please EVERYONE read this before posting
- Thread starter cien750hp
- Start date
Please stop going on tangents
You don't follow the PACs because you have not researched them, $5000 is the limit on PAC not supporting ANY SINGLE candidate, if it is advocating a single candidate it is restricted to the SAME $2300 as the official campaign. therefore WORTHLESS you wish to have some other candidate also advertised.
How do you know they won't make a profit? How much are they making? Why is this a sticky thread? This is the same argument that is going on in all the other threads...
The same amount as they made at the jobs they quit.
How much that is, I don't know, but I bet it will be in their email.
I doubt that will be disclosed in their e-mail, but I guess we'll see. I don't even know if they should put it in honestly because no matter how much it is some people are not going to like it. I have to give him props for starting a thread asking how much the forum users thinks he should make tho...
tangent4ronpaul
Banned
- Joined
- May 11, 2007
- Messages
- 21,101
Please stop going on tangents
You don't follow the PACs because you have not researched them, $5000 is the limit on PAC not supporting ANY SINGLE candidate, if it is advocating a single candidate it is restricted to the SAME $2300 as the official campaign. therefore WORTHLESS you wish to have some other candidate also advertised.
Well many states have candidates running for the House and Senate under Dr. Paul's platform - why not advertise them? What about all out delegates?
are they not additional candidates?
-n
tangent4ronpaul
Banned
- Joined
- May 11, 2007
- Messages
- 21,101
Please stop going on tangents
You don't follow the PACs because you have not researched them, $5000 is the limit on PAC not supporting ANY SINGLE candidate, if it is advocating a single candidate it is restricted to the SAME $2300 as the official campaign. therefore WORTHLESS you wish to have some other candidate also advertised.
someone does not know what they are talking about:
http://www.pro-pac.org/
Maximum donation amount is $5,610 per individual or $11,220 per married couple each calendar year. Donations are not tax-deductible. Corporate contributions are prohibited. Donations of any amount are greatly appreciated!
I was wrong on the per-event thing, though... unless you make separate PACs per month!!!!
That's the first link that came up... maybe not 100% on target, but...
-n
they are not a single candidate PAC
I honestly have no clue where the 5610 figure comes from it is not in the laws.
even wiki has it right: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_action_committee
Agree that this should not have been a sticky thread. Now those who disagree with this new idea are going to feel that the entire grassroots forum is in on the plans. But I guess that is silly because now we know they are.
I think all you newbs coming here to attack it are plants from another campaign.
and most of us are "in" on this. we have been around long enough to know naysayers are but pesky gnats trying to get in the way of victory.
The reason I don't think it should be a sticky is that it just seems like speculation from someone who I don't think was involved with the project. It also devolved into the same arguments that are already going on in the other threads...
tangent4ronpaul
Banned
- Joined
- May 11, 2007
- Messages
- 21,101
Thanks for the link! - I didn't check Wikipedia this time... You are correct! - was kind of wondering about that, I remembered a more even figure too.
-n
tangent4ronpaul
Banned
- Joined
- May 11, 2007
- Messages
- 21,101
I think all you newbs coming here to attack it are plants from another campaign.
and most of us are "in" on this. we have been around long enough to know naysayers are but pesky gnats trying to get in the way of victory.
OK - in the interests of Grassroots openness and honesty, how about identifying who is involved and what their relationship to the project is. Some have non-identifying usernames (like NewEnd), yet have been trying hard to influence the discussion. If you are part of the project, please identify yourself and your position. Personally, I volunteered for route planning and have been submitting stuff in calls or conference calls, e-mails and postings both here and on a private forum devoted to this (that is pretty dead!). My impression is that it is pretty disorganized. I've only been put in touch with a meteorologist, but I'm hearing conflicting claims that one type of route has been chosen and or certain states have been ruled out. It's a mess! I have made no arrangements to get a penny out of it, and do not expect to. I personally don't want to see a penny to be made out of this. To those that believe in the campaign, it is a willingly given sacrifice to get our country and our freedoms back!
