https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/13/us/po...ction.html

This from the NY Times!

(01-15-2019 12:03 PM)bullet Wrote:  https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/13/us/po...ction.html

This from the NY Times!

Throw in the departure of the corrupt ant grossly negligent elections official in Broward , and things are looking up.

Identity politics gone wild.

Stating that "Florida is turning red" implies that Florida is a blue state, which is factually incorrect. Even the term purple state has always been a stretch for Florida. The state has had a Republican governor since 1999 and has voted Republican for US President in 7 of the last 10 elections dating to 1980.

(01-15-2019 12:17 PM)ODUsmitty Wrote:  

(01-15-2019 12:03 PM)bullet Wrote:  https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/13/us/po...ction.html

This from the NY Times!

Throw in the departure of the corrupt ant grossly negligent elections official in Broward , and things are looking up.

I'm afraid that there is an inexhaustible supply of the corrupt and negligent in Broward County. The trick there is finding an honest one.

(01-15-2019 01:09 PM)RobUCF Wrote:  Stating that "Florida is turning red" implies that Florida is a blue state, which is factually incorrect. Even the term purple state has always been a stretch for Florida. The state has had a Republican governor since 1999 and has voted Republican for US President in 7 of the last 10 elections dating to 1980.

So maybe the Dem classification of Florida as Purple has meant to them they have a chance. Maybe now they see that chance slipping away.

Which wouldn't hurt my feelings one bit.

(01-15-2019 01:23 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(01-15-2019 01:09 PM)RobUCF Wrote:  Stating that "Florida is turning red" implies that Florida is a blue state, which is factually incorrect. Even the term purple state has always been a stretch for Florida. The state has had a Republican governor since 1999 and has voted Republican for US President in 7 of the last 10 elections dating to 1980.

So maybe the Dem classification of Florida as Purple has meant to them they have a chance. Maybe now they see that chance slipping away.

Which wouldn't hurt my feelings one bit.

That would be my take on it as well. The only major change that I see coming for the next presidential election is the state voted in November to restore voting rights to over 1 million ex-felons (excluding murder and sexual offenses). Time will tell exactly how that will affect voting, but one could guess it will favor the Dems. Given that Trumps margin of victory was a little over 100,000 in Florida, if enough former felons or the 1 million vote it could definitely change things.

(01-15-2019 01:09 PM)RobUCF Wrote:  Stating that "Florida is turning red" implies that Florida is a blue state, which is factually incorrect. Even the term purple state has always been a stretch for Florida. The state has had a Republican governor since 1999 and has voted Republican for US President in 7 of the last 10 elections dating to 1980.

No, it doesn't imply that. It says it was purple. Florida has always been a battleground and had extremely close elections. Its classic purple at the federal level.

(01-15-2019 02:53 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-15-2019 01:09 PM)RobUCF Wrote:  Stating that "Florida is turning red" implies that Florida is a blue state, which is factually incorrect. Even the term purple state has always been a stretch for Florida. The state has had a Republican governor since 1999 and has voted Republican for US President in 7 of the last 10 elections dating to 1980.

No, it doesn't imply that. It says it was purple. Florida has always been a battleground and had extremely close elections. Its classic purple at the federal level.

If your definition of purple isn't based on the record of what party actually wins the state, but is based on how close the elections are then that only means that the article is pretty pointless. I can absolutely guarantee you that the next election will be close (which means by your definition it hasn't turned red), but is most likely to be won by the Republicans.

(01-15-2019 03:05 PM)RobUCF Wrote:  

(01-15-2019 02:53 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-15-2019 01:09 PM)RobUCF Wrote:  Stating that "Florida is turning red" implies that Florida is a blue state, which is factually incorrect. Even the term purple state has always been a stretch for Florida. The state has had a Republican governor since 1999 and has voted Republican for US President in 7 of the last 10 elections dating to 1980.

No, it doesn't imply that. It says it was purple. Florida has always been a battleground and had extremely close elections. Its classic purple at the federal level.

If your definition of purple isn't based on the record of what party actually wins the state, but is based on how close the elections are then that only means that the article is pretty pointless. I can absolutely guarantee you that the next election will be close (which means by your definition it hasn't turned red), but is most likely to be won by the Republicans.

Everybody but you defines Florida as purple at the federal level. While states change, both parties over the last 20 years have treated the following states as battlegrounds: New Hampshire, Virginia, Florida, Ohio, Iowa, Missouri, Colorado, Nevada

(01-15-2019 03:24 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-15-2019 03:05 PM)RobUCF Wrote:  

(01-15-2019 02:53 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-15-2019 01:09 PM)RobUCF Wrote:  Stating that "Florida is turning red" implies that Florida is a blue state, which is factually incorrect. Even the term purple state has always been a stretch for Florida. The state has had a Republican governor since 1999 and has voted Republican for US President in 7 of the last 10 elections dating to 1980.

No, it doesn't imply that. It says it was purple. Florida has always been a battleground and had extremely close elections. Its classic purple at the federal level.

If your definition of purple isn't based on the record of what party actually wins the state, but is based on how close the elections are then that only means that the article is pretty pointless. I can absolutely guarantee you that the next election will be close (which means by your definition it hasn't turned red), but is most likely to be won by the Republicans.

Everybody but you defines Florida as purple at the federal level. While states change, both parties over the last 20 years have treated the following states as battlegrounds: New Hampshire, Virginia, Florida, Ohio, Iowa, Missouri, Colorado, Nevada

I do think Beltway growth has virtually turned Virginia Blue. The battlegrounds there are for house seats mostly. I do think Florida is more Reddish than Purplish. New Hampshire is leaning blue, Iowa leans red, Colorado leans blue. Ohio, Missouri, and Nevada are the toss ups, IMO.

