Paul Spending Campaign Cash on House Race?

[ambiguousscion]

When I first came aboard I remember them saying that they would use the funds for candidates with the same ideals if there was any leftover. Paul is one of those candidates in his district.

 

[fmontez]

I think lot’s of signs point To RP running as a Libertarian. Ron never ruled it out completely but did say it would be highly unlikely. What would make Ron Paul run on a third party ticket? The fact the Republican Party really has not given him a fair shake to win the nomination. The other thing that I think could make Ron Paul run as a Libertarian is it would be constructive for true conservatives. Constructive by destructing the party. Ron Paul would pull hundreds of thousands of voters away from the Republican Party. The Republican Party will be forced to wake up and hear our voices! One of the most important factors would have to be a reasonable chance to win. When you factor in the Bloomberg factor in the race who could pull double digits in votes away from whoever gets the Republican or Democtat Nomination. With enough money Ron Paul could be a serious contender on the Libertarian ticket.

RP wouldn't run as a 3rd Party, he may not like the other GOP candidates, but he knows what is waiting on the Dem side.. his priniciples will stop him from doing that.

 

[schwa]

The Dems will beat any of the other Republicans by a land slide. Over 20% more Dems turned out to vote in the primaries in Iowa and NH. The only way the Republicans can win is with Ron Paul or if they can figure out how to reanimate Ronald Reagan and change the laws so they could run him again.

 

[ronpaulyourmom]

RP wouldn't run as a 3rd Party, he may not like the other GOP candidates, but he knows what is waiting on the Dem side.. his priniciples will stop him from doing that.

You assume we'd be taking mostly GOP votes. If Hillary is the nominee, I doubt that.

Ron shouldn't run third party, he should run independent.

 

[MN Patriot]

Bull shit. He's saving for third party

I certainly hope so.

Ron needs to keep the momentum going. He is still gaining support for precinct leaders on his website, and meetup.com keeps growing by 700+ people a day like it has for the last month or more.

Since it is pretty obvious he won't get the nomination, he needs to keep getting the message out as a third party candidate, with 400+ congressional candidates running with him so he doesn't look like a lone kook.

 

[HenryKnoxFineBooks]

Didn't you read the part that his "opponent" in the rep. primary for his seat raised $12,000. Not much of a threat, especially since he's polling at 70% approval rating.

 

[MN Patriot]

You assume we'd be taking mostly GOP votes. If Hillary is the nominee, I doubt that.

Ron shouldn't run third party, he should run independent.

Ron should run as a Libertarian candidate, since they already have ballot access in most states. It would cost millions to get on the ballot as an independent, money and time wasted.

Only a billionaire like Bloomberg could afford running as an independent.

Then as a Libertarian, there would be a congressional LP candidate running with him, each one running their local Ron Paul Libertarian campaign.

Imagine the attention each local congressional candidate could get with signs and flyers saying:

Ron Paul for President.
John Q. Local for US House.​

Since Ron has much better name recognition than any other Libertarian candidate, it would help get the message out.

 

[Elliott]

I think he's going to run independent as well. If he does, his current strategy is brilliant. He seems to be saving his money for something. If he just loiters around in the Republican primaries and participates in the debates it's almost free exposure. The media doesn't want to mention his name, but they are forced to every once in a while. If he was just sitting on the sideline right now, waiting for the general election, he'd be completely anonymous.

Now, if we end up getting a CFR-warmonger like McCain (R) vs. a CFR, well, warmonger like Clinton (D) in the general election, the stage will be set for a major upset by the only one who has a proven history of being against Iraq and absolutely will not take us to Iran...Ron Paul. He could win that, he's not going to win the primary.

...at the very least, The John McCainchurian Candidate might regret saying "we're going to miss you" to RP in the debate.

 

[Johncjackson]

I think from looking at the numbers for the POTUS campaign plus hearing figures for radio and TV buys, new offices, and staff being added- it's safe to say Paul IS spending a lot of the money on the GOP Prez race. $20some million really doesn't go that far.

That said, Paul has never had a problem raising millions for his House races anyway. He always gets a lot of national donations, probably a lot of the same people who helped kick off and continue to contribute for this election.

He really doesn't need to dip-in to this money, especially considering none of his challengers have anything.

However, supporters have to realize that at some point this money is going to be spent somewhere.

I would say if you donate to the GOP POTUS run and he ends up using it on the House race or other party run, ask for a refund. IF it really bothers you.

 

[Johncjackson]

Ron should run as a Libertarian candidate, since they already have ballot access in most states. It would cost millions to get on the ballot as an independent, money and time wasted.

