'Money bomb': Ron Paul raises $6 million in 24-hour period

[bigworld]

Source: USA Today

Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, raised an astounding $6 million and change Sunday, his campaign said, almost certainly guaranteeing he'll outraise his rivals for the Republican nomination in the fourth quarter and likely will be able to fund a presence in many of the states that vote Feb. 5.

Paul's campaign spokesman late Sunday announced the campaign had eclipsed the $5.7 million that John Kerry raised the day after he locked up the 2004 Democratic presidential nomination – arguably the largest single-day fundraising haul in U.S. political history.

Paul, whose campaign has been embraced by a zealous community of online supporters, raised eyebrows when donors acting independently of the campaign dropped $4.2 million into his campaign coffers Nov. 5.

Still, the libertarian-leaning Paul is considered a distant long-shot by conventional political calculations and has languished in the mid-single digits in most national polls

Read more: http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2007-12-17-ronpaul-fundraising_N.htm

---

------------------------
You don't have to like his politics to admire his campaign.

[sasquatch]

1. Ron Paul is one of the very few people I want to see win the nomination

[Stuckinthebush]

4. Really?

I'd rather see a Democrat win it.

[sasquatch]

7. Oops, I want to see a dem win too I just had a brainfart in my post

:blush:

[D23MIURG23]

19. A democrat can't win the republican nomination n/t

[eagler]

42. Lieberman maybe - just kidding

[D23MIURG23]

46. lol. Im sure he'd have plenty of support if he ran as one. n/t

[Zhade]

52. lieberman's not a democrat, registered or otherwise.

NT!

[rinsd]

2. To be an anti-establishment candidate in the GOP primary is practically an oxymoron (nt)

[onehandle]

3. Good thing he has no chance. Let these idiots waste their money on this right-wing nut. nt

[ckramer]

36. Damn right

Real republicans hate Ron Paul's gut saying him a traitor of American foreign policy.

Ron Paul has no chance with Republicans, unless he runs as an Independent.

[0rganism]

5. this could be an excellent development

1) Ron Paul remains unlikely to win the GOP primary, due to insufficient warmongering religious fanaticism
2) those millions are money not going into the campaign coffers of the guys who are likely to win it
3) if he gets enough $$ and :thumbsup:, he could pull a Perot, effectively handing the election to a Dem

[lvx35]

8. It is a very good thing, IMHO

Its about real conservatives standing up against Bush's vast spending and big Mommy security state. I never thought I'd say it but I'm glad to see them back.

[harmonicon]

12. I think you're right

The guy's politics are completely wrong, but it's much more healthy for a democracy to have parties that have real ideological differences and are honest about them and seek votes for those reasons, not people who would muddy the waters with political positions held for purposes of getting TV coverage and vote-getting which may be contrary to their personal feeling.

[crawfish]

23. "effectively handing the election to a dem"

No offense, but if he and his supporters manage to capture the Republican nomination against all odds, they have pulled off an INCREDIBLE coup. He's not likely to self-destruct; we already know what we don't like about him, and considering his Libertarian nature I'd be shocked if there were any big skeletons in his closet that hadn't been uncovered by then. The mainstream r's hate him every bit as much, and perhaps more, than he is hated here.

No, the implications of him achieving a nomination are probably bad for the dem candidate. We'd lose half of our major issues - including the anti-Republican, anti-war vote. The best bet is to hope he finishes with enough votes for his message to be taken seriously, but not enough to win.

[krkaufman]

40. The poster wasn't positing Paul winning the Rethug nomination.

The "effectively handing the election to a dem" comment was in relation to what the result might be should Paul run as a third-party candidate in the general election, having failed to win the Republican nomination outright.

[0rganism]

44. yep n/t

[crawfish]

50. Ahh, then...sorry.

I misunderstood.

Of course, I doubt he's pulling any more out of repub coffers than he is from the dems. Quite a few of his supporters are either first-time donaters, and quite a few are democrats.

[0rganism]

43. first he has to win the nom -- very unlikely, IMHO

Paul is poorly positioned to win a majority of the GOP base, supersaturated as it is with fundamentalists and xenophobes. (If he *did* win, he would be a tougher candidate to beat than the rest of the GOP field, I'd agree with you there. His strengths and vulnerabilities are categorically different from the others.)

The real fun begins if he goes indie after losing the nom and splits the GOP between the libertarian greedheads and the hardcore religious zealots -- an uneasy alliance to begin with, now stretched to breaking by incompatible ideologies. He has a history of 3rd-party activism, and might just perceive the benefits of pushing the Libertarian party back into prominence (in the context of a weakened Republican party) as outweighing the cost of a Democratic presidency.

Think Perot '92, on steroids.

