Topic: Election 2010
Schiff Money Bomb Results Impressive Yesterday's money bomb on behalf of possible Connecticut senatorial candidate Peter Schiff answered some questions and raised some new ones.by Walt Thiessen
(libertarian)
Saturday, August 8, 2009
The results are in, and they're mostly good. Yesterday's Peter Schiffmoney bomb raised almost $750,000. The morning after, his total for the event stands at $730,475 at 9:50 AM Eastern Time.
Compare this to the previous $25,000 money bomb, and the results represent a dramatic improvement indeed. On the other hand, they didn't reach the original $1 million goal set by Schiff's supporters. Is that important? Supporters will probably say no, it's not. What's important is that a significant amount of money was raised, an amount that puts Schiff's coffers in the same neighborhood as Republican front runner Rob Simmons and former House speaker Tom Foley.
On the other hand, Schiff has a long way to go. According to a Quinnipiac poll released July 23, 2009, Simmons is far-and-away the front runner in the early stages of the Republican race, while Schiff has virtually no voter support at all. In other words, if Schiff does pull the trigger and commit to running, he'll be starting from ground zero in terms of popular support. Take a look at Quinnipiac's percentages of support from its three most recent polls:
7/23
5/27
4/2
Simmons
42%
52%
32%
Foley
5%
7%
4%
Schiff
-
-
-
Caligiuri
5%
7%
4%
Someone Else
1%
-
2%
Wouldn't Vote
1%
1%
2%
Don't Know / No Answer
45%
33%
56%
In other words, despite having his name included in the poll, Schiff doesn't score any support among registered Republican voters. Even State Sen. Sam Caligiuri, considered by nearly everyone to be a long-shot in the race, scored some measurable amount of support, but Schiff is still completely failing to register with Republicans.
Of course, Schiff supporters do have some hope, given that all three polls show somewhere between 33% and 56% of Republican voters can conceivably be swayed in Schiff's direction between now and next year. Also, primary turnouts are usually much smaller than general election turnouts, meaning that Schiff has a lower target he needs to hit in order to win the nomination. On the other hand, voters who tend to vote in primaries tend to be mainstream party supporters, and those supporters tend to support the candidate favored by party leadership. That means the Schiff campaign will need to find an equal number of Republicans willing to break old patterns by voting in a primary. That's a lot easier said than done. If they actually hope to achieve that goal, Schiff supporters will have to start right now.
The key to a dark horse winning anything is early organization. If Schiff's supporters want him to win in Connecticut, they need to build that organization right now. They need to quickly establish precinct captains everywhere in the Constitution State. They need to begin lit dropping and sign posting before the end of 2009. They need to work the voters before the big candidates kick their campaigns into gear. In other words, they need to build some serious name recognition for Schiff now...not later.
It's great to bask in the success of an off-year money bomb success. They just better not bask too long and risk sunburn.
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 30 thumbs so far
The views expressed in this
article are those of Walt Thiessen only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. Walt Thiessen is
solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an
employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Not sure if my first comment was posted so I'll try again.
I'd never heard of Walt Thiessen before but I Googled him and 100% unshocked to find out he lives in the DC area.
During the Ron Paul campaign I came to be aware of the phenomenon of the "Beltway libertarian" -- someone who self-applies the mantle of libertarianism, yet always seems to downplay libertarian candidate's successes and magnify any weaknesses. I came to realize the role of this person as a gatekeeper who is, at heart, pro-big government.
I hope you won't take this as a "personal attack," Walt, but judging by this article you fit the description of just such a wolf in sheep's clothing.
Peter Schiff raises more money in a single day than Foley or Simmons did in all of Q2, and you report this as "mostly good"? And then cite the tired, manufactured, cherry-picked polling industry to explain how Schiff really has his work cut out for him, gosh darn it, as much as you'd love to see a libertarian do well. Because after all, I'm a libertarian, you know, it says so right here on my bio.
Anyway, not fooled. I'll be keeping an eye on your writing, Walt, but I suspect you're about as libertarian as Fred Thompson.
Posted By: Walt Thiessen
Date: 2009-08-08 12:22:59
No offense taken, El Dorko. You can call me what you want. I call myself a 100% libertarian. And as for beltway...well, if you dig a little deeper, you'll find that I've lived in Virginia only a few years and previously I came from....Connecticut, of all places, where I ran in 1996 as the LP's candidate for Congress.
