SnyderShrugged Posted October 17, 2007 Share Posted October 17, 2007 Press release: Nat. Press Club today Both Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani spent more than they raised in Q3. Romney brought in $9.9M and spent $21.3M. Giuliani raised $11.6M and spent $13.3M. Mitt Romney often cites his executive prowess as a key credential in his White House bid. However, if the race ended today, his organization would have lost over $8M. John McCain is in the red. McCain claims to have $3.4M in the bank, but due to debt and money earmarked only for the general election, he is in the hole $53,446 for the primary. Dr. Paul outraised Duncan Hunter, Mike Huckabee, Tom Tancredo and Sam Brownback’s combined efforts by 61 percent. Dr. Paul’s $5.4M is 8.5 times greater than all of their cash on hand combined. Dr. Paul is the only top-tier candidate who carried no debt into the fourth quarter. Because of outstanding debt of $678,432, Fred Thompson actually has $6,443,312, less than $1M more than Dr. Paul. Rudy Giuliani has $11,428,979 available for the primary. While impressive, this is far from insurmountable for Dr. Paul and Mr. Thompson. Dr. Paul stands alone in fundraising growth, trajectory and organizational health. Much work remains ahead, but the Paul campaign is in a strong position to make a run down the stretch toward the nomination. I think these numbers will only get better and better as we approach the Primaries. The rest of the field has got to be getting antsy. Oh yeah, Lets not forget that he is #1 for the second quarter in a row in GOP Military donations. Interesting when you consider the party line on the Iraq war right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted October 17, 2007 Share Posted October 17, 2007 It takes more then money to win the election and he is just loading up his pockets :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted October 17, 2007 Share Posted October 17, 2007 It takes more then money to win the election and he is just loading up his pockets :laugh: Why would you say he's loading up his pockets? It's obvious that he walks the talk of a true fiscal conservative in his own finances too. Thats what we need in a President these days. And yes, it takes real people voting to win an election, I think it's been proven at this stage that Ron Paul has a lot more real people supporting him than anyone could have imagine (except me, of course!) LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mass_SkinsFan Posted October 17, 2007 Share Posted October 17, 2007 And yes, it takes real people voting to win an election, I think it's been proven at this stage that Ron Paul has a lot more real people supporting him than anyone could have imagine (except me, of course!) LOL Yes, Dr. Paul does have a core group of real people supporting him. Unfortunately, I don't believe that his campaign (at least to this point) is reaching enough of the core demographics he needs to give him a realistic chance to win the primary or the general election. Especially when a number of his stated positions are considerably contrary to the general views of those core demographics I believe he needs to win either the primary or the general election. Just my :2cents: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted October 17, 2007 Share Posted October 17, 2007 Why would you say he's loading up his pockets? It's obvious that he walks the talk of a true fiscal conservative in his own finances too. So we should vote someone because they can use quicken and run their own personal budget?? Sorry but that is not a reason why you vote for someone. That is like using what someone did in their past (like all of us have) as an excuse to not vote for someone. Pesonally people put to much stock in someones personal life in deciding who is president. No one is perfect and as long as that person is not breaking any laws who cares what they do with their own life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted October 17, 2007 Share Posted October 17, 2007 So we should vote someone because they can use quicken and run their own personal budget??Sorry but that is not a reason why you vote for someone. That is like using what someone did in their past (like all of us have) as an excuse to not vote for someone. Pesonally people put to much stock in someones personal life in deciding who is president. No one is perfect and as long as that person is not breaking any laws who cares what they do with their own life. I'm having trouble understanding your post's main message. Can we explore it deeper? It's not a personal budget wwe are discussing, It's a large campaign budget. This certainly is an indicator of how as President, he would influence budget. The point I was actually trying to deliver (albeit poorly, I guess!) was that the rest of the GOP field is doing a bad job of manageing their finances. A candidate who is supposed to be running for the "conservative" party (That is certainly in question these days) should exemplify the conservitive values of fiscal responsibility. Ron Paul blows all the rest away in that important category. