Ron Paul "Black This Out" Moneybomb underway $1.2 million so far

[acrylix]

Love him, hate him, or just don't care...it looks like he's raising some serious dough today. Over $1.2 million so far since 12am East Coast time: http://www.ronpaul2012.com/

Black This Out: http://www.blackthisout.com/


Two new ads just released this week:

[crockett]

You can't argue that the guy can raise some money.. However the problem with Ron Paul is he sounds good in 10 second sound bite but any further than that you can see how far over the edge he is.

I originally liked him back when he was first making waves in the last election, but after I looked a bit deeper I could see he's just not realistic.

[Jakez]

Originally Posted by crockett

You can't argue that the guy can raise some money.. However the problem with Ron Paul is he sounds good in 10 second sound bite but any further than that you can see how far over the edge he is.

I originally liked him back when he was first making waves in the last election, but after I looked a bit deeper I could see he's just not realistic.

What IS realistic? I can't believe anything any of these people in office do, it's all unrealistic to IMO.

[acrylix]

Originally Posted by crockett

I originally liked him back when he was first making waves in the last election, but after I looked a bit deeper I could see he's just not realistic.

Fair enough. But I happen to think that the economic plan he released this week looks like a very realistic way to cut $1 trillion from the budget in the 1st year alone (and balance it in the 3rd), without cutting medicare or social security. It will also only bring defense spending down to 2006 levels.

Anyone interested can view the plan here: http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issue...store-america/

Or download the PDF here: http://c3244172.r72.cf0.rackcdn.com/...mericaPlan.pdf

[ArsewithClass]

Raising that sort of money is serious stuff

[nextri]

He at least seems to be honest and stands for something, unlike the rest of em.

[acrylix]

Originally Posted by acrylix

Anyone interested can view the plan here: http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issue...store-america/

Or download the PDF here: http://c3244172.r72.cf0.rackcdn.com/...mericaPlan.pdf

Or, here is the press conference:

[Coup]

Doesn't really matter how much he raises if he doesn't use it to campaign with.

[Emil]

[glamourmodels]

He's up to $1,532,118.71 now... what's that like 300K in the last 3 hours... too bad he cant win

[acrylix]

Originally Posted by Coup

Doesn't really matter how much he raises if he doesn't use it to campaign with.

Good point. He needs to put that money to good use early. Which according to this this Politico article, he seems to be doing:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/66040.html

Paul?s heavy campaign burn-rate emerged in his third-quarter campaign finance report filed Saturday, which showed him raising about $8.2 million for the period but also spending $7.5 million. He finished the quarter with $3.6 million in the bank. The largest costs came in the form of more than $2 million spent on TV and direct-mail advertising, for airtime and mail pieces that are running well past the quarter?s closing date last month.

Here are the Q3 Fundraising Records for Republican candidates: http://race42012.com/2011/10/15/q3-f...l-fec-edition/

Ads like these have been airing in early Republican primary states:

[Caligari]

Ron Paul is absolutely the best candidate on the repub/tea party side and if they want a chance in hell they should really push this guy.

Sure he has some unrealistic ideas and certainly some shit i don't agree with, but he is the real deal and right now thats what we need.

[topsiteking]

I also belive Ron Paul is the best candidate.
That's why I gave. ;)

[ChefJeff]

He's the only candidate that isn't influenced by corporate/special interests. He's honest and has the best ideas about the role of government (smaller government). If the media would give him more air time he'd stand a good chance of winning.

[Slick]

He made a very good point about pulling our troops out of countries like Germany. Really, why do we have to have troops there ??

[topsiteking]

Originally Posted by ChefJeff

He's the only candidate that isn't influenced by corporate/special interests. He's honest and has the best ideas about the role of government (smaller government). If the media would give him more air time he'd stand a good chance of winning.

Originally Posted by Slick

He made a very good point about pulling our troops out of countries like Germany. Really, why do we have to have troops there ??

[glamourmodels]

$1,914,193.48 and counting...

[FlexxAeon]

i'ma tell you right now. if ron paul gets the nod..... i'm swinging independent

[DWB]

Originally Posted by crockett

You can't argue that the guy can raise some money.. However the problem with Ron Paul is he sounds good in 10 second sound bite but any further than that you can see how far over the edge he is.

I originally liked him back when he was first making waves in the last election, but after I looked a bit deeper I could see he's just not realistic.

What is realistic?

Everyone is living WAY beyond their means, the country is drowning in debt with no plan on real spending cuts, we're close to living in a police state, we're fighting multiple wars for no reason at all, states are going bankrupt, education is a mess, and so on and so forth. Our perception of American reality is what is not realistic.

