July 6th, 2007
04:36 PM ET
12 years ago

Paul reports more campaign cash than McCain

Paul raised $2.4 million in the second quarter.

WASHINGTON (CNN) - He's considered a long-shot to win the GOP presidential nomination, but Texas Rep. Ron Paul is boasting more cash-on-hand than Arizona Sen. John McCain's struggling presidential campaign.

The Texas Republican raised nearly $2.4 million in the second quarter, and, after all expenses, has a total amount of $2.4 million cash-on-hand, campaign spokesman Kent Snyder tells CNN. Paul raised $640,000 in the first quarter of 2007.

Snyder added that nearly all of Paul’s warchest was raised through the Internet.

Earlier in the week, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani’s campaign announced having $18 million in campaign cash, $15 million of which may be spent on the primaries. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney's campaign announced a warchest of $12 million for the GOP nomination fight.

Arizona Sen. John McCain, once the early favorite to win the nomination, reported raising a disappointing $11.2 million in the second quarter with only $2 million cash on hand - $400,000 less than Paul. His campaign said his support of immigration reform legislation hurt his fundraising ability.

Paul, with only 11 staffers on his campaign, runs a frugal campaign. The Texas Republican rarely travels to key campaign states. Snyder said the campaign is expecting to expand into additional states in the near future.

Paul registered 2 percent in the latest CNN/Opinion Research poll conducted June 22-24.

- CNN Ticker Producer Alexander Mooney

soundoff (105 Responses)
  1. Shawnie - Grants Pass, OR

    It is in the liberal media's best interest to promote Ron Paul. He could never win the general election. He only raised 2.4 million. Less than a fourth of what McCain raised. The article is misleading as they are only referring to cash on hand, and since Ron Paul doesn't spend it, he still has it. Not an indication of winning or "rising".

    July 7, 2007 08:05 am at 8:05 am |
  2. Daniel SLC,UT

    This is the only Republican that truly cares about America. This is the only Republican I would EVER vote for. I have a huge amount of disgust for all Republicans. Republicans never ask questions they are fools and should all move to Iraq.

    July 7, 2007 09:18 am at 9:18 am |
  3. Darrell, Foxboro MA

    The problem with voting for Ron Paul is that, while many Americans probably would define themselves as "libertarian" (if it hadn't been made a bad word by politicians and media for years), people do not necessarily want a libertarian running the country. Ron Paul has some very novel ideas, but mixed in with his platform of "if it doesn't hurt others, it should be legal" is: abolition of the Education Department, an end to federal loans for college students, an isolationist foreign policy, and the absolute unfettered dominance of the Free Market. As a liberal, the last thing I want is a hands-off president. I want more wealth redistribution, higher taxes for the wealthiest Americans, and a foreign policy built on collaboration. Hopefully Ron Paul continues to be the only "exciting" Republican.

    July 7, 2007 09:44 am at 9:44 am |
  4. Mark, Harrisburg PA

    Great story!! That's why I want the man to be president. He raised 2.4 Million and guess what? He still has 2.4 Million. I trust this man with my tax money!

    July 7, 2007 09:44 am at 9:44 am |
  5. Jason, Cola, SC

    I find myself intrigued by Ron Paul ever since his showdown with Giuliani at one of the debates. Of all the candidates from both parties he is still not my first choice, but his being elected would not fill me with the same sense of dread and hopelessness as any of the other Republicans either running now or "considering" a run. I wish him all the success, because his is a message many so-called conservatives need to hear.

    July 7, 2007 09:49 am at 9:49 am |
  6. Stuart Lockhart, Vancouver, WA

    In a few more months even the Rudy McRomney supporters will see the writing on the wall. Ron Paul WILL BE OUR NEXT PRESIDENT! The American people will finally win for a change too.

    July 7, 2007 10:37 am at 10:37 am |
  7. brandon walker

    ive got bad news for the reporters and funders over at cnn. giuliani nor mccain will be the president of the United States. 😀

    'sad sad day for america' just like the insane immigration bill not passing.