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted October 17, 2007 Share Posted October 17, 2007 It's a large campaign budget. This certainly is an indicator of how as President, he would influence budget. No it isn't, since most likey they have someone else running that budget. What you want to see is what they have done with their state or committe etc.... This could be why we have not had many senators or congressmen win the presidency because it is hard to prove exactly what you have done on a smaller scale compared to a governor or former vp etc.... The quicken part was a joke since you mentioned his personal finances Now Hillary has one advantage and that she has been a part of a WH. Which is why I think a lot of peope even conservatives are seriously looking at voting for her. It is clear the presidency is between Hillary and Rudy, maybe another governor but I doubt it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted October 17, 2007 Share Posted October 17, 2007 No it isn't, since most likey they have someone else running that budget. What you want to see is what they have done with their state or committe etc.... This could be why we have not had many senators or congressmen win the presidency because it is hard to prove exactly what you have done on a smaller scale compared to a governor or former vp etc....The quicken part was a joke since you mentioned his personal finances Now Hillary has one advantage and that she has been a part of a WH. Which is why I think a lot of peope even conservatives are seriously looking at voting for her. It is clear the presidency is between Hillary and Rudy, maybe another governor but I doubt it. LOL, so we get to choose between....well.....a liberal and a liberal then? sad state of affairs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted October 17, 2007 Share Posted October 17, 2007 I'm still very perplexed as to how anyone who can claim they are conservative could vote for Rudy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mass_SkinsFan Posted October 17, 2007 Share Posted October 17, 2007 I'm still very perplexed as to how anyone who can claim they are conservative could vote for Rudy. I'm surprised that any real Conservative can be ready to vote for ANY of the current crop of candidates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted October 17, 2007 Share Posted October 17, 2007 I'm surprised that any real Conservative can be ready to vote for ANY of the current crop of candidates. Paul's strict constitutional conservatism cannot be debated. I realize that it isnt enough for you personally, but it's a fact just the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mass_SkinsFan Posted October 18, 2007 Share Posted October 18, 2007 Paul's strict constitutional conservatism cannot be debated. I realize that it isnt enough for you personally, but it's a fact just the same. I won't deny that Dr. Paul is a Constitutionalist. I will, however, disagree that Dr. Paul is truly a Conservative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted October 18, 2007 Share Posted October 18, 2007 I won't deny that Dr. Paul is a Constitutionalist. I will, however, disagree that Dr. Paul is truly a Conservative. Your disagreement is meaningless since it's incorrect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mass_SkinsFan Posted October 18, 2007 Share Posted October 18, 2007 Your disagreement is meaningless since it's incorrect. It's meaningful enough that it's keeping me, and a fair number of other people that I know, from supporting Dr. Paul's candidacy. Unlike me, many of them ARE planning on voting for other Republican candidates in the Primary next year. I'm not a Republican so I can't vote in the Primary to begin with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted October 18, 2007 Share Posted October 18, 2007 It's meaningful enough that it's keeping me, and a fair number of other people that I know, from supporting Dr. Paul's candidacy. Unlike me, many of them ARE planning on voting for other Republican candidates in the Primary next year. I'm not a Republican so I can't vote in the Primary to begin with. again, it's an incorrect reason so it's moot. There is no debating his conservatism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mass_SkinsFan Posted October 18, 2007 Share Posted October 18, 2007 again, it's an incorrect reason so it's moot. So what you're telling me is that Dr. Paul (or at least you) would rather be right than victorious?.... He/You may actually have something in common with me after all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted October 18, 2007 Share Posted October 18, 2007 So what you're telling me is that Dr. Paul (or at least you) would rather be right than victorious?....He/You may actually have something in common with me after all. so far there is no indication that he cant be both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted October 18, 2007 Share Posted October 18, 2007 So what you're telling me is that Dr. Paul (or at least you) would rather be right than victorious?....He/You may actually have something in common with me after all. that is one of the things i really respect about him. he refuses to play the game of politics. he just says "these are my views, this is how i'll do things." no politicking, no pandering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.