Only a billionaire like Bloomberg could afford running as an independent.

Then as a Libertarian, there would be a congressional LP candidate running with him, each one running their local Ron Paul Libertarian campaign.

Imagine the attention each local congressional candidate could get with signs and flyers saying:

Ron Paul for President.
John Q. Local for US House.​

Since Ron has much better name recognition than any other Libertarian candidate, it would help get the message out.

Ron Paul can raise more in half a day than the LP raises in a year. Ballot Access is expensive but someone with a lot of supporters can get sigs for cheap or free. Even the LP has had declining ballot access over the last 3 elections. They used to be able to brag about being on the ballot in 50 states, now they would be excited to get 45 or 46.

the Libertarian label is worthless and probably a liability. well funded Libertarian candidates ( this applies for Constitution Party and Greens to an extent as well. Not just picking on my LP) regularly finish behind Independent paper candidates.

The ballot access is valuable, but it's about the only value.

 

[dc74rp]

“The more the voters down here find out about Ron Paul, the more they realize he is simply not a conservative, and the less they like him,” said Peden spokesman Dallas Frohrib.

But Paul has a vast stockpile of campaign cash at his disposal, thanks to his fundraising success in this year’s presidential bid. He raised about $19 million in the last quarter, and, if he chooses to, he can transfer that money into his congressional treasury.

Paul campaign spokesman Mark Elam indicated that Paul was planning on spending money from his presidential campaign on his House reelection bid. He went up on the airwaves Tuesday with his first advertisement, a radio spot touting his biography and legislative accomplishments.

Elam added that the campaign polled Paul’s popularity in the district last month, which showed him with an approval rating over 70 percent. And it is still unclear whether Peden will be able to raise enough money to mount a serious campaign — he raised an anemic $12,000 last quarter.

What were Mark Elams actual words? The article says he "indicated" Paul was "planning" on spending money. How did he "indicate" these plans? You'd think if the man siad something to this effect, a direct quote would be appropriate, unless the actual words spoken didn't sound the way the author wanted them to.

The whole article talks about how voters in Texas don't like Paul, and the reasons they don't like him. Until they quote his 70% approval rating, but funny they don't give reasons why voters approve of him.

I'd be interested in what Elam's actual words were, and am not ready to draw a conclusion based on what might be a biased reporters interpretation of them.

EDIT: Ah, ok. A mistake on my part. I guess the "whole article" isn't about Paul. I meant the "section" of the article about Paul is full of reasons voters don't like Paul, but none for why they do. Also funny we get direct "quotes" from Paul's opposition, but the reporter only gives unquoted interpretation of statements from Paul's campaign.

 

[flahavin]

I think he is just holding out for the big battles..4 more offices in Illinois? http://www.ronpaul2008.com/press-re...ign-opens-four-additional-offices-in-illinois

 

[Feelgood]

I am so damn tired of all the defeatist third party talk, it makes me sick. How many times does Ron have to say he is running for the Republican nomination, not third party? Get it through your thick ass, non-believing, defeatist mentalilty skulls, it is Republican or nothing. IF God forbid he ran as a third party, at BEST we could hope for is to split the vote like Perot did, and ensure another God damned Clinton gets into the White House.

So I have an idea, instead of perpetuating the idea of a third party run, lets stay focused with what Ron is trying to do, and get him on the Republican ticket. I mean this is absolutely the oldest trick in the book, divide and conquer. The MSM is trying to get us to think third party. How is it you people, cant see what they are doing? How can you guys NOT see their plan? FFS people wake up. Either youre on board, or youre not. If not , PLEASE get the hell off of these forums, we really dont need you here. If youre in, then how bout you do the right thing, and quash all the third party bullshit.

The best way to burn down a forest completely, go around and start a bunch of little fires. All those little fires burn, and as you fan the flames, they get bigger and bigger. Eventually you have a roaring inferno, and your forest is destroyed. How bout we get alot of foot soldiers out there, you see a small fire starting (ie "lets run third party") go and stomp it out. DONT fan the flame, put the fire out...once and for all...

http://youtube.com/watch?v=SXtEPKlJhak


Moderators: Can you please start locking and/or deleting threads that discuss third party runs? This needs to be stopped once and for all.

 

[ronpaultag]

i have a hard time believing he NEEDS to spend money to get re-elected in his district..

 

[skeptic]

I have no problem with this.

If we can't have Ron Paul in the White House (and it aint over yet) I would be glad to have him in the congress (which will be overridden with Democrats. In fact, just today another GOP congresscritter resigned. He's not even waiting for the end of his term. He's joining a lobbying firm, naturally.

