democrats Archives - Page 4 of 41 - Florida Politics

Darren Soto willing to work with GOP on health care, but not on this plan

Democratic U.S. Rep. Darren Soto declared Friday that he’s willing to work with Republicans on an appropriate replacement plan for the Affordable Care Act but completely dismissed the GOP’s current proposal as no where near acceptable.

Soto, representing Florida’s Orlando-Kissimmee based 9th Congressional District,  is participating in the House of Representatives Democrats’ “National Day of Action” trying to build a grassroots opposition to Republicans plans to repeal the Affordable Care Act, also known as ObamaCare. Soto is holding a town hall meeting in Kissimmee Saturday. On Friday he participated in a telephone press conference with House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and four other Democrats.

In that call, Soto declared that the ACA has been “a smashing success” in Florida but if Republicans are going to repeal and replace he offers his service to help build an acceptable replacement plan.

“If Republicans have an alternative, show us your plan. We’re happy to work with you,” Soto said. “If not, work with us to improve the act rather than to eliminate it. We can work together on the premiums and more participation by citizens and by insurers. But a repeal without a replace would be a disaster.”

On Thursday Republicans circulated the outlines of such a plan. Soto, Pelosi and other Democrats on the conference call all declared it to be woefully inadequate to merit any support.

“This is just more of a doubling down of the extremism we’ve seen. They have not been responsive,” Soto said.

Pelosi said the plan circulating in Congress is nothing more of an outline, and she predicted that Republicans will hear from their constituents, just as Soto and the other Democrats holding town halls Saturday expect to hear from theirs, that many people have come to rely on and even like ObamaCare.

Also on the call with Pelosi and Soto were U.S. Reps Cheri Bustos of Illinois, Barbara Lee of California, Judy Chu of California, and Matt Cartwright of Pennsylvania. They each took turns offering full endorsements of the ACA and anecdotes about how it has helped individual constituents.

“It has been a smashing success in Florida,” Soto said. “We have the largest exchange of any other state. We have received more subsidies than any other state. And we’ve enrolled nearly 1.8 million Floridians. Many working families in Florida have participated in this program because employer health care has been unavailable to them. It has drastically reduced our uninsured rates.

“Our state has much to lose. But really all Americans have much to lose.”

Oscar Braynon: gun legislation is about ‘reality not philosophy’

Florida Senate Democratic Leader Oscar Braynon considers 2nd Amendment arguments to be about philosophy and he’d  much rather talk about running from house parties when shots break out or watching from behind a car while the man on the other side is shot dead.

“This is my reality,” Braynon told a room full of journalists gathered for the Associated Press’s annual Florida Legislative Planning Session in Tallahassee. “I don’t want to talk about philosophy.

“I represent people who live a life. They don’t live a philosophy,” continued the Miami Gardens Democrat. “They live a life where they have to provide for their children and keep their families safe. And that’s their reality.”

Braynon gave a prebuttle to remarks given later by Florida Agriculture Commissioner Adam Putnam talking to reporters, in which the Republican potential gubernatorial candidate spoke of protecting the rights of law-abiding gun owners in Florida.

Braynon pushed for the Democrats’ agenda, which includes Senate Bill 142 requiring safe storage of firearms, Senate Bill 170 prohibiting guns in performing arts centers, or theaters and 254 prohibiting sale of assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, and opposing open-carry and campus-carry legislation pushed by Republicans.

“These are what we believe are common-sense gun legislation,” Braynon said.

“When I talk about guns, I’m not talking about hunting. I’m not talking about this movie thing that apparently some of my colleagues think about, like Die Hard 2,” he said. “I’m talking about real, legit things that happen. I’m talking about my neighborhood. This is my reality.”

He took issue with those who called Democrats’ bills affronts to the 2nd Amendment, saying he and Democrats can support the 2nd Amendment and call for “common sense” restrictions, just as many Republicans say they support the 15th Amendment that gave African Americans the right to vote yet opposing related measures like the Voting Rights Act.

