Ron Paul

Record-Setting Ron

|

So the Ron Paul campaign raised $4.3 million on November 5th. The previous record for one day of fundraising on a GOP primary campaign: $2.5 million, set by Mitt Romney just 11 months ago. Paul's base has made the party tories realize for the first time that the guy they once wanted to keep out of the presidential debates* might win the fourth quarter. (Rudy Giuliani won the third quarter with only $11 million.) Also, check out Paul's numbers compared to what Democrats raised in the final months of 2003.

Reaction from the internets:

ABC News:

Mark it down: A landmark moment entered the annals of political fundraising Nov. 5, 2007.

Mother Jones:

This is getting to be one of the most bizarre phenomenons American politics has seen in decades.

Dean veteran gate-crasher Jerome Armstrong:

The way Paul's campaign has done it, by not setting up a social networking account on every new-fangled socnet site, but by targeting a few and then expanding, is also the way to go. The Paul campaign recognizes decentralized, organic signs of Paul community, and then officially sanctions the congregation through post links on their website– start going here. The Paul campaign didn't directly create ThisNovember5th.com, but they did create embrace the environment where it could happen.

Alex Massie:

Sure, he's still not going to win the nomination, but this is going to be one hell of a ride. No-one's going to be able to kick Paul out of the debates now. And admit it, anything that throws a spanner into the works, upsetting all the careful plans laid out by the front-runners has got to be a good thing. Every underdog deserves his day.

General J.C. Christian:

You need another funding source. That's why I'm asking you to consider marching into the Sudetenland and invading Poland. With their treasuries in the Paul campaign coffers, Ron will be able to outspend all of his opponents combined. And let's not overlook the side benefit of having a captive campaign worker force numbering in the millions to lick all those envelopes.

Yeah, I don't get it either.**

If you're a churl you've got two reactions: Paulites fell short of their $10 million goal and they're not going to turn their money into primary votes. Those are shortsighted takes on this. Before this campaign, who thought there were tens of thousands of anti-war or isolationist or gold bug Republicans and independents who'd donate to a presidential campaign? Who thought Ron Paul would run TV ads before Rudy Giuliani? Who thought you'd see handmade Paul signs on overpasses basically everywhere? (Places I've seen them: Virginia, Maryland, Delaware, Illinois, Iowa, New Hampshire, New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, California.)

Side note: Remember the pro-war Republicans trying to oust Paul by stealing his Texas congressional seat out from under him? There's local city councilman Chris Peden, who's got less than $1000 in his campaign fund, and there's NASA contractor Andy Mann, proprieter of the world's saddest blog. They got into this race thinking Paul would flame out and alienate his base back home, and they've watched him turn into a rock star and raise $80,000 just for his congressional race. They're that saddest breed of political animal: The opportunist who's lost his opportunity.

*Admittedly not many people wanted this, but it was chattered about after the Ron-versus-Rudy South Carolina debate.

**I'm aware that it's a parody blog, but the Hitlerism doesn't really hit.

NEXT: Trick or Treat

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Finally popped my political donation cherry last night. Just $50, but still…

  2. The question: “Who thought there were tens of thousands of antiwar or isolationist or gold bug Republicans and independents….?” That is only part of the issue.

    Paul also has the anti-immigration racialists lined up with him, the hard core state control of abortion crowd, certain types of Reconstructionist theocrats and libertarians.

    Paul’s campaign is a mishmash of the ignored fringes in politics, the people who have never had anyone championing their causes the way Paul does. That they hold ideas diametrically opposed to one another is ignored because each of them seems equally convinced that Paul is “one of them” merely playing down his position. That the Stormfront crowd is donating and cheering him along (as a read of their site shows) along with libertarians only shows how masterful Paul has been at tapping the radical fringes in numerous ways. The antiwar crowd we knew about and there are many of them but the others were all small minorities and Paul is the candidate of the fringes.

    Because these people have never had a champion in the race before they tend to be absolutely fanatical — annoyingly fanatical in fact.

  3. You should include this blurb by David Freddoso at NR’s Corner (from 10:41 last night):

    “I went to the bar three hours ago and just returned. In that time, Ron Paul’s campaign raised another $600,000, bringing them to $3.6 million for today. I don’t care what your politics are – that’s a sign that he needs to be taken more seriously. The test, of course, will be in how wisely the money is used…”

  4. Alot of this feedback concludes that Ron Paul crafted his message to target these audiences in a strategy session before he through his hat in the presidential race. However, he is simply saying the same thing he has been saying for 30 plus years. He sounds very similar to what this guy was saying in the 1970’s.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STLR6tFP4S4

  5. Skeptic, what is anti-immigrant? If you are referring to his stance on illegal immigration, well, yes, he doesn’t believe illegal immigrants should get benefits. Should they?

    And abortion? Well, considering he has delivered 4000 babies and has seen an abortion, I’m shocked he’d even leave it up to the states. But Bush is also pro-life, but look at how far he went with changing America.

    And I love the guilt-by-association. Racist love him! He’s a radical! My my, try hard?

    And Reason: Ron Paul isn’t an isolationist! 🙂

  6. Hello, Ron is a non-interventionist, not an isolationist. He highly encourages and will push trading and discussions with all nations. Please correct your article.

  7. Ron Paul raised $4.2 million in one day…
    that’s BIG news.

    Somehow FOX NEWS has uh overlooked this.

    CALL THEM AT 1-888-369-4762 and let them know
    to cover this story.

    I mean after all they are “fair and balanced”
    aren’t they?

    1-888-369-4762

  8. Well myself being A Iraq Veteran, do not support Ron because of his War message alone. My chief reason for supporting Ron is Economics. The guy really knows his stuff, and up tell i first heard Ron speak i like most had not a clue of how money works from the fed down. Put it this way once i put two and two together that the fed causes inflation and it only stands to get worse, i put 10 grand in some gold and silver….. 7 months ago lol. lets just say ive only returned money to Ron as contributions from the money he has helped me make.

