Coakley Raises $351,000 Online So Far Today

by Jonathan Singer, Wed Jan 13, 2010 at 05:24:09 PM EST

So much for the notion that progressives and Democratic voters around the country aren't engaging with the Massachusetts special Senate election.

On a day when Vicki Kennedy, the widow of the late Senator Ted Kennedy (whose death prompted this special election), penned a fundraising appeal on behalf of Martha Coakley, the Democratic nominee in the race, more than $351,000 in online contributions have streamed into Coakley's campaign. While this figure is less than the $1.3 million raised in a single day earlier this week by Scott Brown, the GOP nominee in the race, the day is still young and money appears to be continuing to pour in.

[UPDATE by Jonathan]: That number is now, as of the 9:00 hour on the East coast, $457,000 and counting.

[UPDATE 2 by Jonathan]: Coakley blows past half a million dollars.

Tags: MA-Sen, Senate 2010, Massachusetts, Special Elections (all tags)

Comments

17 Comments

Sort by

permalink

Thanks for letting me know...

Some more $$$ coming her way from me!

by LordMike 2010-01-13 07:51PM | 0 recs

permalink

Screw Coakley and the other Corporate-Owned Dems

yeah, I got an email from Obama's OFA or whoever about supporting Coakley -- and replied, "Why, so you have a 60th vote to throw women under the bus, enrich the insurers, kill the Public Option, and Medicare expansion?"

I refrained from writing "Screw you, and the insurance company executive who rode in on you." But just barely.

Besides Coakley just had a big ole fundraiser where the insurance industry and Pharma gave her buckets of cash to support them over us.

Why I should be bothered, when Coakley also hasn't apparently deigned to campaign amongst us little folk until the very last minute?

by judybrowni 2010-01-13 08:41PM | 0 recs

permalink

Because Scott Brown loves women so much more

I can't tell if you're for real, or a Republican troll.This comment is that ifnorant and ridiculous.

But if you are for real, try researching the candidates' positions. I think you'd find out that Scott Brown is far more hostile to women's rights than Martha Coakley.

Big Insurance and big Pharma are funding Brown's campaign ads.

by NoFortunateSon 2010-01-13 09:29PM | 0 recs

permalink

PUMA, I remember that handle

from the primary days

by ND22 2010-01-13 10:41PM | 1 recs

permalink

Strange

I did a check of the diaries to see if they are a troll, and sure enough, it looks like there's a real person there wirred about women's reproductive rights. So why would this person seriously not be all out for Coakley who runs against a right to lifer? It makes no sense.

by NoFortunateSon 2010-01-13 11:03PM | 1 recs

permalink

RE: Strange

...and the first woman Senator for Massachusetts!

by LordMike 2010-01-14 01:48AM | 0 recs

permalink

RE: Strange

I believe Brown is pro-choice.

by orestes 2010-01-14 09:03PM | 0 recs

permalink

RE: Because Scott Brown loves women so much more

The argument that the republicans are much worse is losing its luster with a lot of angry democrats. I assume Judy is talking about supporting Coakley with funds and other assistance, not necessarily with regard to a vote. She's not alone in that sentiment.

by orestes 2010-01-14 09:07PM | 0 recs

permalink

RE: Because Scott Brown loves women so much more

It will however quickly regain it's luster once said Republicans are in power. Becasue it's not so much an arguement - it's a fact.

by vecky 2010-01-14 11:13PM | 0 recs

permalink

RE: Screw Coakley and the other Corporate-Owned Dems

Its not a good idea to shoot yourself in the foot. Brown is a corporate whore also - much more of one than Coakley. Many progressives are mad that the process is not moving forward fast enough. But if you think voting in regressives is a good idea - you are very wrong. We did that with Carter - everyone was upset because he didn't move fast enough and was surrounded by corporate people. The result was Reagan and the 30 year decline of the middle class.

by Moonwood 2010-01-15 01:34PM | 0 recs

permalink

I have been away to long

WHY is this a "close" race? WTF!?

by kevin22262 2010-01-13 11:05PM | 0 recs

permalink

RE: I have been away to long

It's a special election.

by vecky 2010-01-14 12:12AM | 1 recs

permalink

A couple of reasons

Scott Brown is a very well handled liar running a smashing campaign, and Coakley really dropped the ball the past month by not defining him earlier. It's politics 101. Define your opponent, or they will define you. He's been able to thread the needle getting teabag support and yet appealing to (angry, white) independents. It's disgusting. Moreover, Coakley's assumption that the general election would be a slam dunk was very insulting to the MA voters.

I think we'll know more in the polling towards this weekend, but my take is the race is going to be very close, and so turnout is key.

I know this may sound like shocking news, but living here, it is no surprise.

You can only have a one party rule state for so long before the repressed anger boils over. Even if he wins, and I think it is likely enough that we should all be preparing strategy for such an event, he will be 3 years and out. He can't walk that teabag/independent line in MA. He won't be an unknown anymore and Obama will be at the top of the ticket in 2012. Plus, the guy's a real turkey.

In fact, does MA have a recall law....?

by NoFortunateSon 2010-01-14 12:22AM | 1 recs

permalink

RE: A couple of reasons

You can't recall from federal offices. It's either impeachment or resignation.

by vecky 2010-01-14 12:41AM | 0 recs

permalink

Awwww,,,,

There goes that hope.

by NoFortunateSon 2010-01-14 04:11PM | 0 recs

permalink

Firedoglake is backing Brown

by Moonwood 2010-01-15 12:52PM | 0 recs

permalink

RE: Firedoglake is backing Brown

"backing" brown?

by kevin22262 2010-01-16 09:17PM | 0 recs