Baynon also declared a hardline stand Tuesday against Republican budget plans to cut spending and taxes. He argued that property tax cuts might give low- to middle-class families relief of just $20 a month while they see reduced services from schools, hospitals and other services that far outstrip that.

And he argued Republicans have been doing it for the full decade he’s been in the Florida Legislature always promising the economic boosts from the strategy would help everyone, but he hasn’t seen it happen.

“It has not worked. The proof is in the pudding, because 10 years later here we are again,” he said.

“I would say doing the same thing expecting new results is insanity. I am going to call it now. We are taking a caucus position as the Senate Democrats against insanity,” Braynon said.

 

Janet Cruz ready to support Richard Corcoran on Enterprise Florida

After laying out Democrats’ priorities for the House this session, Florida House Democratic Leader Janet Cruz said she would support Republican Speaker Richard Corcoran’s attacks on Enterprise Florida and VISIT Florida.

Speaking before journalists gathered for the Florida Legislative Planning Session, Cruz, of Tampa, pledged that Democrats would continue to fight for increasing funding for public education, particularly for teachers, health care coverage for low-income Floridians and support for public hospitals.

Afterward, pressed for where that money might come from, she offered to do away with corporate development incentives provided by Enterprise Florida, incentives that were vigorously defended by Gov. Rick Scott, but targeted by Speaker Corcoran for major reform, at the same conference.

“I understand the importance of attracting business, but in a good economy, do we really need to spend that money to attract businesses? Won’t they come to Florida?” Cruz challenged. “I think in a good economy these corporations find their way to Tampa without incentives.”

Cruz offered that she sees both sides on corporate incentives, but added, “we still have teachers that are some of the lowest paid in the country. We have school funding that is 50th. You know, that’s why I say we have misplaced priorities.

“Maybe we make cuts on some of the Enterprise money; maybe we start there,” Cruz said.

The priorities that she laid out are not new to Democrats. Cruz said the party and leadership have to do a better job of making a case for how the priorities would help Floridians.

“I don’t think as Democrats we’ve done a good enough job of articulating our core values have a direct impact on ensuring Florida’s families can continue to climb the economic ladder to success,” she said. “It comes down to the simple idea that we need to get more money into Floridian’s pockets.”

Those priorities include that:

— Every child deserves a quality public education. That includes re-expansion of the Bright Futures scholarship program.

— Every Floridian should have access to quality, affordable health care.

— Florida protects and preserve the environment for future generations.

— Florida creates “safe communities” where families can live without the threat of violence.

— Floridians all deserve the same equal a uniform treatment under the law.

— And “everyone deserves a fair shot to achieve their version of the American Dream.”

In question and answer, Cruz took to defending hospitals for criticism and state subsidy cuts, saying they had become like public schools and teachers, vilified by some Republicans for opposing Republican initiatives, and then cut.

“Years ago this started where we villainized teachers, and we villainized the unions that support them. Now I think that all has changed in the direction of public hospitals. Hospitals are not accustomed to being villains, but they are being villainized. You hear, ‘Oh, the hospitals are too large. They need to be privatized.’ All of this is an attempt to privatize. So we Democrats are standing up for our safety-net hospitals.”

 

DCCC puts 2018 targets on four Florida Republican Congress members

Three weeks into the 115th Congress, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has put targets on four Republican members of Congress from Florida: Brian Mast, Mario Diaz-Balart, Carlos Curbelo, and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen.

The DCCC listed those four among 59 targeted nationally in a mid-term memo circulated to various Democratic allies.

The DCCC’s rival, the National Republican Congressional Committee, scoffed.