  9. Skeptic, judging by your post, you are not a supporter of Ron Paul. What then makes you an authority on why his supporters support him?

  10. I went to St. Petersburg (FL) over the weekend and saw Ron Paul signs and banners all over the place. I also noticed a complete lack of signs for others in the race.

  11. Bryan,

    Too bad he didn’t tell you to buy Canadian dollars. You’d have done even better. Without scratching the fetish, of course.

  12. Brent and Kevin,

    Mr Weigel was saying that some of Ron Paul’s supporters are isolationist, not Ron himself. I’m not sure if you guys are new to these parts, but this is actually one of the most pro-Paul blogs around, so there’s no need to jump headlong into attack mode.

  13. I voted for Bush in 2000 and 2004, in 2006 I voted third party and Paul is the only reason I came back to the GOP. I am a married father of two, I was an infantryman in the Army, and I support Paul 110%. He is the first candidate that I have ever given money to. I go to meetups and out of the 7 people there, half were military veterans.

    There are some very vocal extremes on one side or the other, sure. But there are MANY MANY others like me who are just fed up, concerned about fiscal and foreign policy and who are not leftist democrats. I can’t stomach Giuliani or Clinton for the same reasons, they are basically the same candidate. Hillary will bankrupt us with ‘free’ healthcare, and Giuliani will do it with endless war.

    The reason the extremes get the attention is because they are the most vocal, trust me, they are not the only ones. I have shown Ron to friends and told them to look him up and had them actually register to vote because they believed in him after hearing him on the net. He is turning people on to our party, not turning them away. No other GOP candidate is doing that, they are just trying to win the (shrinking) traditional base.

  14. Ron Paul being elected president would be a disaster second only to Hillary being elected president. The only thing he would he accomplish is to engender a spirit of congressional bipartisanship as the parties get together to pass legislation they agree to, and override every paul veto.

    An executive not only lacking congressional sippoprt but having the enmity of both parties effectively removes an important check on congressional authority. That check is important to constraining federal authority.

    A Ron Paul presidency would likely result in more harm than good to the cause of liberty.

  15. >>>Yeah, I don’t get it either.

    Sure you don’t. Just had to get a little Dem nazi namecalling in there, didn’t you? Meth labs?

    Yeah, we’re all racist dope fiends.

    The only decent quote you have in there is Jerome’s.

  16. This is the only news story that has the correct fund raising number from yesterday. Everyone else lists Ron Paul’s fund raising drive as pulling in 4.2 million or less. Yesterday the Ron Paul campaign raised 4.34 million dollars. There is no mention on Fox. There is no mention on CNBC. There is no mention on bloomberg. MSNBC is covering “dancing with the snark.”
    Write letters people. The willful marginalization and ignoring of a true candidate for change is horrifying.

  17. I’ve seen Paul graffiti all over down here in Austin. Mostly the “RonPaul rEVOLolution” stuff. It warms my heart.

  18. Stephen Macklin –
    I thought of the same thing myself, but then I remembered that politicians are such total hacks. A President Paul would only become president if he were popular. At the very least, democrats might support him some in social policy. Republicans, having realized their mistake in being the borrow-and-spend party, will start to shift their rhetoric back to sounding more like Paul (wrt. the economy).
    I think it would be OK.

  19. No matter how hard you try you can’t stop us now!

  20. The main reason I originally embraced Ron Paul, is because he has never taken a penny from a lobbyist. How can we as a country, expect to survive, when pharmaceutical, auto makers, energy company’s and lawyers dictate the direction our lives go? The likes of the corperate whores led Jack Abramhoff, buying Ney, Burns, Hastert, Dolittle etc.. all lining their pockets with millions in “campaign donations”. With corruption at that level, how can I trust guys like Rudy (making millions on 3000 dead Americans 9/11 victims) laying in bed with guys like Kerik? Everything else is just gravy with Ron.

  21. I also popped my election donation cherry with $100 yesterday. I’d like to know, when is this going to be reflected in the polls?

  22. Joe was making a lot of jokes yesterday about how people couldn’t say the MSM was ignoring Paul anymore.

    Here’s a link to CNN’s Political page. Now, please find the story mentioning the largest donation day for a republican this year…

    How about a story about Ron Paul…

    Nope. Biden’s got one though.

    If you go to the Ticker and dig down, there’s a brief mention in there from yesterday, but that’s it.

  23. From the Reason Magazine FAQ:

    Is Reason affiliated with the Libertarian Party?
    No. Reason is a nonpartisan magazine whose staff represents a range of political affiliations.

    Does Reason endorse candidates?
    No. Individual writers for the magazine may take positions on candidates or other political issues, but they represent only themselves, not the magazine as an institution. Reason takes an analytical, educational approach. It does not tell its readers how to vote.

    Time to update that FAQ, maybe? Just sayin’.

  24. Patriotboy.blogspot.com is a parody site, geniuses. Maybe the graphic of Jesus in an army helmet could have tipped you off?

    And the name is “General J.C. Christian.”

  25. Mith,

    CNN and most major media outlets typically have one big story about quarterly fundraising, when the quarterly reporting comes out.

    After the end of the last quarter, for example, Paul’s fundraising total was the lead story in the CNN and AP reports.

  26. Does anyone know if/where the donation numbers are audited? They are so far out of line with the polls that it would be nice to see some confirmation that they are real, not part of some hype campaign.

    This is not accusation, just a question. My gut tells me to believe in the power of decentralized groups of motivated people, but if data seems slightly odd it is always good to get independent confirmation.

  27. Actually I was watching I believe CNN yesterday and they had a segement on Ron Paul and this fundraising event and then in another segment that had nothing to do with Ron Paul, his name came up and they talked about him and his fundraising again. It was all very positive and you could tell that the panel of four were at least warming to him a little bit.

