http://ronpaul2008.com
http://johnedwards.com
Both ran fundraising drives for $1 million. Ron Paul's started out as being for $500,000, but he eventually made it a million and made it in 6 days. Edwards is on his 10th day and is just shy of a million for his $1 million in 10 days drive.
Considering the differences in name recognition (and I don't think it is possible to "spam" campaign donations), doesn't this mean that Ron Paul is more legitimate of a candidate than John Edwards and if so, doesn't that make him a "top-tier" candidate?
How much longer will it be possible for the haters to deny that he is "top-tier?" Their arguments are falling apart faster than the New York Mets.
2007-09-30 10:55:58 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
Ron Paul is a nut. But he appeals to a certain nutty group of well off people. Edwards people are largely impoverished.
2007-10-08 04:15:11 · answer #1 · answered by Marlin B 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not necessarily. Now, if it took John Edwards 40 more days to raise $1 million for his campaign, then I would say that Ron Paul is definitely the serious candidate. But 4 days isn't that big of a deal.
2007-10-01 10:11:07 · answer #2 · answered by chrstnwrtr 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I think that Edwards was hoping to be the candidate of the people rather than a candidate of coporate America and special interests. Instead, that candidate is Ron Paul, and it's becoming more clear every day. I think that Ron Paul is a "top-tier" candidate, right there with Romney and Thompson. To me, Ron Paul is the best candidate running because he is the only one that completely and whole-heartedly supports the Constitution and would not abuse the powers of President. Ron Paul also seems the most genuine about serving the American people rather than finding new ways to oppress them. I'm looking forward to seeing how the mainstream media reports the fundraising for the third quarter, especially if Ron Paul ends up in the $7-10 million range.
2007-09-30 11:22:01 · answer #3 · answered by Brian R 3 · 7⤊ 2⤋
ron paul will be a top tier candidate he has the volunteers to do it with - he needs less money if he puts the volunteers to good use which I am sure he will - he gets plenty of coverage in NH already from the two top newspapers there and also seems to have the most people show up at events there -there was a report on the money race today in the washington post saying that a lot of candidates did not have the lull in fundraising this quarter- they stated ron raised a million online in 5 days and that his estimated total was 2.4 million which doesnt make sense being that was his total from last quarter and pauls campaign has already stated they would be well above that mark
2007-10-01 05:59:03 · answer #4 · answered by rooster 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
They will continue to diminish him as they always do on the msm circus. However seeing the polls after the debates and how abc altered theirs and he still won with 67% and cnbc took there poll off because they thought something was wrong he had 78% of the vote, that means one guy gets 3/4 of the vote and nine others shared 25% and he has won every online or text poll in the debates. Straw Polls he has taken more than any other candidate. He will be recognized after the primaries for just how powerful his message is that our liberty for our people and the constitution has to be upheld.
2016-05-17 13:03:55 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Raising a million dollars does not make you a top candidate in this election year.
As of July, Edwards had raised $23 million and Paul, $3 million. I really doubt that gap will have closed at the Oct 15 reporting deadline.
2007-09-30 11:25:08 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋
Greetings. when did it become a mark of being qualified to be president being how much money you could get donated? note that ordinary people cannot donate big amounts of money to a politician, so if a politician gets big money fast, it is from big contributers, and that means corporations and special interests. to me that automatically disqualifies them from a position of trust. accepting bribe money before hand is still accepting bribe money and all corporate donations are exactly that. Bribes. Why would you want to vote for a person who brags about how much bribe money they accepted?
2007-10-08 03:21:58 · answer #7 · answered by Rich M 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There is no question at this point that Ron Paul is a top-tier candidate.
The powers that be (Democratic and Republican Party) need to keep him down to keep their power.
It is up to the people to get him in. If he is elected he will need some good security. The elites do not want to lose their power.
2007-09-30 15:47:00 · answer #8 · answered by needliberty 2 · 4⤊ 2⤋
If Ron Paul was homeless he would still be a better candidate.
2007-09-30 13:56:01 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
No, he is not a more serious candidate than Edwards, but he is more serious than any of the lamestream media give him
credit for. Gandhi said it best: "First they ignore you, then they attack you, then you win."
2007-09-30 11:01:16 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 9⤊ 2⤋