What you don't seem to understand, El Dorko, is that being a libertarian does not mean being foolish. It does not mean drinking koolaid for koolaid's sake. Rather, it means thinking clearly, being realistic, and doing what one knows to be right.
You don't like the fact that I didn't fall over backwards swooning over the fact that the money bomb raised $750,000. You think that merely acknowledging it to be a impressive isn't good enough. So, you're going to be "watching me." Well, now, I guess that's me warned.
The goal for Peter Schiff's money bomb was to procure $750,000 within 24 hours. The reason being not so much for financing a possible campaign but to test the waters of support. This is cleary stated on Schiff's Money Bomb Web Site.
Well guess what Mr. Walt Doubting Thomas? After Congressman Ron Paul sent out thousands of emails (a call to arms) to his ever growing and forever faithfull support base. Peter Schiff recieved $730,000 within 24 hours! And the money bomb is still up and running. And still collecting. This is a huge success in may ways for a 'Dark Horse".
Ron Paul is still a force that should not to be ignored. His House Bill: HR1207 to Audit the Fed has gathered close to 300 signatures from both Parties in Congress. So if and when King Paul decides to Knight someone such as Peter Schiff don't underestimate the energetic response.
So hold on to your hat Cowboys.Thanks to all of the recent misbehaving in Washington. Mainstream America is now paying real, close attention to everything political.The horse has started bucking. And the old riders on the hill are soon going to be falling off onto their butt's left (Democrats) and right (GOP).
Posted By: Walt Thiessen
Date: 2009-08-08 12:51:32
Well, let's be accurate. The original goal was $1 million. 10,000 giving $100 each...that's $1 milllion. That's what the money bomb site showed last week. It was changed to $750,000 sometime in the past few days.
Also, I'm not doubting that success can be achieved. Instead, I'm pointing out what that success will require, including the fact that the money bomb can't be enough by itself. The fundraising can only be a starting point.
Walt, which website are you talking about? The one where I donated to is at the following link: http://schiffforsenate.com/
You can clearly see that the original goal was $750,000 and because of the good response it has now been raised to $850,000. Schiff has recieved a total of $762,484 thus far.
This reminds me of a New York Times front page headline back in 2006 that read: Stock Market Soars While Many are Still Homeless.
Here's another example from my hometown: The State Times and Morning Advocate: Local Man Wins 3 Million Dollar Lottery While Ex Wife Needs Kidney Transplant.
The real story was, this gentleman's wife left him. Five years later she starts having health problems. The ex husband wins a lottery and then she immediately contacts the News Paper and they run a big spin on it.
Do you see what I mean? Everyone is guilty of having their own version of a story. Myself included. But in the News Media, there always seems to be some kind of a concerted effort to steer it a certain way. That depends on what the political agenda of that particular News paper happens to be.
And now we have President Obama's News Groupies reporting: The Rate Of Job Losses Is Lessening. What? If Bush were President I guarantee you the story would have a competely different angle. It would be more like: President's Promise To Create Jobs Still Fall's Short.
The American people are sick of it. We just want the story without the twist. Just the story.But where do we go to get it? Even Fox News is guilty. Not as much as the others but they do dabble into a little bias. Thank God for the internet.
Perhaps Schiff's goal is to in fact raise one million. The more money the better. But on the website where I donated, it doesn't state that.
@ El Dorko, and the rest of you "new kids on the block."
Whether or not you were around for the Ron Paul campaign, you demonstrate a complete lack of education on the matter.
Peter Schiff raising a few hundred thousand in a day (the day began with more than $400,000) is mostly good. The polls are VERY BAD.
If you were around in 2007, we all believed the MILLION$ UPON MILLION$ guaranteed Ron Paul would win. We didn't think there was a chance any of the schlubs in the Republican party would topple him then.
Truth is, this is chump change. Even Peter Schiff is aware of this. I understand the emotions that drive you to accuse anyone not 100% cult like in absolute certainty of Peter Schiff's victory, because I've already been through it with Ron Paul.