  28. stuartl,

    The Ron Paul campaign has been filing reports with the FEC for the duration of the campaign. Records of donations are available here.

    If you’re wondering if the Paul campaign is claiming more in contributions than they’re really getting, well, that would be a very stupid thing on their part, since they have to account for where the money goes. If they don’t spend money they claim to have, someone goes to jail.

  29. What Paul needs is the kind of free press that Mike Huckabee so undeservedly receives. Now, how do we get that, other than donating tons of money to the guy?

  30. joe,

    CNN and most major media outlets typically have one big story about quarterly fundraising, when the quarterly reporting comes out.

    That makes sense for normal fundraising. But when there is a “special event” out of the norm, it should be reported on that day. Especially when it goes against conventional wisdom.

  31. Just to point out though, I have seen a number of stories, so it isnt like it hasnt been covered. Not sure where they are being buried though, I found them via news.google.com.

  32. ed,

    I seem to have missed the Reason endorsement of Ron Paul. This post, and the many others that have appeared about Dr Paul, can plausibly be explained as the result of the individual writer’s opinion of Dr Paul.

  33. That’s why I’m asking you to consider marching into the Sudetenland and invading Poland.

    Anyone want to lay odds that this blogger thinks “BusHitler” jokes are beyond the pale?

  34. Mith – 5th from the top on Google: US News.

    Patriotboy.blogspot.com is a parody site, geniuses. Maybe the graphic of Jesus in an army helmet could have tipped you off?

    joe, you should visit the Bible belt sometime. Your understanding of what an obvious parody is might change a bit.

    PS – the MSM is being mean to my candidate!

  35. He doesn’t have a real chance in hell. His ideas are principled, but impractical. I disagree with about 65% of his positions.

    I’m going to vote for Ron Paul.

    Maybe if enough people do politicians in both parties will be forced to pay a little more attention to us “fringe” Constitution nuts.

    I doubt it, but it’s worth a shot.

  36. From dailypaul.com

    =======================
    Wolf Blitzer/CNN: Ron Paul Raises Millions!

    ABC News: Ron Paul is Money

    New York Times: Guy Fawkes Day Helps Raise Millions for Paul

    Associated Press: Paul Raises More Than $3.5 Million

    Drudge Report front page: Ron Paul Raises More Than $3.5M in One Day…

    Breitbart: Ron Paul Raises More Than $3.5M in One Day

    And the list goes on and on: The Washington Post, USA Today, The Atlantic, The SF Chronicle…

    No doubt there will be more tomorrow, both in print and on TV. Great work, everyone, and congratulations Dr. Paul!!
    =============

  37. What Paul needs is the kind of free press that Mike Huckabee so undeservedly receives. Now, how do we get that, other than donating tons of money to the guy?

    Reinmoose, Now that he has plenty of money to buy time, the media will undoubtedly give him planty of free time – it’s all part of the law of karmic perversity, in the same way that banks are happy to loan money to people who don’t need it, and women will congregate around you right after you get a new girlfriend.

  38. I’ve only seen two campaign signs etc. since the beginning of the summer. One is an Obama bumpersticker on the same Prius parked outside of Whole Foods every weekend. The other was a handmade sign over I-170 that read “google Ron Paul.”

  39. @Mo

    I also popped my election donation cherry with $100 yesterday. I’d like to know, when is this going to be reflected in the polls?

    Probably when he starts spending it on advertising. At this point, most of the country only has a vague idea who he is, let alone what his positions are.

    And the money is still coming in. Not thousands of dollars per minute like yesterday, but it’s trickling in a few hundred here, and a few hundred there. I wouldn’t be surprised if he’s up to $8 million by the end of the week.

  40. Skeptic:

    The reason[s] that the fringe white supremacists support Paul are pretty obvious, when you stop to think about it for a while.

    The federal law enforcement bureaus spend a considerable amount of resources on spying on, infiltrating, arresting, and prosecuting members of white supremacist groups – probably an amount of resources all out of proportion to the actual systemic threat these losers pose. A candidate who doesn’t want the federal government to spy domestically, who wants to shrink the federal law code, who wants to make it impossible to use tax agents as a weapon against people who “drop out” of society, who wants there to be no gun laws for the ATF to enforce, etc., will have a certain amount of appeal to members of these movements, even if his political goals and aims are exactly the opposite of theirs.

    It’s only mystifying that Paul’s support is growing among white supremacists and American Muslims simultaneously, and fundamentalist homeschoolers and atheist libertarians simultaneously, if you forget to factor in that whole “unpleasant encounters with state authority” thing.

  41. If you’re a churl you’ve got two reactions: Paulites fell short of their $10 million goal and they’re not going to turn their money into primary votes.

    And the third reaction is, it’s all a scam.

    Heh.

  42. Newsday’s Campaign Update mentions HRC’s $50B strategic energy fund, Edward’s accusation of Hillary’s two-faced foreign policy and failure to stop Dubya’s march to war with Iran, and a mention of Barack’s climb in the polls after the last debate.

    Election coverage for local candidates included a 2/3 page article on Rudy stumping for Republicans on Long Island (can’t fault them here — that is real news and not fluff), but the bottom third of that page was devoted to the anticipated speech of none other than… drumroll, please…

    Judith Giuliani.

    So far, I haven’t seen Ron Paul’s name at all in today’s edition. Maybe they are saving up all their articles for their cover feature tomorrow. Right.

  43. I saw a car with “Ron Paul” written in white shoe polish on the rear window. I found it more inspiring than yesterday’s fundraising results. The average American who feels alienated from the political process may be attracted by the grassroots nature of his support.

    There is far more interest in RP than the media is willing to admit. I suspect the MSM intentionally supports the leading candidates because they expect to receive a lot more advertising revenue from the big names. Their interest in RP will increase proportionately to the money he has available to spend on TV ads.