Mast beat Democrat Randy Perkins in Florida’s 18th Congressional District in November, succeeding Democratic U.S. Rep. Patrick Murphy for that Treasure Coast seat. Diaz-Balart won his eighth term in Congress when he defeated Democrat Alina Valdez in Florida’s 25th Congressional District. Curbelo ousted Democratic incumbent U.S. Rep. Joe Garcia in Florida’s 26th Congressional District. And Ros-Lehtinen won a 14th term when she defeated Democrat Scott Fuhrman in Florida’s 27th Congressional District.

The campaigns in the 18th and 26th were among the most expensive races in Florida, with both the DCCC and the NRCC investing millions of dollars in those campaigns.

The DCCC memo says the organization is counting on the longstanding trend continuing, that the party in the White House loses significant numbers of Congressional seats in the midterm elections. The Democratic group also contends it is setting up unprecedented ground games, and predicts an unpopular President Donald Trump will fuel that effort even more.

But Mast, Diaz-Balart, Curbelo and Ros-Lehtinen?

In response statements she put out,, NRCC spokeswoman Maddie Anderson called the Mast target “delusional” and scoffed at the others, saying, “Keep on keeping on, DCCC.”

 

Bill Nelson, Democrats, unveil their $1 trillion infrastructure plan

If President Donald Trump wants to spend big on America’s infrastructure, U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson and other Democratic leaders are offering their plan: $1 trillion, with money included possibly for Florida rail, seaports, highways and Everglades restoration.

Nelson and the Democrats unveiled their “A Blueprint to Rebuild America’s Infrastructure” Tuesday afternoon, proposing $1 trillion in spending over the next ten years.

Nelson, the top Democrat on the Senate Commerce Committee and a key sponsor of the proposal, said in a news release issued by his office that, if approved, the plan would likely fund several important projects in Florida.

Specifically, Nelson said the plan includes $180 billion to improve and expand bus and rail systems, which could be used to restore Amtrak service along Florida’s Gulf Coast and extend SunRail service in Orlando. It also includes $10 billion to modernize ports and waterways, which could be used to speed up repairs being made to the Herbert Hoover Dike needed for Everglades restoration, and deepen the seaports in Jacksonville and Ft. Lauderdale to accommodate the new mega ships coming through the expanded Panama Canal, and $210 billion to fix crumbling roads and bridges.

The plan also provides, among other things, $30 billion for airport improvements, $10 billion to construct new U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs facilities and $75 billion to modernize public schools.

“Florida is growing at a rate of nearly 1,000 people per day,” Nelson stated in the release. “You can imagine the toll that’s taking on our state’s infrastructure. This is our chance to make some much-needed repairs and create millions of new jobs in the process.”

He and the Democrats also claim their plan would spur 15 million jobs in construction, and they call for specific protections for American workers and goods, with recommendations that the program have:

–  “Buy America” provisions to use American products.

–  Strong protections for workers, including Davis-Bacon prevailing wages.

–  Strengthened participation of minority- and women-owned businesses.

–  Accelerated project delivery while adhering to important environmental protections.

It also calls for “closing tax loopholes used by corporations and super- wealthy individuals to offset associated costs.”

The plan would set aside $100 billion for reconstruction of roads and bridges; $100 billion for revitalizing Main Street; $10 billion for expanding the TIGER local transportation grants program; $110 billion for rehabilitating water and sewer infrastructure; $50 billion to modernize rail; $130 billion to repair and expand transit; $200 billion for “vital infrastructure;’ $75 billion for public schools; $30 billion for airports; $10 billion for seaports and waterways; $25 billion to build “resilient communities;” $100 billion for “21st century energy infrastructure;” $10 billion to expand broadband; $20 billion for public lands and tribal infrastructure; $10 billion for  VA hospitals; and $10 billion to provide innovative financing tools.

Marco Rubio, bipartisan group of Senators, throw down gauntlet on Russia

As new allegations arise charging details of Russian interference in the American presidential campaign, Florida’s U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio joined a bipartisan group of senators to unveil a bill calling for comprehensive sanctions on Russia for cyber intrusions, aggression, and destabilizing activities.