You know something's wrong when they all take to flight like pigeons.

 

[VoteForRonPaul]

RP wouldn't run as a 3rd Party, he may not like the other GOP candidates, but he knows what is waiting on the Dem side.. his priniciples will stop him from doing that.

I do not see "running a 3rd Party" would be against his principles. He simply can create a third party and call it True Republican, because this so called Republican party is so far from being a True Republican party.
But anyway, we still in the race and we have to believe it and if not we would lose this race. So let us concentrate on what is coming guys!

 

[jmdrake]

Come on people! Can't you spot a stupid hit piece when you see one?

First of all, as someone else pointed out, this happens all the time. Remember how Lieberman kept running for senate when running for vice president?

Second Ron Paul's opponent has...what...$12,000? When we only raise $12,000 that's considered a bad day!

Third, as someone else pointed out if Ron Paul doesn't become president do you REALLY want someone else to get his congressional seat?

Fourth, the article is mistitled. Ron Paul is better than a "longshot" at this point. (Our numbers are arguably better than Giuliani and Thompson) and with his approval rating in his district at 70 percent that can hardly be called a backlash!

Fifth, Ron Paul's congressional opponent must think Texans are REALLY stupid if he's going to claim that most in Paul's district didn't know he was against the Iraq war or critical of president Bush.

Really folks, Ron Paul has ENOUGH to worry about already. There is NO NEED to add to his woes with uninformed complaints about "every dollar not going to the presidential bid". Have some of you never heard of the term killing two birds with one stone? The article mentioned Ron Paul running ads touting his legislative record. Guess what? He's doing that in other states with the express purpose of winning PRESIDENTIAL votes! So why shouldn't he run such ads in his own district? Total non issue.

Regards,

John M. Drake

 

[jmdrake]

“The more the voters down here find out about Ron Paul, the more they realize he is simply not a conservative, and the less they like him,” said Peden spokesman Dallas Frohrib.



What were Mark Elams actual words? The article says he "indicated" Paul was "planning" on spending money. How did he "indicate" these plans? You'd think if the man siad something to this effect, a direct quote would be appropriate, unless the actual words spoken didn't sound the way the author wanted them to.

The whole article talks about how voters in Texas don't like Paul, and the reasons they don't like him. Until they quote his 70% approval rating, but funny they don't give reasons why voters approve of him.

I'd be interested in what Elam's actual words were, and am not ready to draw a conclusion based on what might be a biased reporters interpretation of them.

EDIT: Ah, ok. A mistake on my part. I guess the "whole article" isn't about Paul. I meant the "section" of the article about Paul is full of reasons voters don't like Paul, but none for why they do. Also funny we get direct "quotes" from Paul's opposition, but the reporter only gives unquoted interpretation of statements from Paul's campaign.

That's cause the article is a hit piece. I can't believe anybody fell for it.

 

[qh4dotcom]

Well we need him in Washington somewhere. I don't want my money back. Use it to get elected to the White House, to the Senate, or to the House. I don't care.

I feel the same way too...don't want my money back...anyway I want to see his numbers go up in the polls so that he has a realistic chance of winning the nomination before I make another donation. Like I said in another post, I am afraid my donation will wind up as a surplus.

 

[Peace&Freedom]

The best way to burn down a forest completely, go around and start a bunch of little fires. All those little fires burn, and as you fan the flames, they get bigger and bigger. Eventually you have a roaring inferno, and your forest is destroyed. How bout we get alot of foot soldiers out there, you see a small fire starting (ie "lets run third party") go and stomp it out. DONT fan the flame, put the fire out...once and for all...

http://youtube.com/watch?v=SXtEPKlJhak

Moderators: Can you please start locking and/or deleting threads that discuss third party runs? This needs to be stopped once and for all.

The 'fire' to be put out could be your stillborn one of 'let's strand all the Paul people with no place to go if his candidacy doesn't work out and he quits the race.' 3rd party talk is not defeatist, it is transitional. If by mid March Paul is mathematically out of contention for the Republican nomination, an independent run is a natural alternative. If anything has been evident about all the other contenders in this campaign, it is that IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE WHETHER THE WARBOT DEMOCRAT OR WARBOT REPUBLICAN WINS. What matters is continuing this revolution. A November 3rd party run builds on the infrastructure of this movement. Running 3rd party IN ADDITION TO the GOP line could also act as leverage to help persuade Republican delegates choose Paul in a brokered convention scenario. So open your mind, not close down the boards.