  44. jimmydageek,

    My observation as well. I’ve only seen Ron Paul stuff on the street (not counting bumper stickers), and about once a month, I see his supporters waving signs on the Courtney Campbell bridge.

    I think a Paul presidency would do a number of good things. First, he would have substantial power to clean house within the administration. Second, reforms in foreign policy (including trade policy) and in how we use the military and the rest of the national security apparatus are possible, even without Congressional support. Third, he could wield a mighty veto and pardon pen. Finally, he could use the bully pulpit to preach the gospel of limited government and freedom.

    Yeah, those are good things. And I strongly suspect that the shock of a Paul presidency–and the popular impetus behind such a surprise election–would render Congress inactive for quite some time. Of course, if Paul really started taking the candy away, his popularity with some groups would plunge very quickly, leading to a quite messy relationship between the branches. Good.

  45. Nutbars from Libertarians to Neo-Nazis think that somehow Ron Paul’s silly and ultimately doomed campaign is going to advance their causes, so they’re giving him money. Big fucking deal.

  46. Saw a homemade Paul sign on I-94 between Detroit and Ann Arbor.

  47. The major obstacle the Paul campaign has is lack of operational viability within the Republican Party. Most of the tens of thousands of dedicated Paul fans have never been active in the GOP and are not at home in state GOP orgs. State GOPs are the ones who select the delegates for the National convention, and they are almost exclusively packed with stuffed shirts, party hacks and flower-hatted old ladies who barely acknowledge Ron Paul’s existence if at all.

    I can’t see these fuddy duddies sending delegates for an antiwar candidate, no matter how well we do in New Hampshire, South Carolina, Arizona or Nevada. RP people need to get on these local GOP executive committees and establish voting majorities like yesterday.

    At the Presidency IV shindig in Orlando, the Ron Paul crew got a very cold reception. Then again, Ghouliani and Flip Romney got to bus in at least 1000 people each, as both campaigns were $100K sponsors. One of these cats is going to buy their way to the nomination unless the RP people basically take over the state party orgs.

  48. Will Ron Paul be able to do anything about America’s lack of leadership in the flying car market?

  49. Jesse, look in the PatriotBoy archives.

    You’re barking up the wrong tree.

  50. Remember the pro-war Republicans trying to oust Paul by stealing his Texas congressional seat out from under him?

    I think characterizing their efforts as “stealing” Congressman Paul’s seat would be like characterizing Congressional Paul’s efforts as “stealing” the Republican presidential nomination from Rudy McRompson. There is no divine right to the Texas 14th, nor the Presidency

    That said, no argument from me on the dysphoric nature of Mr. Mann’s website.

  51. Kenny,

    It’s very unusual for an incumbent to face a serious opponent from his own party in the primary. So, the “stealing” metaphor is appropriate.

  52. In Columbia, SC, there are Ron Paul signs everywhere. You have one just about every 100 yards on the interstate and they are on every surface that will stand still downtown and near the Univ of South Carolina.

    Go Ron Paul!!!

  53. Joe: So it’s an unfunny left-wing satire site instead of an unfunny right-wing satire site? OK.

  54. The only presidential campaign signs (excluding bumperstickers) I have seen in and around the Triangle (NC) have been for Paul. Both of the homemade and official variety.

    Of course, our primary is so late that it might as well be in 2009…

  55. State GOPs are the ones who select the delegates

    That may be true, but precedent (and Republicans are long on precedent, often to their detriment) is that the primary winner offers a list of names of delegates who are pledged to be loyal to the primary winner. If a state GOP committee decided to award delegates to a candidate other than the primary winner, there would be such a shitstorm it would make FL 2000 look like a tea party. And not the Boston variety.

  56. But’s that’s exactly the problem. We have rightly criticized DONDEROOOOOOOOO for his “I was a libertarian when you all for looking for freedom to poop in your diapers.” You need to continually prove yourself worthy of the public trust. Now, it looks like the people of the Texas 14th like what they have in Paul, which is great. But, being continually tested in the marketplace, or at least, as close as it gets in politics, seems to me an essential element of our system that should be done more; not rejected in some sort of union-esque protecting our own kind logic.

  57. Sh*t, I put your name instead of mine in the name line above

  58. It’s only mystifying that Paul’s support is growing among white supremacists and American Muslims simultaneously, and fundamentalist homeschoolers and atheist libertarians simultaneously, if you forget to factor in that whole “unpleasant encounters with state authority” thing.

    You nailed it.

  59. Brent: Don’t distort Paul’s xenophobia on immigration. Illegals are forbiddent to get most benefits now. He knows that. He voted to reduce legal immigration. He voted to build that damn multibillion dollar wall (and all the eminent domain needed to confiscate private land to build it). When Ron ran for LP presidential office he was for abolishing INS now he wants to beef it up and put it on steroids.

    And when you bash immigrants the racists are going to love you. He knows that. Everyone knows that. Its not guilt by association it is describing how he manages to get various groups with contradictory agendas on board his campaign including libertarians who think he is one. All the far Right groups think he is one of them. That is masteful political manipulation.

    Paul is a free trade advocate in rhetoric and an isolationist in practice. He argues that all free trade treaties are flawed since we don’t need treaties. So he continually votes against the only measures to deregulate trade that are offered. It is one way he plays up to the free trade libertarians and the anti-trade Buchananites at the same time. He’s very good at that.

    I just remind people that there are many hard working valuable libertarian educational groups who will be around long after the Paul hype is over. And their donor base is being bleed dry in this campaign and they are hurting as a result. This is one lasting damage that will be done to the movement for what I believe will be a flash in the pan campaign.

    I know of projects to advance libertarian ideas which were pledged funds. The donors then just stopped donating but all of them are pouring every cent into the Paul campaign they can. So people who were working without a Congressional salary are cutting back to make up for the pledges that never materialized and those projects are hurting. No one is asking how limited is the fundraising potential of the libertarian movement and with Paul taking such a large chunk of it what damage is being done, for the long term, to all these other worthy projects?