I was gung ho to the bitter end. I gave the max amount in the bombs. I campaigned for over a year. I voted for him in the primaries, and in the general election. Other people might tell you they voted for Paul, but they're lying. Fewer people voted for Ron Paul than showed up at any one of his big rallies.
Ron Paul never had the polls. That is where the truth lies (lol).
I'm not saying Peter Schiff can't win. I'm not saying he won't win. I'm not saying he isn't the absolute best candidate. I'm saying; WAKE UP: IT WILL BE AN UP HILL STRUGGLE AND THE WORK MUST BEGIN NOW OR IT WILL FAIL.
I'm an Objectivist, so don't even get me started on trying to call me a fake Libertarian. Libertarians are watered down Objectivists.
You will not find someone more devoted to the cause as I was during the Ron Paul campaign. The total amount of people in this nation that maxed out their donations, campaigned, and voted for Paul in both the primaries and general election would fit in your house. I know dedication.
I appreciate your diligence, but please, if you didn't learn it from the Paul campaign, at least think about it now, being accusatory to every person who isn't 100% "Schiff will win by God and Country so it is written" will win no one over to you. Being abbrasive, calling your friends enemies, breaking your back to insult people will be Schiff's undoing.
Get off it. Nolan Chart is the last website on the internet you should ever come to denounce on this subject. You will find in the coming months, the true vile nature of the media.
They hate and fear Libertarians. Even a moderate objective view will stand out as flagrantly "pro-Schiff" when this is all over.
You have to get the word out. You have to get the numbers. Schiff has to campaign hard, and so do you. It will not win on the internet. The internet will be good for meetups, and "already on board" people, but it won't bring in anyone new.
"Simmons is far-and-away the front runner in the early stages of the Republican race, while Schiff has virtually no voter support at all. In other words, if Schiff does pull the trigger and commit to running, he'll be starting from ground zero in terms of popular support. Take a look at Quinnipiac's percentages of support from its three most recent polls:"
And you cite as evidence three polls, two of which were taken in April and May, before Schiff even entered the race. This is you spinning, is it not? And unnecessarily, and against a libertarian candidate. One might wonder, why? This isn't hard-nosed realism you offer, it's anti-Schiff spin.
As for Schiff's name being "included" in those polls (including the 7/23 one: well, as you may know, pollsters can get any result their clients want. They can run 30 polls and release only the one that shows candidate X in a favorable/unfavorable light. There's a video on YouTube of Frank Luntz boasting how he can produce whatever result with a poll he chooses.
The pollsters have many tricks -- I remember a Rasmussen poll during the Ron Paul campaign that claimed to show Paul's support in a certain state at something like 2%, and they claimed Paul's name was included on the poll.
Which it technically was, but callers received this recorded message: "If you support Fred Thompson, press 1. If you support Mike Huckabee, press 2. If you support John McCain, press 3. If you support Rudy Giuliani, press 4. If you support Mitt Romney, press 5. If you support another candidate, press 6." And only then, if they press 6, is Ron Paul offered as a choice. Hardly fair, but then Ron Paul's poll % is reported at 2% in that state and becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
This is how pollsters and their political clients marginalize candidates that don't play ball with the DC kleptocracy, shaping public opinion and winnowing out inconvenient candidates.
And it's what I suspect you're doing with Schiff. I might be wrong, but I doubt it.
"emotions that drive you to accuse anyone not 100% cult like in absolute certainty of Peter Schiff's victory"
"being accusatory to every person who isn't 100% "Schiff will win by God and Country so it is written"
A little overwrought, Johsua. I'm pointing out a type: the self-proclaimed libertarian who happens to live in the DC area and yet who suspiciously often manages to find reasons to be negative about unabashedly positive aspects of a libertarian candidate's campaign.
It's an effective method for marginalizing a candidate who threatens a corrupt system, and the DC system is large enough to have intellectual gatekeepers built into it who co-opt potentially dangerous political candidates and movements.
In this case, Walt Thiessen walks and talks like just that kind of duck. Again, I could be wrong -- this is the first thing of Walt's I've ever written. But for what I suspect it is, this article is well-written.