    July 7, 2007 10:43 am at 10:43 am |
  8. rich, hatfield,pa

    Let's see:
    Ron Paul has taken in less money than the other top tier Republican candidates.(this can be likened to LESS TAXATION ALA GOODBYE IRS, ETC) He has spent far less in the same quarter.
    The kicker is in the results:
    He has improved his support and recognition at least four-fold.
    He accomplished more with much less.
    He has thousands of supporters that actually do work on his behalf without pay. He never had the groups organized or funded-they organized spontaneously from his TRUE grass roots support. He doesn't have to hire and buss in supporters. I heard he has only 11 paid campaign workers. He will probably add more in key areas to compliment his
    grassroots supporters' skills.
    What a way to campaign...
    what a way to govern...

    July 7, 2007 01:42 pm at 1:42 pm |
  9. Anonymous

    Isolationism would allow the US taxes and spending to shrink dramatically.

    The military-industrial complex and oil robber-barons are out of control turning the USA into a fascist police state.

    I hope Ron wins but the Republicans don't seem to be interested and are brainwashed into supported Bush policy no matter what the human and financial costs.

    July 7, 2007 04:52 pm at 4:52 pm |
  10. Chris, Prairie Grove AR

    I agree with Matt from Texas. From the people's stand point, we are waiting eagerly to see the media give Ron Paul the time and exposure he deserves, but I suppose that would pose a problem to too many intrest groups. I do believe he like many have said, is one of the last true politicians for the people. It is kinda sad that, that commitment is met with nothing but contempt.

    July 7, 2007 04:58 pm at 4:58 pm |
  11. akidabroad

    Ron Paul would like us to pull out of the World Trade Organization and NAFTA because he believes they threaten US sovereignty. He even claims on his website that NAFTA will lead to a "North American Union" that would make Canada, the US and Mexico one nation! With radically protectionist views like this, I don't think he should be considered a serious candidate by anyone.

    July 7, 2007 05:39 pm at 5:39 pm |
  12. Kimmy, Vancouver Wa

    His message of freedom and liberty rock. The American people are waking up! Ron Paul gives America hope once again:)

    July 7, 2007 06:26 pm at 6:26 pm |
  13. Hopeful Rochester, MN

    I am thrilled to finally have a presidential candidate who really understands the duty of protecting the freedoms of the American People; and as sappy as it may sound, it brings tears of joy to my eyes to see that there is hope for the voices of "We the People" to not only be heard, but resound from coast to coast.

    July 7, 2007 10:37 pm at 10:37 pm |
  14. Shawn Hyde, Rochester Minnesota

    Vote Ron Paul for American Freedom in the primaries and in the 2008 election!

    Ron Paul for a free America! I'm gonna go make a donation right now!

    July 7, 2007 11:12 pm at 11:12 pm |
  15. chris, san antonio, Tx

    a response to Hojo :Dr. paul has not lied he has made it clear that the reason he is running on the republican ticket is because his views would not be exposed to the audience numbers if he ran on a third party ticket, and would be just about guaranteed excluded from any debates.
    he does not propose to legalize drugs. he desires many issues (including drugs) to be returned to the States to decide, this is not advocating legalization of drugs.
    Reguarding foreign policy,Dr. Paul is a non-interventionist, this is not the same as an isolationist as is commonly charged.
    A final note, I am a life long Republican voter and have no problem voting for a libertarian, if that person also happens to be the best canidate, which I believe Dr. Paul is.

    July 8, 2007 10:12 am at 10:12 am |
  16. chris, san antonio, Tx

    "He even claims on his website that NAFTA will lead to a “North American Union” that would make Canada, the US and Mexico one nation! With radically protectionist views like this, I don’t think he should be considered a serious candidate by anyone."
    Dr. Paul is for OPENING up our markets to foreign competition. this is the opposite position a so called "protectionist" would take. A protectionist would advocate increased tariffs (to protect domestic business at expense of the consumer) and increased govt. regulations. Oh wait, these among other protectionist policies have been implemented for decades now.
    Oh yea, and that North American Union you spoke about. It is not so unrealistic as you suppose. In fact the latest immigration bill had provisions in it to further advance it. I believe Cnn's Lou Dobbs even spoke about it as well some time back.

