because the funds are there and should be used, an option you don't have.

I can't change the poll. If you want to vote yes, choose the top option.

dseisner
01-09-2008, 10:05 AM
Dr. Paul *must* use matching funds. The current establishment makes this legal and as long as RP stays within boundries of current laws, he is doing nothing wrong -- and in my opinon, is doing everything right.

The best way to make change is to become a part of the establishment and use the methods and resources of that establishment. I don't think any of us agree with matching funds, as it shuts out the "little" guy even more, but the only way to make change is to get into the power position.

Just imagine how many more votes we could get if we had 20 million MORE in the bank. The establishment created this socialism - let's use their own tactics to take them down.

Sola
01-09-2008, 10:06 AM
Not too happy about doing that as its against what Dr Paul stands for....but for me its the same as asking for a tax refund....If Dr Paul takes matching funds then he's welcome to my tax dollars if they're going to be used to save this country.

atilla
01-09-2008, 10:06 AM
i don't like your choices. i think he already spent too much money in new hampshire to be eligible for matching funds. but if he can get them, sure go ahead, it's a tax refund.

dseisner
01-09-2008, 10:10 AM
i don't like your choices. i think he already spent too much money in new hampshire to be eligible for matching funds. but if he can get them, sure go ahead, it's a tax refund.

If that's the case then clearly he won't take them. But the polls isn't about whether or not it is still possible. It's about whether you think he should or shouldn't.

stevedasbach
01-09-2008, 10:16 AM
Paul can't take matching funds -- given his statements about not taking his Congressional pension, not accepting student loans for his kids, etc. he would lose all credibility. Plus, it would severly hamper him in the months prior to the convention if he actually won the nomination.

If they will spend the money they've raised on advertising to boost his national poll numbers and earn a victory somewhere, money won't be a problem. If they don't, money won't matter.

amonasro
01-09-2008, 10:19 AM
Are you guys aware that accepting matching funds limits the way he could spend it? It's not a blank check for 20 million.

ShowMeLiberty
01-09-2008, 10:25 AM
Absolutely YES.

1. It is very much like "earmarks" so I don't see how it violates Dr. Paul's prinicples.
2. It is money that is given voluntarily by people who check that stupid box on tax forms, so again, I don't see how it violates Dr. Paul's principles.
3. Probably a lot of us can't afford to donate much more (I sure can't), but HQ says they need a LOT more money.

dseisner
01-09-2008, 10:25 AM
Are you guys aware that accepting matching funds limits the way he could spend it? It's not a blank check for 20 million.

Explain.

adam1mc
01-09-2008, 10:31 AM
Ideologies aside... Do you want Dr. Paul in the Oval Office?

Yes or No?

If you said yes, then there is only one option. Matching Funds.

We NEED the money for name recognition in the other 48 States.

I know it's against his positions and we all want to have the perfect candidate, but I want Dr. Paul in Office. I'm so upset about Iowa and NH. I want real change, not Clinton.

I WANT MATCHING FUNDS!

adam1mc
01-09-2008, 10:33 AM
Are you guys aware that accepting matching funds limits the way he could spend it? It's not a blank check for 20 million.

I've heard this, but can you provide more details?

Can he spend it on advertisements? If so, then so be it.

lemnad
01-09-2008, 10:39 AM
I wish he would, but he probably will not sacrifice his principles. He has not done it in 30 years in Congress so he will probably not start now. All the money we waste though, that would be some well spent and could possibly save the future of our country.

paul_v
01-09-2008, 10:39 AM
I say if the other candidates take the funds then Dr. Paul should too. It makes it a level playing field.

BobSmith
01-09-2008, 11:19 AM
How is it against his Views, the government took my money and we deserve to get it back. If anything falling to take the matching is against his views. Remeber when Tim Rusert asked him about asking for money for his district in spending bill, no one camplained about that.

UtahApocalypse
01-09-2008, 11:27 AM
I voted No. The campaign has plenty of money, they just have no clue how to use it effectively.

runderwo
01-09-2008, 11:58 AM
Besides, Ron Paul inserts earmarks for his district. It's against his beliefs but he understands that ultimately, the system is broken and he must return as much money as he can to his district's taxpayers.

The difference is that he votes against the bill, so the blood isn't on his hands, and that the money would be spent on the war if it weren't earmarked.

Asking for matching funds is far different from that.

RPatTheBeach
01-09-2008, 12:05 PM
Why should he? It's not like he's going to spend it anyway?

But, I think he should. Use the system to fight the system.

mconder
01-09-2008, 12:06 PM
Well, it's good to know that 35% of us are in good company with RP! The other 50% are those who will be going back to establishment candidates after this is all over. They are those who never truly got RP.