  60. Crimethink,

    The way I hear it, the party spent money against him in the primary. Once he won the primary, Paul asked the party for election funds for the general election. They said they spent it all.

  61. It’s important to note that we’ve already exceeded the expected combined total for October and November (3 million for October, 4 million for November). Anything above this current total is just icing on the cake. If another money bomb can be effectively planned for December, we can totally rock the $12million goal.

  62. Ron Paul kicks ass!

  63. Reinmoose,
    The next money bomb is Nov 11 Veteran’s Day. It won’t be another Fifth of November, but we’ll keep Paul’s coffers growing.

  64. J sub D:

    Remember those pandagon people? Look at what happened there. Even Robert Murphy pitched in. I think it is the Robert Murphy!

  65. I’m sure it’s unrelated, but Mike Huckabee’s site no longer displays his fundraising widget on the front page.

    I wonder if it has anything to do with him only raising $151,312.40 since November 1st.

  66. Joe: So it’s an unfunny left-wing satire site instead of an unfunny right-wing satire site? OK.

    It’s actually a pretty funny site. The Ron Paul post was unusually weak.

  67. Did they say RedState.com has banned Ron Paul-friendly posts?

    Fucking Fascists!

    social networking account on every new-fangled socnet site,

    I’m sorry, “socnet” is way too newspeak to tolerate.

    Pay no attention to the millions, ’cause Ron Paul is a terrorist who

    Well that didn’t take long.

    Reading some of the posts on RedState.com et al; those people all sound like DoonderOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!1!1!!11!1!

    It’s kind of scary.

  68. Mr. X | November 6, 2007, 11:10am | #

    I’m sure it’s unrelated, but Mike Huckabee’s site no longer displays his fundraising widget on the front page.

    I wonder if it has anything to do with him only raising $151,312.40 since November 1st.

    Nice catch. I checked Huck’s site for the first time yesterday and noticed it had a $ counter similar to Paul’s. Of course, the biggest difference was that Huck’s $ stopped just short of $150,000.

  69. Power Line suggests turning a “cold shoulder” to any “voters who find Ron Paul appealing.”

    Those 24 percenters are brilliant strategists: “Building the party by telling people to fuck off.”

  70. Reading the comments about Paul’s fundraising on a few sites has been hilarious. IMO, the two best comments (summarized) have been:

    1. Must the DEMONCRATS filling Paul’s coffers!!1!!!!!!!11!

    2. Must not be true, ROFL!!@:)-!!!!

  71. Republicans should respond to voters who find Ron Paul appealing with a cold shoulder.

    I’m sure that’s fine and dandy for mainstream Republican commenters to say. But there’s just no way the other candidates can afford to think that. How much would Romney be willing to pay for volunteers as passionate as Paul’s? How much would the other candidates love to have those extra few percentage points? They know the Republican nomination is up for grabs. Cold-shouldering a motivated group of near-certain primary voters is not good politics, period.

  72. Huck’s up to $151,538.40 now.

    That’s a whopping $226 raised in only 30 minutes.

  73. “Power Line suggests turning a ‘cold shoulder’ to any ‘voters who find Ron Paul appealing.'”

    Why not? The GOP has been ignoring all but its wacky Christian base for years. Why change now?

  74. Signs of Pauline life in Oshkosh, Wisconsin

    1. That’s my hometown.

    2. That’s whose state rep actually brought up the Medical Marijuana bill in WI. (Well, one of them.)

    3. During the Badnarik campaign, a supporter was arrested for hanging a sign over the highway (U.S. 41, splits right through the city). After that incident, the libertarians made their mark and he went on to serve on the state elections board for one term.

    4. The citizens suffered a warrantless gun seizure campaign (seen here), and one thing you don’t do there is go after a man’s gun.

    Oshkosh has a growing richness about it when it comes to libertarianism. Not hard to see why.

  75. No one is asking how limited is the fundraising potential of the libertarian movement and with Paul taking such a large chunk of it what damage is being done, for the long term, to all these other worthy projects?

    skeptic — got some hard data? I would surmise that increasing awareness in libertarian principles by the Ron Paul candidacy would trickle down to elevate local and statewide Libertarian candidates. I voted for one this morning, and never have before. Even if hard resources are drying up as you say, I would expect that the attention given to Ron Paul is not to the detriment of Libertarian candidates.

  76. Power Line suggests turning a “cold shoulder” to any “voters who find Ron Paul appealing.”
    Also from the Power Line link,
    There are plenty of other Republican candidates this cycle who embrace small government conservatism.

    And they would be…? Jesus H. Christ, what blather.

  77. More good donation dates for Ron Paul:

    Veteran’s Day
    The Anniversary of the Boston Tea Party (Dec. 16th)
    Christmas
    Boxing Day (hey, why not…)
    New Year’s Eve

  78. Powerline is conflating “embrace” with “pay lip service to.”

  79. David Weigel – what happened to politics & prog, anyway? Not that many prog-rock fans out there?

    Even haters might find this video amusing – if only to see the faces Thijs van Leer makes, and to try to figure out what he was on at the time.

  80. Paul’s campaign is a mishmash of the ignored fringes in politics,

    Or you could say his campaign represents everyone who has been marginalized by the two mainstream parties, with their increasing indistinguishable and bizarre mix of authoritarianism, class warfare redistribution, and identity group collectivism.

    What Paul needs is the kind of free press that Mike Huckabee so undeservedly receives. Now, how do we get that, other than donating tons of money to the guy?

    You need (a) a compelling-but-irrelevant personal story that plays well to “The View” (I was fat and lost weight!) and (b) squishy mainstream political views.

  81. I see some RedState commentators are already making credit card fraud accusations.

    That’s some deep denial there. On the level of Dick “The insurgency is in its last throws” Cheney or Walter Mondale denial.