(01-15-2019 04:08 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-15-2019 03:24 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-15-2019 03:05 PM)RobUCF Wrote:  

(01-15-2019 02:53 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-15-2019 01:09 PM)RobUCF Wrote:  Stating that "Florida is turning red" implies that Florida is a blue state, which is factually incorrect. Even the term purple state has always been a stretch for Florida. The state has had a Republican governor since 1999 and has voted Republican for US President in 7 of the last 10 elections dating to 1980.

No, it doesn't imply that. It says it was purple. Florida has always been a battleground and had extremely close elections. Its classic purple at the federal level.

If your definition of purple isn't based on the record of what party actually wins the state, but is based on how close the elections are then that only means that the article is pretty pointless. I can absolutely guarantee you that the next election will be close (which means by your definition it hasn't turned red), but is most likely to be won by the Republicans.

Everybody but you defines Florida as purple at the federal level. While states change, both parties over the last 20 years have treated the following states as battlegrounds: New Hampshire, Virginia, Florida, Ohio, Iowa, Missouri, Colorado, Nevada

I do think Beltway growth has virtually turned Virginia Blue. The battlegrounds there are for house seats mostly. I do think Florida is more Reddish than Purplish. New Hampshire is leaning blue, Iowa leans red, Colorado leans blue. Ohio, Missouri, and Nevada are the toss ups, IMO.

Missouri is trending red to the same extent Virginia is trending blue.

(01-15-2019 04:08 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-15-2019 03:24 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-15-2019 03:05 PM)RobUCF Wrote:  

(01-15-2019 02:53 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-15-2019 01:09 PM)RobUCF Wrote:  Stating that "Florida is turning red" implies that Florida is a blue state, which is factually incorrect. Even the term purple state has always been a stretch for Florida. The state has had a Republican governor since 1999 and has voted Republican for US President in 7 of the last 10 elections dating to 1980.

No, it doesn't imply that. It says it was purple. Florida has always been a battleground and had extremely close elections. Its classic purple at the federal level.

If your definition of purple isn't based on the record of what party actually wins the state, but is based on how close the elections are then that only means that the article is pretty pointless. I can absolutely guarantee you that the next election will be close (which means by your definition it hasn't turned red), but is most likely to be won by the Republicans.

Everybody but you defines Florida as purple at the federal level. While states change, both parties over the last 20 years have treated the following states as battlegrounds: New Hampshire, Virginia, Florida, Ohio, Iowa, Missouri, Colorado, Nevada

I do think Beltway growth has virtually turned Virginia Blue. The battlegrounds there are for house seats mostly. I do think Florida is more Reddish than Purplish. New Hampshire is leaning blue, Iowa leans red, Colorado leans blue. Ohio, Missouri, and Nevada are the toss ups, IMO.

It’s interesting that Ohio is much more Red at the state level than the Federal Level.......but you are correct that at the Federal level it’s a toss-up.

Just like many other places, the state map looks like a Red Sea with Blue islands where the major cities are.

(01-15-2019 02:35 PM)RobUCF Wrote:  

(01-15-2019 01:23 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(01-15-2019 01:09 PM)RobUCF Wrote:  Stating that "Florida is turning red" implies that Florida is a blue state, which is factually incorrect. Even the term purple state has always been a stretch for Florida. The state has had a Republican governor since 1999 and has voted Republican for US President in 7 of the last 10 elections dating to 1980.

So maybe the Dem classification of Florida as Purple has meant to them they have a chance. Maybe now they see that chance slipping away.

Which wouldn't hurt my feelings one bit.

That would be my take on it as well. The only major change that I see coming for the next presidential election is the state voted in November to restore voting rights to over 1 million ex-felons (excluding murder and sexual offenses). Time will tell exactly how that will affect voting, but one could guess it will favor the Dems. Given that Trumps margin of victory was a little over 100,000 in Florida, if enough former felons or the 1 million vote it could definitely change things.

True, that felons will vote but one has to remember that it was Trump who signed that Prison Reform bill and that alone will help him get ex-con votes. It's a "who's got your back" kind of thingy.

In the new sort, where college degreed and younger voters abandon the GOP en masse, and older white voters without college degrees gravitate towards it, Florida's demographics favor the GOP.

1) Florida is really, really, really, old. And migration from places like NY is slowing, while older whites from the Midwest and the Upper South are becoming more of a factor.
2) There is minority migration, but its' primarily Hispanic, which is a traditionally low voting demographic. And some of the Hispanic population is Cuban, which is the only Hispanic subgroup to be a tossup demographic
3) Florida is not really a business center, which really tamps down its appeal to working college degreed persons.
4) Florida's population growth has shifted towards more GOP areas, such as NW Florida and the Naples area.

Florida is a lot more "Buckeye Mobile Home Park" than South Beach/Boca Condo. Over 850,000 mobile homes are registered in Florida, containing over 2 million Florida adults.

----

Florida will still be a lean GOP state for a while. Basically, if the Dems win Florida in a Presidential year, they won't need it to win. But remember, the margins are still razor thin for the GOP.

2012 - Obama won by a very small margin
2014 - Scott won by less than 1 percent.
2016 - Trump won by 1.2 percent, with 49 percent of the vote
2018 - The GOP candidates for Governor and Senate won by miniscule margins.

Basically, the GOP has had 3 cycles where they've won - barely - each time.

----

Florida hasn't behaved politically like the rest of the country because its demographics are different.