-n
I have nothing to do with it. I am just enraged there are a bunch of know it all newbs who are trying to spread FUD about something that can be great, and trying to sink the fucking blimp. My only agenda is to have that fuckign Blimp in Boston on the 16th. that is it... and there are a bunch of retards runnign around thinking they know better... and it pisses me off.
They are spreading ignorance, and even outright lies to try and shoot down the blimp, and i think it is fucking dispicable.
I have run into people like this onthe boards before... all they ever do is try to shoot down an idea, and they will stop at nothing to try and see it fail.... Worthless grass roots support. The type that should be weeded out and burned in a trash can so the real grassroots can flourish.
They aren't helping, they are being a god damned nuisance. And when that blimp is inthe sky, with gaggles of people asking their news stations about it, you fucking assholes that tried to discredit how it got up there are going to have some real apologizing to do to those of us that had to tirelessly rebute your fucking bullshit.
Just like before Novemebr 5th, when people were saying how terrible it was, how the money should be donated now.....
...they were wrong, but god was it annoying trying to keep their lies and piss poor logic from fucking it up.
Last edited:
So whenever this blimp lands at a rally and media is around instead of talking about Ron Paul and his platform the media is going to be asking the same questions about money bombs and the blimp itself, which really will serve no purpose at all to the campaign.
The best thing Mr. Lyman could do for Ron Paul is to stay far away from this Blimp so that the media attention is focused on the man himself and his ideas. The purpose of the Blimp is to draw attention to Ron Paul, not how particular advertising plans were drawn up.
Lets get some seniors to champion Dr. Paul to the AARP at some stops and some economic exerts at others and constitutional law experts at others and so on. Talking about money bombs and the blimp itself is pointless. We need votes at this point, not pats on the back, we can save that for later.
The best thing Mr. Lyman could do for Ron Paul is to stay far away from this Blimp so that the media attention is focused on the man himself and his ideas. The purpose of the Blimp is to draw attention to Ron Paul, not how particular advertising plans were drawn up.
Lets get some seniors to champion Dr. Paul to the AARP at some stops and some economic exerts at others and constitutional law experts at others and so on. Talking about money bombs and the blimp itself is pointless. We need votes at this point, not pats on the back, we can save that for later.
You really think it is better for the media to talk to Trevor about money bombs and his blimp at every stop then to have the media discuss Dr. Paul's ideas with regular citizens at each stop? Do you really think so?
The media is going to know he owns the company and they will ask him about it. They WILL ask him if he is making money from the blimp and no matter how you look at it his replies will not sound too good to the public. I don't know, just seems like there would be a better way to use the blimp stops for the campaign.
tangent4ronpaul
Banned
- Joined
- May 11, 2007
- Messages
- 21,101
Well thank you! - much better than your "Most of us are in on it" quote to imply you were an insider to this project! I have no interest in sinking the blimp! - the organizers are seriously F'ing up by changing what was offered to get those pledges to something different on short notice. This NEEDS to go with the majority of the original plan (1 day flights won't work, etc) and then look at commercial involvement as a solution. The changes are causing it to loose it's support! - this NEEDS to happen NOW! Any time spent arranging how to pay the organizers and inflate the cost 150K is a total waste of time, that will prevent the more modest plan from flying if perused.
From your posts that I have seen, which is many in the past 2 dys, I am having a hard time thinking of one where you were not trying to shoot down someones ideas. Now who is the troll?
-n
I think Trevor can handle getting the message out, as well as his media guys. And you are looking into a crystal ball.... but magic isn't real. You have no idea how the media may react... and the blimp is more a name recognition tool, than an evangelizing tool.
again, crystal ball. You dont know they will ask him, and even if they do, most people are not going to care abotu whether he is drawing a salary or not. In fact, most people assumed Lyman was a staffer for Paul in the first place, so they assumed he was getting payed anyways.
Similar threads