  82. Paul’s campaign is a mishmash of the ignored fringes in politics, the people who have never had anyone championing their causes the way Paul does.

    Skeptic — “a mishmash of ignored fringes” is a pretty good description of the Democratic party’s “base”, and they’ve managed to do well electorally.

  83. Last night when I made my donation, Google News was showing 8 articles on RP’s fund-raising. It is now up to 278. And that should continue to grow as today’s news cycle heats up.

  84. Here’s the mention in my local paper.

  85. I see some RedState commentators are already making credit card fraud accusations.

    The five stages of death are:
    1. Denial
    2. Anger
    3. Bargaining
    4. Depression
    5. Acceptance

    RedState is in stage one. The transition to stage two will be swift (probably in the aftermath of the NH primary). Stage three will be most amusing. They will die in stage four and walk the earth as the undead.

  86. Warren,

    I really do admire your optimism.

  87. it’s all part of the law of karmic perversity, in the same way that banks are happy to loan money to people who don’t need it, and women will congregate around you right after you get a new girlfriend.

    The unkindest cut of all is when you’re a father holding your newborn, and all kinds of hot women show up and start talking to you.

    My advice to bachelors seeking impossibly hot dates? Rent someone else’s newborn.

  88. Ron Paul is now at 5% NATIONALLY in the latest CNN poll. First I’ve spotted him that high.

    (He’s polling considerably higher in select states like NH, NV, TX, SC and WA.)

  89. Gee,

    You have links for the state polls too?

  90. Ron Paul is now at 5% NATIONALLY in the latest CNN poll. First I’ve spotted him that high.

    (He’s polling considerably higher in select states like NH, NV, TX, SC and WA.)

    This could even be better, but maybe I’m missing something. The results say the interviews were conducted with “1,024 adult Americans.” But wouldn’t a poll of likely primary voters be more relevant?

  91. http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/11/05/poll.presidential.08/index.html?iref=newssearch#cnnSTCText
    The poll involved telephone interviews with 397 Republicans or independents who lean Republican. The poll’s margin of error was 5 percentage points.

    So, good sample. And while it could mean Paul is at %10, it could just as likely mean %0. I don’t think he’s moved off the %2 mark yet. But that’s nothing a multi-million dollar ad campaign won’t cure.

  92. I’d love to see the data set from that poll. You know, I still don’t get the Huckabee love. What makes him different than Rudy McRomney? Why is he polling 10% despite having zero base? I just don’t get it.

  93. From an interview with RP’s challenger Andy Mann from TownHall:

    “Al Qaeda’s actions on 9/11 were so provocative, that stopping to ask “why” is just going to slow one down from addressing their actions in a violent, efficient manner.”

  94. Speaking of provocative actions, FoxNews is apparently going to start excluding Paul from their future televised debates.

    I’d personally like to thank FoxNews, because after the November 5th love-in the Paul campaign was likely to lose some momentum just from grass roots exhaustion – but there’s nothing like the raw power of pure anti-Fox, anti-Hannity hatred and rage to get the old juices flowing again. I now predict no grass roots letdown at all.

  95. Why is he polling 10% despite having zero base?

    All his base are belong to Paul.

    Ok, I apologize for that. To answer your question, imagine you’re being polled, and you mentally substitute “None of the Above” for “Huckabee” because you know he has no chance of winning.

  96. BakedPenguin,
    I dunno about that. I have noted a number of articles, particularly on Faux News, giving Huckabee the rimjob.

    I apologize for the visual, but payback’s the bitch.

  97. It is refreshing to see my fellow Americans finally waking up to the circumstances they are in. Even if 1 billion dollars is raised for truth and freedom, even if every thinking non-robotic person wakes up and supports Dr. Paul, even if every MSM media scumbag article is challenged on the facts by hundreds of people who see the facts, IT WILL ALL BE FOR NOTHING if we do not take back the voting system to open transparent fairness.

    Electronic voting machines are a part of the foundation of the establishment’s control. The tyrants can safely sit behind phony poll results as a screen for the fraud they will pull on election day. The establishment foresaw that a certain percentage of Americans would start to awaken as the tyranny became more obvious. Unless you want all your work to go down the drain you MUST do something about the electronic voting machines. The system can crank in any result they want.

    50 lawsuits in the 50 sates are in the process of being filed that demand the decertification of electronic, paperless voting machines like the Diebold system. Please check out the votefraud org also VoteInSunshine and the National Clean Elections Lawsuit: “N-CEL” for more details about this vital subject. Time is short. I pray it is not too late for all of us!

    “I care not who votes, I care only about those who count the votes”.-
    quote attributed to the dictator Josef Stalin

  98. You know, I still don’t get the Huckabee love.

    Seriously, see me @12:08. I honestly think that’s all there is to it.

  99. Kwix – he’s the only Republican still in the race who does more than give lip service to the evangelical / born-again wing of the Reps.

  100. Hey Warren, who’re you going to vote for, if you don’t mind me asking?

  101. Speaking of provocative actions, FoxNews is apparently going to start excluding Paul from their future televised debates.

    Fluffy,

    Where did you see that?

  102. From the Des Moines Register:

    It was unclear who would attend, although only those candidates who had support of at least 5 percent of those surveyed in recent national polls or The Des Moines Register’s Iowa Poll are invited, Iowa GOP officials said.

    That would include former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, Arizona Sen. John McCain, U.S. Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson. It could leave out U.S. Reps. Duncan Hunter of California and Tom Tancredo of Colorado.

  103. I have only come to one conclusion:

    No on knows what is going to happen but everyone seems to have an opinion about what will happen. Speculation is what the media passes off as news. It isn’t. They are merely biased guesses based on how much money that will be made when the candidates start purchasing ad-buys.

