What we need to is to RETIRE the money bomb..

[FreeMind&Market]

One of the fun aspects of the '08 money bombs was watching the ticker climb (and climb fast.) I especially liked watching Ron Paul Graphs. In addition to the above comments about needing more donors, those of us that have maxed out have to find other avenues to contribute. If we had another RonPaulGraphs, the was tied-in with both the official campaign and the various PACs, I imagine the boost to the ticker would add that much more excitement to the money bomb.

When someone comes up with an idea better than a money bomb, it will displace the money bomb. Until then, keep promoting the money bombs. Last time 'round, the big money bombs didn't happen until later in the campaign season.

Personally, however, I feel that you should donate as much as you can as soon as you can rather than wait until the next money bomb. Success breeds success. The more success we have in Iowa and NH, the more the donor base will grow. The sooner the campaign and the PACs have the funds, the sooner they can put it to work to win Iowa and NH.

 

[MJU1983]

If money bombs bring in large amounts of cash, why on earth would anyone want to end them?

 

[KingRobbStark]

If money bombs bring in large amounts of cash, why on earth would anyone want to end them?

Those with no alternate solutions.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

Like MelissaWV, I'm also maxed out and its July. So I won't be donating to any more RP2012 moneybombs. This is a phenomenon called "Donor Saturation". You've just simply run out of donors. The campaign is going to need more donors, plain and simple.

Perhaps our efforts as a grassroots should be in ATTRACTING NEW DONORS rather than having 20 page arguments coming up with another significant date? As far as retiring the money bomb... I agree that we should continue to be creative. I disagree about retiring it completely.


Another thing that's been under my skin regarding people saying that this money bomb is a failure (or implying that since it didn't make 6 million, it isn't worth having them any more):

It seems a little silly to me to use the ploy, "$1 now is like $5 later, DONATE NOW", and then give absolutely no recognition for the significance of it. If $1 now is like $5 later, then this $620,000 moneybomb actually raised $3,100,000 in the future.



Anyways, I digress. My point is-- when donors are saturated, the campaign stops. WE need to figure out how to get more donors. Stop thinking about the next money bomb ploy, or the totals, and start getting creative about how to attract fresh donors. And space out the moneybombs from now on-- quarterly at most.

You're missing something. We are nowhere near the saturation point. Think about it: We had two huge moneybombs in 2007 totalling over 10million dollars and something like 18 million for the quarter (don't remember the exact number). As of yet in this campaign, we have only raised a bit over $5million. We have way more support now than we did in 2007, and people simply aren't aware yet. We have PLENTY of money left from the remaining donors. That's why the moneybombs should still happen. We need to tap our resources to the fullest extent possible before moving on to the next gimmick. IMO, the moneybomb cannot be completely replaced. That said, it's still important to get new donors. Nobody's arguing with that. What I'm saying, is that we need to freak out a little less. We're not in panic mode. We have lots of potential donors. We just need to figure out how to get them to give more money. I think moneybombs are still the most effective tool we have for that.

 

[Eric21ND]

I have a feeling there's a lot of money on the sidelines waiting to jump in once the Paul campaign starts to take off and the Presidential race heats up.

 

[pacelli]

You're missing something. We are nowhere near the saturation point. Think about it: We had two huge moneybombs in 2007 totalling over 10million dollars and something like 18 million for the quarter (don't remember the exact number). As of yet in this campaign, we have only raised a bit over $5million. We have way more support now than we did in 2007, and people simply aren't aware yet. We have PLENTY of money left from the remaining donors. That's why the moneybombs should still happen. We need to tap our resources to the fullest extent possible before moving on to the next gimmick. IMO, the moneybomb cannot be completely replaced. That said, it's still important to get new donors. Nobody's arguing with that. What I'm saying, is that we need to freak out a little less. We're not in panic mode. We have lots of potential donors. We just need to figure out how to get them to give more money. I think moneybombs are still the most effective tool we have for that.

I don't disagree at all.

 

[Jackie Treehorn]

Right, if I had to guess, I'd say VERY few people are even in the ballpark of maxing out. Hopefully I'm not wrong.

 

[Jackie Treehorn]

And for what it's worth? I would pay very good money to have Thanksgiving with the Pauls I wonder if anyone else would? Now THAT is a $1,000/plate dinner.

This.

 

[No Free Beer]

This is a perfect reason why we should NOT retire it...

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/ar...der-Paul-rakes-in-money-for-straw-poll-effort

 

[IRONCLAD]

Hey folks, remember this. The money bomb is an old idea to us, but to a new Ron Paul supporter it's a new idea. I say we keep the money bomb, but have less of them and have them on a special day.

The money bomb works, if it isn't broke, don't fix it. I find myself sitting around watching the ticker reach it's goal. BTW, by watching the ticker, I was able to find a group of Ron Paul suuporters by seeing one name pop up in my area. Did a facebook search of the name and found him.

 

[IRONCLAD]

OH yes, we are the only supporters who can pull this off, NOT ONE other person who is running for president can pull this off. So why get rid of it?

If you say the money bomb is an old idea, so then is this fourm.... so why not get rid of this forum, it's played out...right? I don't think so. I don't believe this web-site will ever get as many people as it once did back in 2008. So, should we get rid of something that works? NO! If you do a google search on forums for anyone running for president, we are the only ones worth it's weight in gold. No one else can touch us with forums or money bombs.

 

[IRONCLAD]

wording

 

[IRONCLAD]

I agree with this. I was on Twitter from wake to rest because there was so much clamor about the moneybomb. There was a decent amount of Facebook action too, and I don't think that level of excitement could have been matched otherwise. When people get tired of the grind of campaigning, another moneybomb is there to rally the troops and get some much-needed cash for Dr. Paul.

I agree as well.

 

[IRONCLAD]

And another thing. The money bombs are our (grassroots) thing, not the campaign of Ron Paul. So why get rid of something that works? Ron Paul wanted from his "grassroot supporters" $500K for Iowa and we delivered. Ron Paul doesn't have the "fatcat" supporters like Mit Robama, Ron Paul relies on us and not the fat cats.

If you think this is an old idea, then come up with something new that no one has thought about yet. Do you remember the Ron Paul BLIMP?

 

[IndianaPolitico]

I don't think we should get rid of the Money Bombs, we just need to expand our fundraising. Ron Paul is the master of the Money Bomb, no other candidate can fundraise on the internet like he can. But can you imagine how much money the campaign could bring in, if he did some more traditional fundraisers? If we did both the Money Bombs, and traditional fundraisers, there would be no stopping us!

 

[IRONCLAD]

RP was the #2 fundraiser last quarter behind Romney and his fat cat corporate dollars.

That tells me the money bombs have been a success. Maybe not as successful as we would like, but it is early and the economy is in the tank.

An Ames straw poll win will wake up the old supporters who are not involved and bring in new ones. New supporters will latch onto the money bomb because it is new and exciting to them.

If RP get a third or lower in the Ames straw poll, it won't matter whether we have money bombs or not, but I expect a win.

Look how much wind the other GOP candidates are sucking financially. RP #2 in fundraising this early tells me the right things are being done.

I agree