Rubio, a Republican, was joined by Maryland Democrat Ben Cardin, Arizona Republican John McCain, New Jersey Democrat Robert Menendez, South Carolina Republican Lindsey Graham, New Hampshire Democrat Jeanne Shaheen, Minnesota Democrat Amy Klobuchar, Nebraska Republican Ben Sasse, Illinois Democrat Dick Durbin, and Ohio Republican Rob Portman in announcing the “Countering Russian Hostilities Act of 2017.”

The bill is far sweeping in its directives, including imposing specific sanctions on Russia, codifying executive orders issued by President Barack Obama, authorizing a campaign by the Department of Homeland Security to educate the public about cybersecurity, identifying Russian government-controlled media and the American companies that advertise with them, and developing campaigns to counter “fake news.”

The bill explicitly states that Russian President Vladimir Putin orchestrated an influence campaign to affect the 2016 American elections; and also addresses Russian activities in attempting to influence elections in other countries; and Russia’s invasions of Georgia and Ukraine, and its operations in Syria and elsewhere.

The move, introduced Tuesday evening, may become a Senate gauntlet throw-down to President-elect Donald Trump‘s reluctance to criticize Russia or express serious concerns about the election influence allegations. Rubio, McCain, Graham, the Democrats and many of the other senators signed on as co-sponsors already have spoken out forcefully about Russia’s activities. That criticism is reinforced by statements made by each of the co-sponsors in a news release they jointly issued, though none of them explicitly criticize Trump.

The bill had entered the Senate before new allegations emerged on CNN Tuesday evening and the internet site BuzzFeed.com published a dossier floating around Washington D.C. claiming that Russia not only gathered and leaked embarrassing and harmful intelligence on Democrat Hillary Clinton but also collected and is holding embarrassing and damaging intelligence on Trump.

“Vladimir Putin is not an ally of America, and he only understands strength, not weakness in the form of unilateral concessions. These two facts are important to remember as a new president takes office,” Rubio stated in the release. “I will continue working with our bipartisan coalition to pressure Putin and his corrupt regime until Russia changes its behavior.”

“Every American should be alarmed by Russia’s brazen attack on our democracy,” McCain stated.

“The facts are clear, and it’s time to act. America must stand united in sending a strong message to the Kremlin that this attack on the foundation our democracy will not go unpunished,” Shaheen stated.

 

Dwight Bullard elected in Gadsden County, back in state Dems race

Former state Sen. Dwight Bullard has gotten himself elected state committeeman from Gadsden County and is back in the running for chairman of the Florida Democratic Party.

Bullard, whose home turf has been Miami, where he lost a bitter re-election campaign this fall after redistricting, has a home in Gretna in Gadsden County, and now is registered to vote there, according to the Gadsden County Supervisor of Elections Office.

Tuesday evening Gadsden Democratic State Committeeman Sam Palmer resigned and Bullard was unanimously elected to replace him, according to Gadsden Democratic Chairman Willie Neal.

“I support him. I’ve known him as senator for years,” Neal said.

That opens the door to reignite Bullard’s campaign for the state party chairmanship. He had failed in his bid to qualify in Miami-Dade County earlier this month to Stephen Bittel, who formally announced Tuesday that he, too, is running for the state chairmanship.

Also in the running are Alan Clendenin, who took a similar track as Bullard to qualify as a candidate. Clendenin moved to Bradford County to get the state committeeman post there after losing election to get the job in Hillsborough County early this month. Duval County State Committeewoman Lisa King and Osceola County Democratic Party Chair Leah Carius also are in the running.

The Florida Democratic Party will elect its new chairman Jan. 14, 2017. Current Chair Allison Tant is stepping down.

Steve Schale: Florida early vote, a retrospective

It is time for one last big data piece on Florida 2016.