[krkaufman]

39. Well, if Paul is truly interested in stopping the Iraq war ....

... his running as a third-party candidate, pulling votes from the Republican candidate (in greater proportion than from the Dem candidate), would be a good way to make that happen.

[balantz]

6. Cool! He can buy more hot-air balloons that say "EVOL".

[skipos]

9. There are lots of racists, anti-choicers and other idiots with disposable income

I see.

[High Plains]

17. I think painting all Ron Paul supporters as racist cavemen is stupid.

He is tapping into some sort of disaffection with the rest of the field.

I suspect many of his supporters don't know all of his weird stands on social issues, but are glomming onto to his anti-war (and anti-drug war) stance. I bet some of them would vote for Paul first, then Kucinich. (I'm not trying to trash Kucinich by association here; merely suggesting that Paul is getting some of the anti-war vote that Kucinich also appeals to...and suggesting that many Paul supporters are just not that sophisticated about all this ideological stuff and just want out of the war.)

To merely deride his supporters instead of trying to figure out what's going on is not smart politics.

[skipos]

24. No, ignoring Paul's base is stupid. Here you go:

stormfront.org
Go see how much they like Ron Paul. They like him a lot, for obvious reasons.

[High Plains]

28. So everybody who supports Ron Paul is a Nazi?

Is that what you're trying to say? I think that misses the boat.

I don't doubt some racist yahoos are climbing on board the Paul bandwagon, but that doesn't mean everyone who supports him is a Nazi. I think we might be better off figuring out what's energizing Paul supporters than just calling them names.

I think it's his anti-war, and to a lesser extent, anti-drug war stands that are motivating a lot of people.

[skipos]

29. Maybe you want to figure out why tens of millions of people voted for Bush

and learn from his ideas, since 50 million votes is about as impressive as Ron Paul's millions... I don't. If 90% of his ideas are crap, I feel no need to study his "massive" 5% support. Paul will go nowhere, why don't you study what "motivates" that.

[ckramer]

37. Post # 9 could be right

Constitutionists are all rich bastards...LOL

[ckramer]

38. Most of his supporters are gun nuts

Yes they are nuts.

[krkaufman]

41. Agreed. Some of Paul's positions are great.

Some... not so much. And he does tend to stand out in the Republican field, all alone, with his anti-war stance.

[alcibiades_mystery]

10. Double down on 15!

:rofl:

[Justitia]

49. LOL - too funny, and a great summation! -eom

[Acadia Blue]

11. Shows some rePIGs don't like the present cabal.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LanternWaste]

15. He's anti-choice, anti-woman and a racist.

He's anti-choice, anti-woman and a racist. He wants to allow corporations to write environmental law.

What democrat would give anyone with that type of platform a second look, let alone a first? I doubt a Democrat with the strength and courage of their convictions would ever allow RP a consideration, regardless of whether he had an R or a D in front of his name. Probably aren't Democrats you know that would say this-- just some cowards.

Are you sure you're on the right message board?

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[skipos]

27. I am guessing your 2nd priority is coat hanger abortions?

Good luck on your quest.
And thank God Ron Paul has no chance so I will be spared watching idiots vote for him.

[High Plains]

18. Also anti-Iraq war and anti-drug war.

I think that's what's driving his appeal even among some people around here.

[crawfish]

22. His views...

...are not a threat to abortion, viewing him as "anti-woman" distorts his Libertarian standpoint, and he has publicly denounced racism.

He wants government out of our lives, which is a good thing. He has spoken out against the Patriot act (probably the most dangerous threat to our life and liberty today) in no uncertain terms, something none of the leading Democrats have done. He is stronger anti-war than ANY Democrat running.

So many people here like to say, "He's right on a few issues but wrong on everything else". Well, for those issues he's right on, he's more right than any of the Democrats.

I won't vote for him, but I do respect him for those views. I respect the people supporting him even more - what they're doing is unprecedented, and gives me hope for the future.

[jdog]

26. Well said. And unlike King George

I don't think he believes in interjecting every one of his beliefs into public policy. In fact, I don't think it would hurt to have someone come in who is against big government and for a balanced budget. He speaks against the powers of the Federal Reserve - that's a biggie.

The democrats are driving more people into his camp every day by their inability to move us forward.

[LanternWaste]

32. Sorry. Wrong answer.

Sorry. Wrong answer. Giving states the right to deny an abortion is a de-facto attempt to end legal abortions.

Sorry. Just 'cause he's against the war, he's still a raging asshole worthy of the respect of cowards, but not democrats...

Yeah... Hitler wanted every German to have a Volkswagen, but he was still a raging asshole despite one or two "good" ideas...

[crawfish]

34. Quit invoking Godwin's law.

Paul tells the story of how he formed his opinions on abortion. During his residency, he witnessed an abortion procedure where the still-moving fetus was removed and thrown in a bucket. Say what you want, but the guy's got a more honest reason to be anti-abortion than 90% of the guys out there.

