Ron Paul Gets Very Close to 3 Day Goal

About a week ago the Ron Paul campaign refocused their website’s fundraising efforts on a short-term goal of raising $430,000 in three days to air radio ads in some early primary states. The campaign came very close to meeting that number, falling short by just under $30,000.

Part of the thing about that first fundraising drive at the end of the third quarter was that the original goal was set to something that sounded quite high ($500,000) but was actually very reachable. That way, when the donors blew out the number it could be raised… and then when they hit that new number ($1 million) it felt like there was incredible momentum at play.

In the case of setting a three month goal of $12 million, I think the Paul campaign might have overshot a little bit and done more harm than good to their perceived momentum. Everyone who looks at Congressman Paul’s campaign website now sees a graphic counting down to the end of the month… and over $2.2 million uncollected towards the $4 million October target.

Which sounds better and motivates volunteers more?

1. A goal of $430,000 in three days. The result is $403,000.

2. A goal of $250,000… raised to $350,000… in three days. The final result is $403,000 and everyone cheers the tremendous success.

I’d go with the second option. But I could be wrong.

42 Responses to “Ron Paul Gets Very Close to 3 Day Goal”

  1. Phil Says:

    To be fair to the Paul campaign, the $430,000 number was chosen because that’s how much their ad buy was. I do however agree with your overall point.

    If they had just started the ad buy fund drive by setting a goal of raising $430,000 in five days, we’d all be talking about how incredible their victory was.

  2. rick Says:

    Regarding the $430k, I agree perceptions of goal setting are important.
    I think the $12m goal might be realistic, although dividing it equally by the month may not be. Considering the past growth in support, I would think it will be more like $3m in October, $4m in November, and $5m in December.
    The Nov/Dec numbers could be even higher which would result in the $12m
    goal being exceeded. Remember the Nov 5 $100.00 donation bomb had
    8,875 subscribers at 10:20 pm EST 10/24/07—Even at that level it would add nearl $1m to the campaign. Dr Paul’s fundraisers will also help.

  3. Texas Little El Says:

    I have to say the same thing. Many of us are also trying to hit when our paychecks get here instead of putting it on Credit Cards.

    I will be giving $125.00 on the BOMB day instead of just the $100.00. Hopefully more will give a little extra than just the $100.

  4. Robert Milnes Says:

    Very Close but No Cigar, Steve (Gordon). It’s not going to be even close on Super Duper Tuesday. Let’s call it “Free of Ron Paul Day”. Remember Dr. Dean!

  5. Ron Paul American Says:

    Ron Paul failing his set goals of 430,000 dollars and 4 million dollars are just so frustrating. These things make me nervous. Is Ron Paul going to fail miserably? I hope not. These failures are frustrating, but they get compounded when I think about Tom Tancredo seizing 1,350,000 dollars in matching funds. Grrr! How does he get that much and Ron Paul can’t meet his deadlines?!?

  6. Texas Little El Says:

    Robert didn’t look at the new totals.

    The Fund raising is up to $2.2 million for the month.

  7. Phil Says:

    I checked just about four hours ago and it was around $1,800,000… how on earth did he raise $400,000 in one evening?!?

  8. Chris Says:

    I checked just about four hours ago and it was around $1,800,000… how on earth did he raise $400,000 in one evening?!?

    They added accumulated offline donations to the total. More here:

    http://ronpaulgraphs.blogspot.com/2007/10/about-massive-spike-in-donations.html

  9. Phil Says:

    Ah, I suspected it was something like that. Thanks Chris

  10. Robert Milnes Says:

    Are Paulies measuring their rate of contribution fatigue, contribution max-out & new contributors? Maybe we can watch the graphs go limp.

  11. Asher Heimermann Says:

    Ron Pual knows what he is talking about but he will never get elected.

    Asher Heimermann
    Wisconsin’s Youth Activist
    http://www.AsherHeimermann.com

  12. Robert Milnes Says:

    A.H., we already know that, thank you. At least those of us grown-ups who are not delusional or wishful thinkers.

  13. Ferenc Says:

    A.H.
    Ron Paul bigest problem is.He’s age,and he looks like very angry when he talking against the war. How about Mr.Huckabee? For the better future of this once a great nation, we need better than all of the democrat,and the top 4 republican. I don’r realy know if we can find anybody who able to save our nation. We have to many stuped dem. and rep. who no matter what they vote for their party. Plus we have all of this do nothing,and going nowhere third and independent parties. It is sad, very sad.
    God bless you all

  14. Trent Hill Says:

    LMAO. Robert Milnes says, “Those of us who are grownups” while conversing with a 14 year old. Yes, Mr. Milnes—you and the 14 year old are an equal level of grownup.

  15. Robert Milnes Says:

    A.H. and try to work with those of us grown-ups who do not understand English very well.

  16. timothy west Says:

    the country is firmly in the grip of the war profiteers and all the other parasites that depend on their control. One thing I did not consider is that like any crime syndicate, there are 100 waiting to take the place of the one that gets caught.