  104. sage,
    I’ll vote for Paul if he’s on the ballot. If not, I’ll throw another vote away on whoever the LP puts forward.

    sixstring,
    You know, I’m not really this optimistic. Most of the time I’m the embodiment of cynicism. I despise Republican more than Democrats for the way they abuse us libertarians.

    But I can’t stop fighting the good fight. Most of the time you go in swinging knowing your gonna get KO’d in the first round. All my adult life I’ve voted Libertarian. Even ran for congress as a Libertarian once. RON PAUL 08 is the most exciting thing in electoral politics I’ve ever seen. He may not place in a single primary, but big steaming piles of cash can’t be ignored. He’s in it for the duration. And he’s breaking all the rules taking on the establishment. This campaign can’t help but change the way politics gets done from now on.

  105. What are the brainiac commenters over at Alternet saying about Ron Paul’s new found money and rising star?

    “Paul is a darling of the US far right. He is actually more of a fascist than a libertarian.”

    (Thanks to Alternet commenter “Yellow” for the entertaining rant. Another gem: “Paul’s agenda is based less on freedom than hate!! He is feeding off the anti-Latino frenzy which has also given a boost to fascism, neo-nazism, racism and zenophobia.”). @80-

  106. “The Paul campaign didn’t directly create ThisNovember5th.com . . .”

    That’s the whole point: Ron Paul’s campaign is self-sustaining, and has inertia on its side.

  107. Some people just dont get libertarianism. One of the commenters on the alternet link said that no matter what Israel did, Paul would refuse to send them aid. This is because he hates Israel. I wonder if sher can name a country he supports sending aid too?

  108. Alternet is soooo stupid! Somehow I ended up on their newsletter mailing list (I suspect a mentally unsavvy relative forwarded them my email address). I think I’ve successfully unsubscribed though. Why they gotta make it so stupid?

  109. Ron Paul hates aids, and refuses to send them to any country.

  110. More on the FOX debate in IA (evidently that reporter admitted to an error):

    Ron Paul has to EITHER garner 5% in the polls of their (GOP/FOX) choosing OR garner 5% in the ARG AND Des Moines Register polls.

    Let’s hope the RP campaign pours some of that money into Iowa ads, PDQ. But will it stop the likely FOX shenanigans?

  111. I am sure J sub D would be delighted to see me write this, but screw FOX! RP campaign ought to be very confident to take Fox’s challenge (5% polling), only if they do cell phone polling. I haven’t owned a land line in 6 years, neither do most of my friends.

  112. Shalom alleihkum robc, Ron Paul refuses to send aid to Israel cuz his constitution forbids him to. Period. Is that difficult to understand? How do you conclude that he “hates Israel?” By that logic he hates the entire world, and by that logic he is an isolationist. But, we ALL know that to be untrue. How about we let go of this dangerous “us or them” mentality? I know it can be hard for some who have spent their lives living in self-imposed fear, but Ron Paul is trying to pull the wool from America’s eyes in order for us to see how it can have a constructive role in the world. To live in a constant state of war may be necessary for Israel’s survival, but how is it America’s role to finance that state of (illegal) war? Of course Israel and all countries have a right to defend themselves, but Dr. Paul suggests that if we love our neighbours, our neighbours will love us back. Peace to that.

  113. new campaign slogun

    “ron paul is the only candidate running who refuses to give aids to another country.”

  114. Give aids to another country? He’s not going to fuck your country.

  115. TheWhatNow?

    Reading is fundamental.

  116. robc:
    Talk to me here, there’s only so much I can read….fundamentally

  117. Here’s a News Max internet poll to vote for Ron on:

    http://polls.newsmax.com/gop2008/?promo_code=3C2B-1

  118. Sorry, don’t know how to create the html link but an interesting and not completely negative article here:

    http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/jpodhoretz/1237

  119. More on Paul’s haul during “The Situation Room” coming up on CNN.

  120. robc,
    You could have written your original post about Alternet a little more clearly. To wit:

    Some people just don’t get libertarianism. One of the commenters on the alternet link said that no matter what Israel did, Paul would refuse to send them aid and that this is because he hates Israel.

    I wonder if she can name a country he supports sending aid to?

    TheWhatNow?,
    In other words, robc is not saying that Ron Paul hates Israel but that one of the commentors on AlterNet expressed this sentiment.

  121. Kwix,

    Thanks. It thought from context it was clear that the 2nd sentence was part of the alternet comment and not me.

  122. “Is Ron Paul’s candidacy getting the attention it should?” That’s Jack Cafferty’s question of the day on CNN.

  123. “A Ron Paul presidency would likely result in more harm than good to the cause of liberty.”

    Bullshit. To change things you have to start somewhere. If you wait for a libertarian president to also have congressional support to move, you’ll wait forever.

  124. Franklin:

    Lets flood mr. cafferty’s in-box!

  125. Lets flood mr. cafferty’s in-box!

    You mean we don’t have a bot to do that for us?

  126. Joe,
    Great Salon article you linked to there. I wish Glen had focused on the abortion question in his main article as well as making the distinction between the candidate and his supporters a bit clearer. But otherwise, a clean article all around and not one mention of Guy Fawkes.

  127. You mean we don’t have a bot to do that for us?

    No, of course, I meant use the bot, what else?

  128. Lets flood mr. cafferty’s in-box!

    You mean we don’t have a bot to do that for us?

    I actually saw a Tim Russert program on TV where they were talking about the republican candidates and they mentioned Paul for all of about 1 minute, and then before they went to commercial break he said something like “There, we’ve talked about him and his supporters. Now you can’t email us telling us we ignored him.”
    I laughed out loud

  129. Joe, thanks for the link. I had forgotten that Howard Dean was a medical doctor like Ron Paul.

  130. joe,

    Thanks, those two articles were great, especially the Salon piece.

    sixstring,

    That article you posted wasn’t very kind at all, or accurate for that matter. It repeatedly accuses Paul of being an isolationist (he is a non-interventionist, and yes, there’s a big difference), and like all of the other mainstream media articles, it subtly dismisses Paul as a contender, and for no good reason.