RPatTheBeach
01-09-2008, 12:12 PM
Well, it's good to know that 35% of us are in good company with RP! The other 50% are those who will be going back to establishment candidates after this is all over. They are those who never truly got RP.

This money is not taken from the people, like taxes are. This is money volunteered by people. There is a MAJOR difference. If we don't take it, the government sits on it, and collects the interest.

dseisner
01-09-2008, 12:17 PM
Well, it's good to know that 35% of us are in good company with RP! The other 50% are those who will be going back to establishment candidates after this is all over. They are those who never truly got RP.

Don't talk about shit you don't know about. Just because I voted to take matching funds, doesn't mean I would EVER vote for one of the other assholes running. I know RP better than you know your mother.

Isupportliberty
01-09-2008, 12:18 PM
no he shouldn't (and he won't) because it would make him a hypocrite. It is not for us to decide anyway, so threads like these are pretty useless and only serve to divide us.

dseisner
01-09-2008, 12:21 PM
no he shouldn't (and he won't) because it would make him a hypocrite. It is not for us to decide anyway, so threads like these are pretty useless and only serve to divide us.

Of course it's for us to decide. Dr. Paul always says, "as long as the supporters want me in, I'm in it." Besides, we raised all that money for him. Dr. Paul will always respect the input of his supporters and the American people, that's just the kind of man he is.

CriticalThinker
01-09-2008, 12:23 PM
If Ron doesn't take the money - the feds will use that money to purchase more BULLETS for shooting people - they will use the money to make WAR - they will use the money to do horrible things ....

TAKE THE MONEY! - ITS OUR DAMN MONEY!

Isupportliberty
01-09-2008, 12:26 PM
Of course it's for us to decide. Dr. Paul always says, "as long as the supporters want me in, I'm in it." Besides, we raised all that money for him. Dr. Paul will always respect the input of his supporters and the American people, that's just the kind of man he is.

it's a non-starter because it goes against his principles... if 70% of the grassroots thought Dr. Paul should eat babies because it would get him some media coverage, I highly doubt he would throw away his principles to make his supporters happy.

smartguy911
01-09-2008, 12:31 PM
go for it

Joe Schwartz
01-11-2008, 09:18 PM
Are you guys aware that accepting matching funds limits the way he could spend it? It's not a blank check for 20 million.

Apparently, few people here are aware of that. See these Wikipedia articles for more details:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_finance_in_the_United_States#Public_finan cing_of_campaigns
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidential_election_campaign_fund_checkoff

"At the federal level, public funding is limited to subsidies for presidential candidates. To receive subsidies in the primary, candidates must qualify by privately raising $5000 each in at least 20 states. For qualified candidates, the government provides a dollar for dollar "match" from the government for each contribution to the campaign, up to a limit of $250 per contribution. In return, the candidate agrees to limit his spending according to a statutory formula."

"The spending limit increases every cycle due to inflation. The FEC estimates that the limits for the primary election will be $40.9 million, of which a candidate must abide by state limits of 65.4 cents per person of voting age population in a state, or $817,800, whichever is greater."

banjojambo9
01-11-2008, 09:25 PM
That is our money! consider it a tax refund!

Jeremy
01-11-2008, 09:31 PM
can anyone explain what this is to me?

MayTheRonBeWithYou
01-11-2008, 09:33 PM
Can he use matching funds for an independent run?

Kotin
01-11-2008, 09:33 PM
He Will Not, It is Not in His Character.

santopia
01-13-2008, 07:51 AM
If matching funds is the difference between victory and defeat, TAKE THE MONEY AND WIN.

Zym
01-13-2008, 08:07 AM
Don't the matching funds come from the "check this box if you want $1 of your taxes to go toward the presidential campaign" box on our income tax forms? If so I would consider it a voluntary tax, and not out of line with Dr. Pauls beliefs.

ladyliberty
01-13-2008, 08:24 AM
I want him to take back the money that was stolen from me and other taxpayers and use it for something GOOD! I can think of no better way to do that than to use it to win this election!

FreeTraveler
01-13-2008, 08:44 AM
THIS IS NOT UP TO THE GRASSROOTS!

DR. PAUL DID NOT ASK!!

GO DO SOME GRASSROOTS STUFF!!!

freedominnumbers
01-13-2008, 10:57 AM
To the 108 who said yes in some form so far. I'm disappointed to know you'd sacrifice principles when it suits you.