    July 8, 2007 10:22 am at 10:22 am |
  17. Jim Queens N.Y.

    Ron Paul is the only contender not spinning himself. What you see is what you get with The Honorable Dr. Paul, and that, in a nut shell explins his appeal to the masses.

    I've contributed to Ron Paul 2008 and will continue to do so as his momentum grows.

    America knows how important it is to break the chain of servitude towards the owners of the media as well as the military industrial complex. We need a President that is not beholden to outside ( one world order – – CFR ) interests.

    July 8, 2007 11:33 am at 11:33 am |
  18. Frustrated Austinite, Austin, TX

    Ron Paul can be frugal because he has a HUGE following on the internet and is the only candidate with active supporters going out and spending their own money on promoting him. What other candidate can say that? None! How much money does this save Ron Paul? Millions! Other candidates have to higher people to write blogs and comments on the web! What does that tell Americans? hm.

    July 8, 2007 03:17 pm at 3:17 pm |
  19. Darrell, Foxboro MA

    In my opinion, it is a fine thing for people to be personally libertarian about their political views. However, for a politician to be so implies that things are ok when left to "natural processes." As if a free market was fair. As if our educational system does not absolutely pander to wealthy towns by using property taxes (!) to determine which schools get money. As if there was not racism, sexism, homophobia, etc. in our country. For Ron Paul to argue for letting states make decisions on these issues will lead to every state pushing to the extremes: conservative states would outlaw all abortions, put pressure on homosexuals, reinstitute segregation; liberal states would legalize drugs and gay marriage and would become welfare states. And I am a bleeding heart liberal saying this. Sometimes a leader must force change even when the people do not want it. If someone like Ron Paul is elected, there will be even more of a disconnect between the Northeastern states plus the West Coast on one side and the Midwest and Deep South on the other. As much as I dislike President Bush's policies, I actually admire that he bucks the opinion trend on many issues. If Iraq was built on a foundation of truth (as Afghanistan was), more people might support him. I admire his support for an immigration bill, I admire his rejection of the Dubai Ports deal, and I even admire his stance on stem cell research (though I don't agree with him on any of these issues). We need someone with more leadership qualities, but who is willing to compromise and build consensus, not someone who is going to say "I don't want to deal with it, let the states decide."

    July 8, 2007 07:25 pm at 7:25 pm |
  20. Darrell, Foxboro MA

    Oops, I meant his rejection of a rejection of the Dubai Ports Deal. Sorry!

    July 8, 2007 07:27 pm at 7:27 pm |
  21. Patriots Everytown, USA

    We love you Ron!
    Go get 'em!
    We're here with you till the end. Don't forget that!!!

    July 8, 2007 10:35 pm at 10:35 pm |
  22. Jeff from Welch, WV.

    $2.4 million is pretty awesome for a candidate that does take money from special interests.

    It's also pretty awesome that Ron Paul has practially won all the post-debate online polls (although he finish a close 2nd to Romney in the Fox News Text Messaging Poll).

    Only 2%?

    I don't believe that for a second!

    July 9, 2007 12:49 am at 12:49 am |
  23. John, Columbus, OH

    To Darrell (July 8, 2007 7:25 pm),
    Ron Paul is not saying: "I don’t want to deal with it, let the states decide."
    He’s saying: “The Constitution doesn’t authorize it, let the states decide.” Blame the Founding Fathers of the country you live in. (see 10th Amendment)

    "Government is not reason; it is not eloquence; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action." - George Washington

    The Constitution is the fireplace! It contains the fire. We send politicians to Washington, D.C. to watch the fire! When the fire starts up the drapes, it’s high time for action. Presidents take an oath to uphold the Constitution (to keep the fire in the fireplace). Yet now most politicians come back to their constituents bragging about how much bigger they made the fire!
    "I set fire to the bedroom!"
    "I set fire to the kitchen!"
    "Vote for me; I’ll set the den on fire."
    At best, they don’t even know their own jobs!
    The Constitution was written by men who knew the dark side of government.

    July 9, 2007 03:50 pm at 3:50 pm |
1 2 3 4 5