  17. Robert Milnes Says:

    t.w., sorry, I didn’t understand that.

  18. Carl Says:

    I wonder if he has started running those ads in NH. His polling numbers are inching up. Real Clear Politics has him up to 7%, making him the number 4 candidate there. Then again, I just looked at the polling questions. It didn’t make it clear how they handled crossover votes. Did Republicans vote for democrats and vice versa? (See Lew Rockwell’s blog for the link to the Saint Anselm College poll.)

    I think the 12 million goal is a good one. For those who want him to win, a lower goal is a concession of victory to the bad guys. Better to try and fail, than to pretend to try.

    That said, a goal of 3 million for October might have been better, a geometric vs. linear schedule would be more realistic. But given that the NH primary is being moved up, early money is critical.

  19. Robert Milnes Says:

    Carl, again I ask, what are you doing? What is the position of LRC on Ron Paul campaign? It can’t be favorable. Yes, an open primary would increase a libertarian’s polling. The Libertarian Vote-Cato-13%>20% MAX.

  20. Robert Milnes Says:

    Carl, I predicted a geometric downward-$3>Oct, 2>Nov, 1>Dec.

  21. Jay Matthews Says:

    Robert, what little credibility you had went down the toilet when you recently suggested you had a better chance of being elected than RP. RP’s support has grown each week since he announced his candidacy. Conservatively, he’s on pace for a $7.5 million 4th quarter. Really, give it up already and quit embarassing yourself.

  22. Robert Milnes Says:

    Jay Matthews, the course Ron Paul is on is well worn. RP & DP primaries. Conventions. elections. He is one of many this time & past single digit candidates who NEVER win. On the other hand, I’ve proposed an UNTRIED strategy which in the least looks promising. Like I said before, give the strategy a try EXACTLY as I say. If it fails, THEN you can say I was wrong. PS. In the world of RP & DP election politics $7.5 mil is chump change. The “B” word is now being used.

  23. Jay Matthews Says:

    “$7.5 mil is chump change”

    $7.5 mil is chump change? Oh really?! If that’s the case how much do you have in your war chest? Regardless of what your strategy is you need money to be taken seriously and money to deliver the message. (BTW that’s $7.5 mil in online donations only. Regardless, when the quarter ends with a total of $9-12 million raised be sure to come back and tell us it’s still chump change.)

    “If it fails, THEN you can say I was wrong.”

    You’ve been wrong for months now predicting the decline of RP’s campaign.

  24. Chris Says:

    Bob cannot even convince one Libertarian or Green to support him. However, he believes that if we just handed him the nomination, then he could convince at least 33.4% of everyone else to vote for him.

    Bob has failed to raise a single dollar for his campaign. However, he believes that if we just handed him the nomination, he would receive significant enough coverage that more than 1% of the voters would even know he he is.

    Bob also believes that eugenics for Native Americans and shipping black people back to Africa are winning policy positions.

    Who is delusional?

  25. Robert Milnes Says:

    Chris, I never said anything like “...shipping black people back to Africa…” Why do you keep saying this & misrepresenting what I really have said? I admit it has been difficult to pursuade libs & greens to consider an untried strategy. & supporting my campaign. But I bet EVERY one of them has heard about it by now & is pondering it. The Ron Paul hoopla isn’t helping. Jay Matthews, I wrote:”In the world of RP & DP election politics $7.5 mil is chump change.” You disagree? And it is because of Ron Paul campaign skimming off most lib. support that the REAL libertarian campaigns are lacking support. I predicted a decline in RP/RP campaign as evident in to fail to get 4 mil in Oct. & less subsequently. Also the rational end of the campaign on Super Duper Tuesday-What I call “Free of Ron Paul Day”. Of course he might go third party or independent & some might try a draft or write in. Like I said “rational end”.

  26. Jay Matthews Says:

    $7.5 mil for an entire campaign is chump change. We’re talking a single quarter and again I do believe he’ll raise more than that this quarter. By your rationale the nomination should be handed to Giuliani right now. Throw out the money Romney loaned himself and RP was third in fundraising last quarter and only about a million away from second but that’s old news now.

  27. Robert Milnes Says:

    Jay Matthews, I didn’t invent this system or promote it. I’m just trying to deal with it. RP had last quarter 5 mil. This quarter another 5 or 6-whatever. Then Feb. 5 comes fast & his campaign is OVER. In the very interview above O’Donnell asks RP about the evident disconnect between his fundraising successes on the internet & his low polling. 2% is listed. No mention of his limited vote pool as described in The Libertarian Vote. Give it up, man! Give the ball to the REAL libertarian candidates & let’s try the strategy. We can “educate” the public. Ron Paul is wasting our time & $.

  28. Carl Says:

    Robert,

    Your prediction of geometric downward fundraising is so far invalid. Using a linear extrapolation, he is already on a pace to do 50% better than his previous quarter. And that’s assuming no more money for October, and no money raised in Hollywood after the Leno taping.

