Liberal Democrats can't be blamed for their lack of enthusiasm for Martha Coakley. Some very distinguished individuals have held Ted Kennedy's old seat (e.g. John Quincy Adams, Daniel Webster, JFK), and now Massachusetts progressives are being asked replace "Lion of the Senate" with "a barn cat whose actions are based on primitive instinctual forces of political survival and savagery."
...Or to borrow words from the relentlessly progressive kids at Daily Kos, "be very afraid of wasting a senate seat, a safe Democratic senate seat from Massachusetts, on Martha Coakley."
- The scandalous Fells Acres day care case (Coakley successfully fought to keep an innocent man in jail.)
- Martha's shocking indifference toward sadistic rape (the Keith Winfield curling iron case)
- The Big Dig tunnel collapse (shameless corruption and cronyism of the very worst kind)
- Coakley's shady deal with a notorious pedophile (John Geoghan)
- The financial disclosure "mistake" in which Martha Coakley failed to list $200,000 to $250,000 in assets on her financial disclosure forms for the Senate race.
- Her failure in the Henry Louis Gates arrest in Cambridge last July
- The Menino “emailgate” affair
Progressives have very good reasons to oppose Martha Coakley, and I agree with those who say that "it would actually be tragic to see her in the senate."
Update: 22% of Massachusetts voters gave Martha Coakley very unfavorable ratings (vs. 5% very unfavorable for Scott Brown) in last night's Rasmussen poll.
Update II: Among those who are absolutely certain they will vote, Brown pulls to within two points of Coakley (Well within the margin of error, 4.5%).
Update III: Marsha's running for AG now (re-election).
More
Martha Coakley improperly spent state campaign funds to ramp up her Senate bid before Ted Kennedy died?