I will vote for Ron Paul, even thought I don't think he will win. And if by chance he does, the powers that be will assassinate him.

[Shotsie]

Ron Paul's policies are idealogical at best, and dangerous at worst. He appeals to a lot of people because of his vague brand of libertarianism but what most people don't realize is that he isn't really a libertarian at all, he's an anti-federalist. He doesn't mind at all if states choose to limit their citizens freedom, increase taxes or whatever else they want do as long as it's not done on a federal level. Ever notice when he's asked about his stance on an issue his answer is always "let the states decide"?


Let's take a state like Louisiana for example, under Ron Paul's policies could you imagine what it would look like today with no federal intervention? There would have been no federal aid after Katrina for cleanup, no FEMA. Basically Louisiana residents would have been left to sink or swim, literally as well as figuratively. Then there's the BP oil spill debacle, The only reason BP put forth such an extensive cleanup effort and reimbursed families was because the government literally FORCED them to (and it still wasn't enough). Without federal intervention Louisiana would have been reduced to third world status by now. But libertarians don't really care about any of that as long as they don't live along the Gulf Coast.


Shit, the internet was created with government funded research. Pretty much any program or concept that benefits everyone, but requires a collective human effort to succeed will fail, as no given person has an incentive to put forth the money/effort.


This is what you get when the free market is allowed to regulate itself. We'd still have eight year olds getting their scalps ripped off in cotton looms and getting black lung from mining coal.

[seeandsee]

ron paul will be next president of US!

[Shotsie]

Originally Posted by acrylix

Fair enough. But I happen to think that the economic plan he released this week looks like a very realistic way to cut $1 trillion from the budget in the 1st year alone (and balance it in the 3rd), without cutting medicare or social security. It will also only bring defense spending down to 2006 levels.

Anyone interested can view the plan here: http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issue...store-america/

Or download the PDF here: http://c3244172.r72.cf0.rackcdn.com/...mericaPlan.pdf

He makes some good points, and I agree with some of his stances, but the majority of his policies would never stand a chance making it through Congress. His budget proposal would decimate funding for a lot of worthwhile projects. Not to mention erasing 1 trillion from the economy would shrink the economy by basically 1 trillion. There is no way the private sector would come close to filling that right away. The private sector already has trillions in cash. Even if you believe that is the appropriate size of the government in the long-run this would still be absolutely devastating in the short to medium run.

[glamourmodels]

$2,269,248.73

[crockett]

Originally Posted by Jakez

What IS realistic? I can't believe anything any of these people in office do, it's all unrealistic to IMO.

Well I haven't paid attention to him this time around but he was for pretty much closing everything govt and then letting big business do it. Example he thinks the post office and VA hospitals should be shut down to let private companies run them.

Now of course the PO is having troubles now but it's really not their fault, it's a sign of the times where they simply have less business but need to provide the same service standards. Up until recently the PO has been a great example of how the govt can get things right sometimes. I'm pretty certain that neither UPS or fedex would manage to provide the same service that cheap.

Now on the VA hospitals.. It's already been proven that when private companies take them over they end up costing more and service levels go down and in negligence levels at times. (AKA remember the whole Walter reed fiasco and Dick Cheney having his dirty little hands in that mess.

The simple fact is there are some things the govt gets right and we need more of those examples not just turn everything over to big business to create more problems with future bail outs..

Not to mention health care.. I live here ion Mass and while I didn't qualify for the Mass health I was able to buy my insurance via a different program used by the state. TBFH it was pretty awesome insurance policy and it cost me $32 a month.

Now that I can no longer use that service I have to buy via a private company and it's 4 times as much with no where near the quality or benefits. Mitt Romney made a pretty good system it just sucks that you can't choose it over private if you want it.

Yet because he's a Republican he tries to distance himself because of the whole "socialism" thing and right wing rut jobs will hate him. I use it as an example because the system works and it's Govt run and it's better than what I current get via private company. I would personally rather use the Mass state plan if I could, because it's quite simply better and cheaper than what I have now.

Meaning yea the govt often pays too much for stuff but if managed properly they can typically do it cheaper than private companies. One only needs to look at the absurd cost for various services from Iraq contractors for clear examples of that.

If you start turning everything over to private companies like RP wants, then it wont be long til they are gouging the fuck out of us. Ron Paul just doesn't seem to get that.

[marlboroack]

The ones with money are only faces for the men behind the curtains.

[Shotsie]

Ron Paul 2012!!