For about 18 hours a day over 2+ weeks, I found myself living and breathing early voting data. So now that all the data have been reported from counties, I wanted to look back at some assumptions, and compare them to the actual voting data.

Before I begin, there are five things to keep in mind:

1. Every time I talk in percentages, those percentages are relative to the two-party, i.e., Donald Trump versus Hillary Clinton numbers. I have no use or interest in playing the “what if” questions around third-party votes, so the data in here is just the two-party vote. For what it is worth, this is standard for my blogs.

2. I compiled this data over the entire month of November, often by pestering counties to provide data they don’t have on their website. Some of the data came before the final, final certified versions, so there might be exceptionally slight variances — like tens of votes in a county — from the state final counts. However, there is nothing that happened so significant to change any findings.

3. When I talk about early voting, that is both in-person and vote by mail combined, unless I specify otherwise.

4. For the sake of interpreting the data, everything that wasn’t an in-person or traditional vote by mail ballot was allocated to Election Day. So this means that there are likely provisional from in-person early, and VBM, as well as late military ballots in Election Day. I don’t think the impact of this is significant, but I’m flagging it regardless.

5. We know how people voted on Election Day, but we do not know yet who voted on Election Day. In terms of firm lessons and take-aways, some of that should wait.

And since I was wrong about the outcome, before we get started, here were some of my macro-assumptions going into Election Day.

When early voting started, I thought presidential turnout would fall about 9.2 million votes. Because of early vote turnout, and based on who was left to vote on Election Day — namely voters who voted on Election Day in 2012, I modified that projection to 9.5 million late during the second week of early voting, and assuming 3 percent of those would vote for someone else, this meant slightly over 9.2 million would vote for either Trump or Clinton.

I was assuming going into Election Day, we were at about 67-68 percent of our total turnout, and while the Democrats had a 96,000 lead among registered voters heading into Election Day, I was operating from a place that her lead was between 3-4 percent, largely due to the overwhelmingly diverse nature of the NPA vote, which would put her raw vote lead between 180-250K votes.

This meant Trump had to win Election Day, on the low-end by about 5.8 percent to upper end of 8 percent, just to break-even. Both numbers are above Mitt Romney’s Election Day win in 2012 (I can’t remember John McCain, but I suspect it is above McCain as well).

Here are two other things baked into my assumptions: Republicans had about 100,000 more “certain” voters left to vote, though when you looked at just 2012 voters, the number was about 40K.

So worst-case scenario, Democratic turnout struggled and only the certain voters turnout. the R versus D lands about even for the entire election, and the early vote strength combined with a more diverse NPA vote would carry the day. I think my final memo pegged her winning Florida by about 1.5 percent, which was about 130K votes, meaning on the more optimistic view of Clinton’s early vote lead, Trump could still win Election Day by more than Romney, and she’d still win.

Since Trump is a golfer, I described his challenge on Election Day in golf terms: a 250 yard shot over water.

So here are the toplines:

— 9.42 million Floridians cast a ballot for President. For what it is worth, 9.58 million Floridians cast a ballot, though it was only 9.3 million in the Senate race.

— 9,122,861 Floridians voted for either Trump or Clinton in 2016.

— Trump’s margin was about 113K votes, or roughly 1.2 percent out of the two-party voters.

— 69.3 percent of the vote was cast before Election Day.

— Of the VBM/early vote, Clinton won by just over 247K votes — roughly a 4 point edge (she won both VBM and early vote)

— On Election Day, Trump won by 360K, or a roughly 13 point margin over Clinton.

Toplines versus basic assumptions:

Turnout on Election Day was slightly lower than I expected, by about 80-100K votes. Given that my projection was based largely on the number of 2012 voters who had yet to vote, it was almost certainly lower because some share of 2012 Election Day Democrats didn’t show up, and, more than likely, another share voted for Trump. This is the big question I will be looking at when the state updates the final 2016 voter file.