    Reinmoose,

    Russert and I share the same Alma Mater. I guess I have to add him to the list of reasons to be ashamed of my undergraduate education. The school couldn’t have been that great if it turned out yet another clueless mainstream media talking head like him.

  131. So, what would a Ron Paul presidency look like?

    Would he be able and willing to actually do the job? To carry out the functions of government responsibly, to put forward serious annual appropriations bills, etc?

    Or would he spend four years setting off stink bombs, get voted out, and be a punchline for the rest of American history?

  132. smacky,

    He calls him an “articulate and coherent critic of administration policy in Iraq than any candidate on the Democratic side”

    He compares him favorably to Kusinich, “what distinguishes Paul from the anti-war gadfly Dennis Kucinich in the Democratic Party is that Kucinich speaks alternately the language of the brainless pacifist – he would form a Department of Peace to replace the Pentagon”

    So while it is not a mainstream endorsement, I stand by my statement that it is not entirely negative.

  133. joe,

    So, what would a Ron Paul presidency look like?

    And then you lay out only two choices? Tsk tsk. You know better than that.

    Something tells me that he would surround himself with good people that share his most basic goals of limited government and non-intervention abroad.

  134. joe,

    Well, there’s my 10:10 posting above, or you can take my Top 100 Things I’d Do as a Libertarian President as a response to your question. Of course, I’m not Ron Paul, and I may not have been completely serious in all of my “Top 100” (which is actually a Top 90–I still have ten to go).

    In all seriousness, I don’t think Paul would take radical steps across the board, nor could he do so without some Congressional support. He might wield the veto with abandon, but that would just force Congress to be more limited in its governing, it wouldn’t likely shut everything down. I imagine he’ll attempt to phase out some things (e.g., Social Security), stop other things in their tracks (e.g., the War on Drugs).

  135. joe,

    Any reason to think he wouldnt perform the job of president as well as he has performed other jobs?

    No sign of problems with his military record.
    Doctoring business has obviously done well.
    He generally gets reelected, despite being targetted, which implies somthing.

    I think a RP presidency would piss off some libertarians because he wont go far enough, because he wont abuse presidential power. He will veto a lot of bills, but probably negotiate a bunch to avoid a prez/congressional war of vetoes/overrides.

    I think we can look to the Calvin Coolidge administration for some ideas too.

  136. The most important thing Ron Paul could do as president is rescind every executive order ever enacted by his predecessors. That would be an important first step to reigning in the imperial presidency.

  137. Sorry, don’t know how to create the html link

    Sixstring:
    here ya go!

  138. robc,

    The way he has “performed his other jobs” have involved a lot of 400-something to 1 votes, votes against the annual bills that represent months of bipartisan compromise, and other actions which make me think he’s more interested in making points and keeping himself pure than the messy, pragmatic business of governing.

    You can be a gadfly crank as a legislator, but it would be a whole ‘nother ball of wax for a president to govern as a gadfly crank.

    And no, arguing that you like the philosophy behind his gadfly-crankk actions is not an answer. “He’ll spend four years setting of stink bombs, but that’s a good thing,” is not an adequate answer. If you want to president, you need to be ready and willing to do the job you were hired to do, and pushing an ideological agenda is supposed to come second to doing your job responsibly.

  139. Joe,

    I would hire a president just on a platform of doing absolutely nothing once he got the job. Sure beats the “doing” of his predecessors.

  140. Joe, given your definition of “doing the job responsibly”, I guess not.

    Who the hell cares if YOU think he put forward “serious” appropriations bills? If the houses of Congress don’t like the budgets they’re sent, they’re free to pass their own, and do just that every single year. Who cares if the distance between the Presidential budget and the actual budget gets wider? What the hell does that have to do with governing responsibly?

    Sure, Paul would probably veto the budget he’s likely to be sent. So the Congress would just have to keep working until they passed a budget that could override a veto. So what?

    In terms of responsible government, let me ask you this: of the Democrats running, how many do you think will make it a priority to ferret out wrongdoing that occurred under the Bush administration? How many Bush-centric special prosecutors would you expect any of the Democrats to appoint? Zero, maybe? Insuring that lawbreaking and betrayal of the public trust sounds like “serious” governing to me, and sounds like “responsible” governing to me, but we’re almost certain to not get it out of a Democrat. They’ll say “the country has to move on and turn the page” and that will be it.

  141. Fluffy,

    If the houses of Congress don’t like the budgets they’re sent, they’re free to pass their own, and do just that every single year. If you are ok with Ron Paul not actually having any influence on how Congress does its business, that’s fine. Personally, when I support a candidate, I’m hoping he will be able to influence the agenda in Congress in a direction I’d like.

    Politics, to most people, isn’t just a game for congratulating one’s self on one’s moral superiority. Some of us actually hope to see the government change in a manner that’s more appealing to our interests and ideals, and vote in a manner designed to make that happen.

  142. “Some of us actually hope to see the government change in a manner that’s more appealing to our interests and ideals, and vote in a manner designed to make that happen.”

    The budget that the Congress is likely to sustain over a Paul veto, even if it bears no resemblance to Paul’s submitted budget, is likely to be much more appealing to my “interests and ideals” than the budget achieved under Hillary or Giuliani.

    I notice that you didn’t answer my other question. How in line with your interests and ideals is it going to be when all of the misdeeds of the Bush administration are swept under the rug by Hillary, or celebrated in song amd then worsened by an order of magnitude under Rudy?

  143. I’ve seen plenty of those big banners hanging from overpasses on the I5 in Seattle. In fact, I’ve seen more (homemade, no less) signage for Ron Paul than any other candidate–excluding bumper stickers, anyway.

  144. I’ve been having hours of fun wading through the 60 pages of forum comments on Greenwald’s Salon piece.

    The unintended comedy is thick.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.