In just the latest sign that the Coakley campaign is in trouble, MoveOn.Org has launched an urgent fundraising campaign on her behalf (bold in original):
The Republicans are pulling out all the stops in the special election to fill Ted Kennedy’s seat, because if they win, they’ll be able to stall health care reform. Election Day is January 19th. Can you contribute to help Democrat Martha Coakley hold on to Senator Kennedy’s seat?
Added: MoveOn.Org wants to help save health care reform by electing Coakley, but MoveOn is against the Senate health care bill which Coakley supports! Oh, the irony.
——————————————–
Related Posts:
It’s On – Push Polling “Hate Group” Support for Brown
More Signs of Coakley Trouble
Coakley $25 Tweet A Sign of Trouble
Follow me on Twitter and Facebook
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Looking to see what the PPP polls reveal. But from the fundraising push and dirty tricks starting…. I suspect they PPP is going to be better for Scott than Rasmussen.
"hold on to Kennedy's seat"? Are you kidding me? It's not Kennedy's seat, he died, remember? It's OUR seat, the people of Massachusetts, not Washington's, not the democrats, not the SEIU's, not ACORN's, not BO's . . . it's ours, we the people of this commonwealth.
"Hold on to Kennedy's seat…"
I thought we weren't ruled by Lords or Royalty in these United States of America. If such were the case, we would have kicked those "Lords" outta here a long time ago…
Hopefully this means Soros and the PACs he controls have already contributed the maximum allowable amount.
Actually, I'm not sure that's an inconsistency. As I understand it, if Coakley loses, the only way HCR passes is if the House passes the Senate version completely "as is," thus avoiding the necessity for another cloture vote. So if MoveOn is opposed to the Senate Bill, they definitely should want MC in there so something closer to the House bill can be voted on.
It's no surprise that MoveOn's fundraising appeal focuses on the importance of Coakley's election to passage of the health care legislation. They are appealing to moonbats all over the country. I'm wondering how effective that pitch is, however, WITHIN Massachusetts.
Think aout it: Mass. already has "universal" health care with an individual mandate and subsidies for the poor and near-poor. In fact, it's the Mass. reform that serves as the model for the federal legislation under consideration. Given this, what do Mass. voters, in particular, really have to gain from passage of the Obama/Pelosi/Reid health care package? If you're a Mass. voter and you hate the 2006 state HCR, it's unlikely you want to see it enacted nationally. And if you LIKE that bill, there's still no obvious advantage to you in seeing it applied elsewhere. Supposedly, you and your family are already enjoying the "benefits" of taxpayer subsidized "universal" coverage, so how does it help you?.
This is just another reason to question what it is Coakley is really offering to voters to motivate them to get out and vote for her. She doesn't impress me as being all that warm or intelligent. She hasn't really accomplished anything in public life. She doesn't seem to have any relevant experience. If there's any particular thing she wants to achieve as senator, I don't know what it is. Honestly, the whole rationale for her candidacy seems to be that she's a Democrat and can be counted on to vote that way. Pretty thin gruel if you think about it. No wonder she's running such a quiet campaign.
Isn't there a question of tax status now that MM is explicitly endorsing and raising funds for a candidate? And does this count as an in-kind contribution from MM corporate?
"Supposedly, you and your family are already enjoying the "benefits" of taxpayer subsidized "universal" coverage, so how does it help you?."
You get to help the poor, unwashed masses of the uneducated class in spite of themselves.