Huffpo is reporting, citing WCVB and the Globe, that Martha Coakley will announce tomorrow that she is in fact running for Governor. While I’ve already chosen my candidate (Grossman) the political junkie in me loves the prospect of another open constitutional office.
Please share widely!
We can finally get rid of her at AG. I wonder who would run for that. Winslow is a solid choice on the GOP side, but I’d be intrigued by our options on the Dem side. Koutojian and Brownsberger-if they lose this primary-could be formidable. Rep. Keating (if he views it as a step up), ditto JK3. Kim Driscoll would have a much easier time doing that than running against Tierney or for Governor. Kayeem is better qualified for AG than GOV IMO. Will be interesting to say the least.
I hope not. Looking at the recent election results, I worry that a completely unknown Democrat would have around a 50-50 chance of victory against an unknown Republican. The results in the Markey election weren’t exactly heartening around here.
Bernstein on Facebook has Eldridge for SoC and Galvin for AG. I think Eldridge should run regardless…
Jamie has been saying he’ll run for SoC if Galvin moves.
…that might be a good opening for Dan Wolf. The Cape Air ethics kerfuffle shouldn’t be an issue at the federal level.
That’s a win-win in my book. I like the two of them.
Fells Acre Day Care. Wasn’t she involved in the persecution of those innocent people (IMO, of course). Didn’t the brother do years of jail time?
She went after Treasurer Tim on he was found not guilty.
She didn’t ask the Muddlesex DA to resign after letting Remy go without bail.
I don’t know much about Grossman besides he comes from a family business. I was told by Kitty that the Treasurer’s Office is responsible for the issuance of GAN’s, you know, the same funding mechanism people criticize Charlie Baker for using for the Big Dig. Should be interesting.
Absolutely none of those things or anything you’d want to count in her plus ledger has much bearing on the work a Governor does. She’s spent her life as a professional lawyer.
fact that it shows her to be dishonest, unethical, and unscrupulous when it comes to abusing government power in support of private political gain. Goof things those things aren’t an issue for a governor.
If you despise Martha Coakley over the lawyer stuff, then she’s not getting your vote. It’s the big pile of people who aren’t going to get up in arms over those things that she’s courting.
However, when she has to defend herself on the lawyer stuff, it only reinforces that she’s more of a lawyer than a leader. Fells Acres isn’t going to take her out any more than Fauxcohontas and Maryland resident took out Warren and Markey. Being an upjumped trial attorney without any real experience in governing (because the AG doesn’t govern), that’s a backbreaker. Along with Treasurer, AG’s proven a tough sell to the people of Massachusetts for gubernatorial candidates.
I wouldn’t dismiss Fells Acres, which speaks directly to how she handled a public duty, as just a distraction the way one’s heritage or where one has a house is.
I just don’t see it as something that’s going to get a lot of extra traction. It’s a bit of a dead horse and I doubt you’ll see other dems flogging it. If Coakley wins the primary, then I think Baker will try to give it a quick ramp up, but Fells Acres requires a bit of a history lesson (for those not familiar with it) and Tookie Amirault’s conviction never got overturned. The whole thing also gets tied up in how much stock do you put into a decision of the MA Parole Board. It’s a lot of work to sell it to an audience beyond those reaching for a convenient excuse not to vote for Coakley (e.g. the Fauxcahontas crowd).
Yet there’s lots of better reasons not to like Coakley – politically timid, too cozy with the party machinery, no governing experience, possibly more interested in having the job than in doing the job.
that I will not, not ever, vote for Ms. Coakely for anything, ever.
I happily donated to and voted for Senator Brown– the first time for a Republican in almost 20 years– and will happily do the same again.
In my view, there have been repeated instances, with Fells Acres being only the most egregious example– in which she was seemingly quite willing to abuse the power of the government for political purposes. In the Fells Acres matter, she seemed quite content to maintain the incarceration of innocent people in order to spare Tom Reilly political embarassment.
I will never understand how the Democratic Party can support a candidate such as this and then be mystified when they find that people are losing faith and trust in government.
By splitting the Moderate Democrat Establishment Vote with Grossman
and the Moderate/Women vote with Juliette Kayyem, male progressives like Curtatone, Capuano and maybe Berwick will clearly benefit.
A more conservative outsider like Avellone could benefit to, but I don’t see him getting on the ballot, no chance no how.
I really believe Grossman is the the right of Patrick on Revenue. Ask him about Invest in Our Communities, The Patrick’s Revenue Proposal or Single Payer, and see what he says.
You need look no further than the Special US Senate Dem Primary in 2010 to get the fact that a crowded primary benefits Coakley. Capuano’s been there and done that and I hope he decides to stay in his Congressional seat and work to get the US House back by 2016.
in some quarters.
It would be the consolation bracket of Massachusetts politics.
She really should be running for Lt. Governor.
AG now that Coakley is in.