2 votes

Ron Paul's Campaign Efficiently Uses Donations, Romney's Not

Is Ron Paul's campaign better with money than Mitt Romney's?
Six percent of Ron Paul’s campaign spending goes to fundraising, mainly via Internet 'money bombs.' Mitt Romney's campaign spends 23 percent of what he raises to do the same thing.
By Peter Grier, Staff writer / June 19, 2012

Ron Paul had a pretty good May, money-wise. According to his just-filed Federal Election Commission financial disclosure form he raised $1.78 million during the month, despite the fact that Mitt Romney is now the presumptive Republican presidential nominee. And Mr. Paul entered June with no listed debt and $3.28 million in the bank. That’s $800,000 more in cash on hand than he had at the end of April.

So the Texas libertarian is in decent financial shape as he heads into the summer. He’s certainly better off than, say, Newt Gingrich, whose defunct campaign still owed over $4.7 million to various vendors last time we looked.

But what’s Paul’s spending pattern? As it happens, we think where his money goes is as interesting as how much he has, if not more so. Compare Paul’s balance sheet with Mr. Romney’s, and one might come to this conclusion: Paul’s campaign is more efficiently run.
More at:

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Ron PAul spent an infinite

Ron PAul spent an infinite number of dollars for each Republican nomination he received (since he got none.) Romney spent tens of millions for each one he got (since he got one.)

an infinite number is worse than tens of millions.


I sent him all I could because I already knew this!

The secret is out!!


"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world.
Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.”
~ Margaret Mead

SteveMT's picture

Romney is top heavy with bankers, "who must be fed"....

with the best of everything, like they are used to. That makes for a big overhead and a very inefficient use of money.