Principles need to be maintained when they help you and when they hurt you. It is NEVER ok for the government to seize my money and give it to Hillary, Romney or even Ron Paul. This money is no more set aside and prepaid than social security.

jp5065
01-13-2008, 11:13 AM
Hell yea. 20 Mil from "The Man" to help destroy them... How can we NOT take it? I understand not wanting to on principle, and I GUESS it could hurt him in the long run... But I'm still in favor I think.


Except it's not "from the man" it's from the taxpayers... aka me and you

Vizacar
01-13-2008, 11:17 AM
To the 108 who said yes in some form so far. I'm disappointed to know you'd sacrifice principles when it suits you.

Principles need to be maintained when they help you and when they hurt you. It is NEVER ok for the government to seize my money and give it to Hillary, Romney or even Ron Paul. This money is no more set aside and prepaid than social security.

??? I voluntarily checked that box when I filled out my taxes for the past couple of decades and there is no better reason to spend MY donation then to help the good Dr. get elected.

Wyurm
01-13-2008, 11:21 AM
Matching funds come with restrictions. The campaign is already not doing enough, why would you want to limit it even more? Matching funds are usually accepted by failing campaigns such as McCain's.

Oh, and this poll is pointless since there are not enough members on the FEC board to vote for matching funds. This requires 4 votes and there are only 2 members on the board at the moment, unless they have resolved that.

slinkymaster
01-13-2008, 11:55 AM
no way, he'd just be bashed as a hypocrite, and we all know that he would never take the funds.

nate895
01-13-2008, 11:56 AM
No, that means he can only spend a maximum of 40 mil, and we can reach that ourselves with the next money bomb.

MikeStanart
01-13-2008, 12:13 PM
Make polls all you want.

The fact of the matter is: He Won't Do It.

MayTheRonBeWithYou
01-13-2008, 12:14 PM
When do the matching funds kick in?

DealzOnWheelz
01-13-2008, 12:25 PM
ok guys alot of you think he should but the reason he won't is because when you accept matching funds the FEC puts alot of limits on how much you can take per quarter and also limits on what you can and can't do with the money

we all know we can get him a shit load of cash alot more than the fed matching funds would allow

this is why he won't take them on top of the fact that it is against his principles

Ron LOL
01-13-2008, 12:33 PM
When you're the principle candidate, you aren't allowed to violate your principles.

RevolutionSD
01-13-2008, 12:51 PM
He would get slammed in the media for not being principled, but that money could really get our message out. Anyway the media will attack him no matter what right now so what's the difference? Bad press is better than no press.

kotetu
01-13-2008, 12:59 PM
My point of view is thus:

If he accepts matching funds, that is one way for ME to control how MY tax dollars have been spent.

Ron's had over 100,000 donators, and has raised around $30,000,000 dollars. So, if we all take the point of view that this is $300 of our tax dollars that have already been pulled from our paychecks, then it feels good to me. Honestly, this feels like for the first time I will have really had a say in what the government does with my money. All of that money would NOT be going to Iraq or to welfare, etc. The CIA could not use my money to overthrow Iran. Musharraf would not get my money this time around.

See what I mean?

kotetu
01-13-2008, 01:02 PM
fyi how it works:


Contributions from individuals where the aggregate amount contributed by the individual is $250 or less are eligible to be matched on a dollar for dollar basis from the Presidential Election Campaign Fund. This Fund includes proceeds from the voluntary check-off of $3 per person from income tax returns of eligible taxpayers. Candidates may submit any contribution from an individual (including those where the contribution amount is more than $250) in order to receive matching funds for the first $250 of the contribution. Some contributions included in these files, therefore, will also be included as detailed entries in the regular financial disclosure reports submitted by the campaigns.

http://www.fec.gov/finance/2004matching/matching.shtml

expatinireland
01-13-2008, 01:52 PM
I didn't realise that Ron Paul might not accept matching funds. Federal matching funds is a rule of the game. I won't vote for another candidate but I won't donate any more of my hard earned money if Ron Paul does not soon announce that he will take the matching funds that are due him. Talk about deliberately putting oneself at a disadvantage. If he doesn't take matching funds the campaign will vaporise.

This is about winning *&@% it! It's not a mental exercise.

expatinireland
01-13-2008, 01:56 PM
There should have been another choice in the poll.

Yes, I am happy for Ron Paul to take the matching funds and don't understand why he wouldn't.

BiPolarBear
01-13-2008, 08:36 PM
There should have been another choice in the poll.

Yes, I am happy for Ron Paul to take the matching funds and don't understand why he wouldn't.

Ditto - that is where my vote would have gone.

I don't understand what the problem is here? This is money that was essentially donated via a check box on tax returns...Am I mistaken here? If so, can someone point me to some better info on the subject?