techPresident - Wikipedia is the Medium - Comments

doing fine...

jpa — Wed, 12 Sep 2007 02:25:36 -0400

I think he is doing just fine. He doesn't spend much, he is saving up for a fight in Jan.

He had more cash on hand than McCain. He has had better single day records in Q3 than Q2 ($75k was the single day high in August, then he got $100k in 1 day in Texas). The meetup group contest yielded atleast $300k.
I think he is having another solid quarter, and hopefully will have more cash on hand than McCain & Fred. He is very prudent with other people's money (just like he will be when he is our president)

Remember, he doesn't take PAC money, he doesn't take lobbyist money. He is 100% individual contributor. His support is very broad, but not deep. I think the campaign mentioned the average donor is below $100. Compare that to Rudy or Mitt's donor list.

How come the Ron Paul campaign hasn't taken the next step?

tlsmith — Tue, 11 Sep 2007 18:14:01 -0400

I've noticed that there is a lot of on-line support for Ron Paul. However, this is not translating into campaign cash, which is critical for a campaign going forward. According to the Federal Election Commission (http://www.fec.gov/DisclosureSearch/mapApp.do?drillLevel=US&stateName=&c...), Paul was able to raise $3 million in the first six months of this year, while Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama averaged raising that much cash every 10 days over the same six months, each.

While Howard Dean generated a lot of on-line buzz for his campaign, he was at least able to convert his support into actual campaign cash. Of course, Dean was not able to convert, or at least organize, his support in such a way that was able to help him win the Iowa caucuses, and his campaign famously imploded thereafter. For Paul to gain any credibility with the mainstream media, he must demonstrate that he is able to raise money. This is the one measure the media likes to look at to see if a campaign is viable.

Wikipedia is the Medium

Joshua Levy — Mon, 10 Sep 2007 18:36:11 -0400

Ron Paul and Mike Gravel are the dark horses of their respective parties. They raise a ruckus during debates and forums, they hold radical positions at odds with their parties' leadership, and they poll very low (Paul polls between one and three percent in all national polls; Gravel polls even lower). Not surprisingly, news coverage of them is scarce. So fired-up, web-savvy voters, tired of gatekeepers failing to mention more than half of debate participants in their post-mortems, are trying to influence media coverage and public opinion in the most straightforward way they know -- by writing and editing Wikipedia entries and Digging sympathetic news articles.