Clinton’s nearly 250K vote lead was actually at the upper-end of my projections. Honestly, this surprised me. I suspected some of my optimism in the numbers leading up to the election was misplaced, and honestly thought as I put numbers into Excel, that we’d see she had gone into Election Day with a narrower lead. However, almost everything was landing right on target for her to win. As I get more into this, and look at some of the benchmarks I tracked throughout, you can see the pattern for my optimism going into Election Day.

However, Trump just crushed Election Day. There is no other way to look at it. And as I discussed in the first look back at the numbers, it really happened in just a handful of places: namely the Tampa and Orlando media markets. For example, his two-party vote share was 8.39 percent higher on Election Day (56.44) than Early Vote. (48.05), but in Tampa it was up 8.92 percent (51.5 percent EV, 60.42 ED), and Orlando was up 9.08 percent (48.8 percent EV, 57.88 percent ED). Less than 3 million voted for Bush or Clinton on Election Day, yet he won the day by 360K votes.

How big is that? Bush won Florida in 2004 by landslide for Florida proportions: 380K votes — out of 7.6 million cast. Trump’s Election Day margin almost matched it.

Benchmarks

For most of early voting, I tracked a variety of benchmarks, namely Hillsborough (the only county that voted for Bush and Obama both times), the I-4 corridor counties, South Florida and #Duuuval county.

So, for the sake of this exercise, let’s start there:

Hillsborough

Clinton went into Election Day with about a 29K partisan advantage among early voters, or a partisan lead of about 6.8 percent.

When the votes were cast, she carried the early voting period almost 44,000 votes, or almost 11 percent of the two-party vote. Trump won Election Day by just under 2 points, or right at 3,000 votes, so when all was done, Clinton carried the county by 41,000 votes. The final percentage margin, 6.8 percent was almost the same as Obama, and her raw vote win was about 5,000 votes larger.

The county was a little below where it should have been for turnout. Hillsborough is typically about 6. percent f the statewide vote, but it landed at 6.3 percent, largely because its Election Day share was down — only 29 percent of Hillsborough votes came on Election Day.

Long and short of it, Hillsborough could have been a little better, but that number is right at what a win for Democrats looks like.

I-4 Corridor

Hillary Clinton won the I-4 counties by almost 162K votes, but here the Trump surge on Election Day is very evident. She won these counties by almost 200,000 votes in the early/vbm phase, yet Trump won Election Day by almost 35,000 votes. Overall, Clinton won the early phase with 56.3 percent of the two-party vote, though only won 47.3 percent of the Election Day vote — a surge which exceeded his statewide average.

When you look at the Volusia and Polk numbers, you can see the seeds of how Trump won on Election Day. Compared to the state, both saw their Election Day turnout levels exceed Early Vote — with 34 percent of the Volusia vote coming on Election Day, and over 40 percent for Polk. Once fairly Democratic Volusia has been the canary in the coal mine for a few cycles — there is a reason I’ve highlighted it in blogs for years. If I was going to do qualitative research into 2016, I’d start with focus groups in Volusia.

Pinellas is a slightly different kind of animal, but his Election Day performance is probably indicative of late deciders breaking almost exclusively for Trump. Had the FBI Director not chosen to insert himself into the campaign with a week to ago, I suspect Clinton would have carried Pinellas (albeit very narrowly).

In total, 24.1 percent of the statewide vote came from these counties, of which 70.6 percent of the vote came before Election Day. Another way to look at it: while only 29.4 percent of the total vote from these counties came in on Election Day, 33.4 percent of Trumps’ vote total from these counties came in on Election Day. I suspect when Election Day voter data comes out, we will see a cratering of minority participation.