I don't see abortion being overturned even with him, anyway. Bush is far more anti-abortion and, last I heard, they were still legal. I have a difficult time seeing that reasonable rights are going to be taken away from a guy who wants to get the government off our backs.

Heck, let's be honest. Clinton, Obama, Edwards, Biden - all of 'em are raging, power-hungry assholes as well, and I fear for my personal rights more with them than I would with Paul, because they won't stand up against the Patriot act. A few more powers granted to the gov't from that and the next repub president won't even have to go through congress to make abortions - and many other things - illegal.

Our rights as Americans are being whittled away, starting with the ones that don't push our personal buttons, but we're blind to that as long as they give lip service to the most visible issues. Pardon me if that isn't enough.

[D23MIURG23]

48. Where are the allegations of racism comming from?

Thats one thing I haven't heard.

[skipos]

25. Sure, there are few of racist, anti-choice Dems out there who would join you

Though you would definitely have more friends at stormfront.org than DU

Look at all the appealling things about Ron Paul:
http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2007/11/ron-pauls-record-in-congress.html
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/6/5/193414/2787
:sarcasm:

[EClark5483]

30. Last I checked..

It's not about voting the party, sorry to say. I am a Democrat, but I am not a liberal. I can be open minded enough to know that your insults towards me, mean nothing.

Where is the REAL "WE" in "WE THE PEOPLE"?

I'm sorry if I don't buy into a political socialist philosophy where I need to choose a side or go elsewhere... I.E. "YOU DON'T BELONG HERE ON DU FOR THINKING THAT WAY"

Where is the effort to bring party lines together for a common cause?

I'm sure not seeing it here.

Once upon a time, people.... there actually WERE decent Republicans.

I don't believe they are an extinct breed... I simply believe their governing philosophy was tainted by the CONSERVATIVE RIGHT.

Ron Paul is racist? Which "side" started the KKK? Here's a hint, it wasn't the Republicans.. A bit of hypocrisy now isn't it?

I believe in progressive thinking that moves forward by the process of "WE THE PEOPLE", not by whichever party line is in control.

Judgeing by the snide commentary about it, switching my own primary party all together doesn't seem like a bad idea.

I'm lately beginning to need convinced to stay.
.
.

[skipos]

31. "Ron Paul is racist?

Which "side" started the KKK? Here's a hint, it wasn't the Republicans.. A bit of hypocrisy now isn't it? "

Not at all. Do you think Lincoln and Roosevelt would be Republicans today? No, they wouldn't, because the parties have chnaged. When LBJ came along and wanted to make blacks equals, racist Dems deserted the party and became Republicans. You know about the southern strategy, and why 90% of blacks vote for Democrats, right?

"Judgeing by the snide commentary about it, switching my own primary party all together doesn't seem like a bad idea."

Oh please, I am BEGGING YOU! Don't support Ron Paul and make his support jump to 5.000000000000001%!
:eyes:
Vote however you want. Vote for Ron Paul or Alan Keyes or Newt Gingrich for all I care.
Are you really surprised that promoting a racist, anti-choice, mostly AWFUL Republican candidate on DemocraticUnderground gets you heat? You shouldn't be.

[LanternWaste]

33. That was classic!

I find that arguing with someone who doesn't have history on their side is like arguing with a pig-- they enjoy it, and we still end up muddy.


"...make his support jump to 5.000000000000001%!" That was classic!

[LanternWaste]

14. Sorry not to jump on the card board bandwagon...

Well, the train wreck that is Ron Paul is siphoning off money that would have otherwise gone to the other train wreck campaigns. So that, in and of itself is good.

"You don't have to like his politics to admire his campaign." True-- one is not exclusive on the other-- yet I still don't like his politics and I still don't admire his campaign. Sorry not to jump on the card board bandwagon...

[loudsue]

20. This is cool! Does anybody know how Kucinich did on the 15th?

I was away from DU for the results of the $$ drive on the 15th.

[tanyev]

21. The freepers have a couple long, ugly threads about this.

This could be the most entertaining GOP convention evah!

:popcorn:

[sasquatch]

35. Riots at their conventions could be quite interesting

I bet the cops treat their guys alot better than our guys LIKE ALWAYS!
:eyes:

[Hardrada]

45. A vote for Ron Paul is really a vote for None of the Above!

Aot of people are turned off by corporatist lobby-driven politics and neocon/neolib imperialism and want off the train before it goes off the rails. They might be putting national survival ahead of the same old garbage. I can see people thinking that way. I am for Kucinich or Edwards for some of the same reasons.

[yardwork]

47. Good. More morans separated from their money.

[TroubleMan]

51. Please, please, please run as an Independent if you don't get the repug nomination.

That would be the best scenario.