I've read more of your stuff now and there are two question I'd be interested in knowing the answer to, if you'd care to respond:
1) What is it that you do for a living? I can find out only that you are "self-employed since 1995"
2) Whatever it is that you do, are you financially advantaged by a larger federal government? I suspect so, since you told me you moved to DC only in recent years from Connecticut. It's a big country out there; why DC?
Posted By: David F. Nolan
Date: 2009-08-08 20:57:31
I don't know Walt Thiessen very well, but in my limited dealings with him I have always found him to be fair and honest. I'm not so sure about Peter Schiff. He constantly touts the fact that he foresaw the current economic meltdown, but never mentions that most people who took his investment advice lost over 50% of their money during this same period. So as far as having a deep and thorough understanding of ecomomics, Schiff falls a bit short.
It would not surprise me if, after raising a couple of million dollars for his campaign, Schiff drops out and pockets the campaign funds for his own use. This is PERFECTLY LEGAL as long as he pays income taxes on the money! And it's a rational thing to do if you're polling at under 10% in a multi-candidate race.
Am I saying that Schiff will do this? Of course not. But don't be thunderstruck if it does. Peter Schiff is mostly about making money for Peter Schiff.
"[Schiff] constantly touts the fact that he foresaw the current economic meltdown, but never mentions that most people who took his investment advice lost over 50% of their money during this same period."
False, investors whose accounts are down that much invariably only began investing with Schiff in the past 36 months. Those who were with him before saw very high returns before the recent downturn. And many of those who lost that much-touted 50% number have gained part of that back in recent months -- also, remember that the stock market as a whole lost ~50% of its value over the same period. And it isn't true that Schiff "never mentions" this -- he has addressed it extensively in print and on his radio show.
"It would not surprise me if, after raising a couple of million dollars for his campaign, Schiff drops out and pockets the campaign funds for his own use."
Schiff has publicly and repeatedly stated that if/when he drops out, all contributions will be returned to donors.
Interesting -- as with Walt Thiessen, we have here another DC libertarian who magically doesn't support a serious, principled libertarian candidate. He even randomly conjectures that Schiff will pocket donors' money and drop out of the race.
DC libertarians: intellectual wolves in sheep's clothing. Hard not to notice the pattern.
As a thought experiment, I'm going to go Google some of David F. Nolan's writings on Ron Paul's 2008 presidential campaign. If Mr. Nolan is, as seems likely, a Kochtopus faux libertarian whose true role is to co-opt and derail promising libertarian campaigns, I'll expect to find lots of "Gee, I'd love to support Ron Paul, but..." style pieces under his byline. Perhaps he even conjectures that Ron Paul may pilfer his donor's money "for his own use," as he baselessly did against Peter Schiff above.
I'll report back with my findings. I suspect we have a career intellectual mole on our hands with Mr. David F. Nolan, but I'll let you know. In the wonderfully weaselly D.C.-style words of Mr. Nolan: Am I saying David F. Nolan is a lifelong big-government mole? Of course not. But don't be thunderstruck if he is.
First off "most" of Schiff's clients did not lose 50%. Some may have. However, the clients that lost last year have gained most of it back. The Asian markets have risen 90% compared to the 25% in the U.S. Then if you compare the loss in dollar strength towards other foriegn currencies, his calls have dismantled this pathetic cheap shot!!
As for this article...I understand where Walt comes from. It will be an uphill battle. However, the reason why Ron Paul lost in the general election had a lot to do with media coverage. The Republican establishment as well as the media marginalized him and his supporters, because they already had their "good" Republican chosen. If we want Libertarian minded people in Congress, then we need to start now by giving credit where credit is due!! Walt...by living in the Beltway the past few years, you should know better than most how this game is played. So...if you are a Liberarian, then for gods sake write articles to help get Schiff elected!!! WE NEED people like him in Congress who are not afraid to call out the clowns in Washington and people who do not just spout Republican talking points. If he is not doing well in the poles...then we need to help get his message out to the people and help him get name recognition. We need to get the failed Republican establishment to heed Schiff's message! I feel that this article only continues to marginalize our efforts and message. I can only hope that moving forward the tone in Washington and the media changes. Walt...you are someone who can help make this shift for liberty happen!!
"Walt...by living in the Beltway the past few years, you should know better than most how this game is played. So...if you are a Liberarian, then for gods sake write articles to help get Schiff elected!!!"