Volusia (Daytona)

Final early vote party spread: 39.6 R, 37.1 D, 23.3 NPA R + 4,302
Actual early vote spread: Trump +8.88 percent (+14,754 votes)
Actual Election Day spread: Trump +22.28 percent (+19,162 votes)
Results: Trump +33,916 (54.3-41.4 percent). In 12, Romney was +2700 (+1.15 percent)

Seminole — suburban Orlando

Final early vote party spread: 41.0 R, 35.0 D, 24.0 NPA R +10,316
Actual Early Vote spread: Clinton +1.84 percent (+2,989 votes)
Actual Election Day spread: Trump +12.36 percent (+6,518 votes)
Results: Trump +3,529 votes (48.1-46.5 percent). In 12, Romney was +13,500 (+6.5 percent)

Orange (Orlando)

Final early party spread: 45.8 D, 29.5 R, 24.7 NPA D +67,155
Actual Early Vote spread: Clinton +29.71 percent (+116,949 votes)
Actual Election Day spread: Clinton +13.49 percent (+17.729 votes)
Final spread: Clinton +134,678 votes (59.7 percent-35.4 percent). In 2012, Obama was +85,000 (+18.2 percent)

Osceola — heavy Hispanic suburban Orlando.

Final early vote party spread: 47.1 D, 26.2 R, 26.7 NPA D + 22,625
Actual Early Vote spread: Clinton +29.71 percent (+30,645 votes)
Actual Election Day spread: Clinton +13.98 percent (+4,512 votes)
Results: Clinton: +35,157 votes (60.4-30.6 percent). In 2012, Obama was roughly +27K (+24.4 percent)

Imperial Polk — between Tampa/Orlando

Final Early Vote Party Spread: 39.6 R, 39 D, 21.4 NPA R +1,085
Actual Early Vote Spread: Trump +7.55 percent (+12,424 votes)
Actual Election Day spread: Trump +25.01 percent (+27,573 votes)
Results: Trump +13.94 percent (+39,997 votes). In 2012, Romney was +19K votes (+6.8 percent)

Hillsborough (See Above)

Pinellas (Clearwater/St. Pete)

Final early vote party spread: 38.5 R, 38.2 D, 23.3 NPA D +752
Actual early vote spread: Clinton +4.58 percent (+14,460 votes)
Actual Election Day spread: Trump +12.72 percent (+19,960 votes)
Results: Trump +1.1 percent (+5,500 votes). In 2012, Obama won by about 26K votes (+5.5 percent)

South Florida

Going into Election Day, there was almost nothing that I didn’t feel good about in South Florida, and here is why: 87.7 percent of the entire 2012 election turnout voted early in Dade. In Broward, it was a respectable 81 percent. In fact, 11.9 percent of all early votes came in from Dade (should be 10.3 percent), and Broward was at 9.65 percent (should have been 8.75 percent).

And then Election Day happened. The issue here was different from I-4. Trump’s share of the two-party vote in Broward and Dade went from 32 percent to 38.7 percent, a growth of 6.7 percent, which while significant, is lower than his statewide average increase of 8.4 percent. What happened on Election Day is people didn’t vote. Statewide, 30.7 percent of the vote came on Election Day — in Broward and Dade, it was 23.2 percent. Another way of looking at it: these two counties made up 21.5 percent of early vote, and only 14.7 of Election Day

That said, these two counties both exceeded their projected share of the statewide vote, as well as set records for vote margins. Democrats cannot blame losing on Broward and Dade not doing their jobs.

On the flip side, I was concerned about Palm Beach County the entire early vote period. Even in my last memo, I called Palm Beach a “red flag” largely due to lagging turnout. While the Democratic margins were good, Palm Beach was only 5.9 percent of the statewide early vote, and it should have been 7 percent. Well it turned out on Election Day — 41.1 percent of the total Palm Beach County vote came in on Election Day, making up 9.5 percent of the total statewide vote, the biggest single jump in the state. And it was a Trump vote that showed up: after running up a 95K vote lead in the early vote, Clinton won Election Day by just over 7K.