    To a large degree, Ron Paul is doing the progressive/libertarian alliance thing! His campaign is centered around bringing troops home and getting rid of corporate subsidies. Yes, some of Ron Paul’s rhetoric seems lifted from the John Birch Society. But guess what: when I have attended meetings of local hippie-progressives, they sounded like Birchers in tie-dye!

    Jeffersonianism, Birchism, Hippie-Progressivism, Fundamentalism…are all examples of Luddism, the desire to have a more decentralized, neighborhood-centric economy.

    It’s not simply about size of government. It’s about size of institutions in general. This is why Ron Paul has so much more appeal than Objectivist libertarians.

  29. G.E. Smith Says:

    Ron Paul is not for Luddism or a “neighborhood-centric” economy, Carl. WTF is that? He is for global free trade, division of labor, and wealth. What you speak of is socialism.

  30. Robert Milnes Says:

    Carl, I’m willing to admit that some of my prediction is wishful thinking. But if there is in fact a limited pool of RP supporters-at least in the libertarian section-& those are internet savvy, then they should all be informed of his candidacy & already supported him near max. So the idea of using his contributions to increase # of supporters should be erroneous as far as they are concerned. Now, can he increase his support in the non-libertarian sections? And this already includes leftists who are sympathetic to libertarianism. Agreed, “To a large degree he IS doing the progressive/libertarian alliance thing.” But by going RP/RP he is ruining it. He is not getting any LP or GP support. He is not getting any coattails. It is a one man phenomenon destined to GOP failure. As far as neo-luddism v. socialism, this is getting into pretty complex social science. & RP has not been very explicit on his positions on that. He’s just been yelling his sound bites as loud & quickly as possible (free media) & responding to standard questions presented.

  31. Robert Milnes Says:

    Carl, how can the Ron Paul revolution be neo-luddite in nature & be so inclusive-to say the least- of internet technology?

  32. Carl Says:

    Luddism is more about decentralization than anti-technology. You don’t see Luddites protesting sewing machines, electric motors, solar cells, or personal computers. They protest(ed) steam powered weaving mills, big hydroelectric dams, shopping malls, factory farming and nuclear power. Many modern day Luddites understand and wield technology better than their corporatist/socialist oppositions. In fact, one of the earliest non-governmental branches of the Internet was the Whole Earth ‘Lectronic Link.
    ——-

    Oh, in other news. The Ron Paul ads are to start running on Monday. We’ll see in a couple of weeks how well the RP message really plays…

  33. G.E. Smith Says:

    Luddites are the scum of the earth and 100% not what Ron Paul is about.

    They protested the steam-powered weaving mill? Shopping malls? They love poverty, depression, and death. They hate progress.

    I have a hard time envisioning Ron Paul decrying technology or shopping malls.

    Come on. This is the most absurd B.S. I’ve ever read here.

    A libertarian protesting shopping malls? Wow.

  34. Carl Says:

    A libertarian protesting the government imposed overhead that leads to such centralization. Without the FED playing games with the currency, you don’t have to participate in the banking system to break even. Without the SEC overregulation, many industries would be more dispersed with capital available at a cheaper rate to smaller corporations.

  35. Robert Milnes Says:

    GES, in any mental match between you & Carl,...Which begs the question again-Carl, what are you, a mentally myopic Paulie?

  36. Robert Milnes Says:

    Carl, I guess what I’m getting at is: What are you doing after “Free of Ron Paul Day”?

  37. Robert Milnes Says:

    A Shadow Cabinet would be nice.

  38. G.E. Smith Says:

    Carl thinks that the Fed and big government has produced all of our progress and that, in the absence of them, we wouldn’t be cursed with modern technology.

    That is such a perverse and ridiculous point of view, I don’t even know how to respond to it.

  39. Carl Says:

    Dr. Smith, you don’t get it. Luddism is not so much about anti-technology as against centralization.

    It takes greater knowledge of biology to run an integrated organic farm than a modern monoculture farm that cranks out stuff that resembles food.

    A town with mom and pop stores has more capitalists than one where retail has been taken over by a few big block stores.

    Ron Paul points backwards to the days of family doctors vs. HMOs.

    And as I pointed out above, part of the original Internet was built by Luddites.
    —I like progress too, but I am enough of an eco-conservative to recognize that new is not always better. Sometimes it is good to go backwards to recover good that has been lost. Other times it is better to abandon a bad idea from the past.

  40. Robert Milnes Says:

    Carl, unfortunately RP points back to pre-RvWade/states rights also.

  41. G.E. Smith Says:

    Carl Milsted’s motto for Libertarians: “Backwards to the past, poverty, and petulance for liberty!”

    Not at all what Ron Paul stands for. Quit deluding yourself.

    BTW: Thanks for the promotion to Dr.

  42. Carl Says:

    Shouldn’t thank me. ‘Twas a reference to “Lost in Space.”

Leave a Reply