And yet Walt doesn't do that, but rather does the opposite. Again, why? Same with Mr. Nolan -- for all the wrapping himself he does in the mantle of the word "libertarian," I can't find any articles he wrote during the Ron Paul campaign lending support to the candidate. Why is that?
He did make a $300 donation to the Paul campaign, however, which is almost one-seventh the amount that I donated to it. I guess anything less would have looked bad.
I also meant to correct Mr. Nolan's false statement that "most of the people who took [Schiff's] investment advice lost 50% of their money."
It's very strange, is it not? A co-founder of the Libertarian Party, and yet he has an almost vitriolic aversion to a serious libertarian candidate for the US senate, a candidate he appears to know little about. He's not merely neutral about Schiff; reading his post above shows any neutral observer that's he's openly and extremely hostile to Schiff.
As a former political hack many years ago working on campaigns all I can say is the most important piece of this and is absoultley correct and the key to any victory is:
The key to a dark horse winning anything is early organization. If Schiff's supporters want him to win in Connecticut, they need to build that organization right now. They need to quickly establish precinct captains everywhere in the Constitution State. They need to begin lit dropping and sign posting before the end of 2009. They need to work the voters before the big candidates kick their campaigns into gear. In other words, they need to build some serious name recognition for Schiff now...not later.
Walt Thiessen is correct. The sooner folks quit arguing about money bombs and get out on the street to campaign the sooner this revolution will be succesful.
A doorknocker working 20 hours a week with a well organized campaign in a small state like Conn. is way more critical than $. Hopefully Schiff has or will soon aquire experienced campaign operatives that set up the campaign structure. WIthout that we can raise untrolds millions and still lose.
Posted By: David F. Nolan
Date: 2009-08-09 11:08:41
Sigh. I'm now being attacked as a "Kochtopus faux libertarian." Whoever "El Dorko" is, he must go back a way, because nobody has used the term "Kochtopus" in about 20 years. (Hmmm ... initials ED. Who might that be?) And I gave a total of $500 to the RP campaign, but not all at once. And where does he get the notion that I have an "almost vitriolic aversion" to Peter Schiff? I'm pretty sure my previous posting was my first public comment on Schiff's campaign. I have no axe to grind vis-a-vis Schiff; I'd be delighted to see him in the U.S. Senate, but right now the odds are against him.
PS: If "El Dorko" does a diligent search, he should find that I have complimented Ron Paul many times over the years. I don't agree with him 100%, but he's a man of courage and integrity. That's why I contributed to his Presidential campaign. I always said that he was an extreme longshot for the Presidency ... and he was.
Posted By: David F. Nolan
Date: 2009-08-09 12:21:34
One point I forgot to address in my posting directly above. "El Dorko" claims to have contributed seven times my $300 to Ron Paul's 2008 Presidential bid. Really? How 'bout posting under your real name then, ED? Or don't you want people checking into YOUR past statements for however many years they can dig up? If you live in a place like Iran or Afghanistan, where making politically incorrect statements can get you killed, anonymous postings are simply prudent. Snide remarks posted anonymously on websites like this one are just pathetic.
I get the notion that you have "an almost vitriolic aversion to Peter Schiff" from the fact that your first public comment on Schiff's campaign, according to you, states that you would not be surprised if Schiff took his donors' money and put it to his personal use; that you're not sure if he's fair or honest; and that he's all about making money for himself.
I think these statements qualify as vitriol, especially because they're so created out of thin air; what on earth has given you the impression that Schiff might take donors' money and use it for his own personal purposes, especially since he's explicitly stated that he'd *return* the money?
Would love a link to some articles you've written supporting Ron Paul. I was unable to find any on the web. You'd think that a founder of the LP would support the most libertarian serious contender in decades, and vocally. Did you? I'd be interested to see evidence of it.
Now, I don't know any of you at all... but this discussion reminds me of just how entertaining it is to see a Republican-turned-Libertarian run into a libertarian. LOL! ;-)
Want to comment on this
article? Leave your comment here. Your email address is
required to track your comment. However, we will neither
publish your email address nor distribute it to other
organizations or persons. The only reason we might use
it would be if we needed to contact you regarding your
comment. All comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