When it boils down to it, Clinton won the county by about the same vote margin as Obama in 2012 (which was down from 08), but her vote share was down. Frankly going forward, Palm Beach is a place where Democrats need to up their game.

Palm Beach

Final early vote party spread: 47.3 D, 28.4 R, 24.3 NPA D +74,728
Actual early vote spread: Clinton +24.9 percent (+94,888 votes)
Actual Election Day spread: Clinton +2.78 (+7,383 votes)
Results: Clinton +15.1 percent (+102,271 votes). In 2012, Obama won by just over 102K (+17 percent).

Broward

Final early vote party spread: 55.4 D, 21.7 R, 22.9 NPA D +212,077
Actual early vote spread: Clinton +41.7 percent (+254,391 votes)
Actual Election Day spread: Clinton +18.6 (+37,978 votes)
Results: Clinton +34.9 percent (+292,369 votes). In 2012, Obama won by 264K votes (+34.9 percent)

Miami-Dade

Final early vote party spread: 43.9 D, 29.2 R, 26.9 NPA D +114,767
Actual early vote spread: Clinton +34.4 percent (+234,758 votes)
Actual Election Day spread: Clinton +26.7 percent (+55,389 votes)
Results: Clinton +29.4 percent (+290,147 votes). In 2012, Obama won by 208.5K votes (+23.6 percent)

#DUUUUVAL

Clinton had one job in Duval, keep it manageable. If you had given the Clinton campaign the option of spotting Trump a 20,000-vote win in Duval in exchange for both campaigns walking away, I would have urged them to take it. After all, this is a county where Bush in 04 won by 61,000 votes, and given that Trump exceeded the Bush 04 margins in most counties, running up a big number here was a real possibility.

But she did her job here, plus some. In keeping Trump’s Duval margins under 6,000 votes, she had the best showing in Duval for a presidential Democratic candidate since Jimmy Carter, and she held Trump well below the Marco Rubio numbers, who won the county by 70,000 votes. If #NeverTrump succeeded anywhere, it was in Duval.

Final early vote party spread: 42.5D, 41.1 R, 16.4 NPA D +4,279
Actual early vote spread: Clinton +1.9 percent (+5.439 votes)
Actual Election Day spread: Trump +8.9 percent (+11,407 votes)
Results: Trump +1.4 percent (+5,968 votes). In 2012, Romney won by 15K votes (+3.6 percent)

Final Thoughts

There isn’t much more to say — Clinton had the race where it needed to be, and Trump won it on Election Day.

First, one quick note on the votes before Election Day. Democrats had about 1.5 percent edge in the voters who had voted either in-person early or a vote by mail ballot, yet she won the early voting period by almost 4 percent. This was likely due to her over-performing with NPAs, given that nonwhite voters made up 37 percent of NPA voters (compared to 33 percent of partisans).

I suspect what we will see when the Election Day voter data comes out that white NPA participation was quite high, balancing out the racial makeup of the NPA voter to look more like the electorate at-large.

So where did Trump really win it? The data from the early vote/Election Day totals confirms my first glance: This was a win primarily in suburban/exurban I-4.

Here’s why.

Start with my favorite analogy, Florida as a scale. The GOP media market buckets (Pensacola, Panama City, Jacksonville and Fort Myers) and the Dem buckets (Tallahassee, Gainesville, West Palm and Miami) largely balance themselves out, and I-4 tilts it one way or the other. This year, in their core markets, Republicans did much better on Election Day than the Democrats, winning them by 188K votes, compared to the Democrats only winning theirs by 70K, carrying a margin of roughly 120K votes out of their core markets.

However, Democrats went into Election Day with a bigger margin, having crushed the Republicans in early vote, by almost 260K votes. In fact, Clinton’s 141K final margin over Trump in the core partisan markets was a few thousand votes higher than Barack Obama in 2012.

Then we get to I-4, and this time, we look at it not as just as the counties on I-4, but every county in the two media markets. Going into Election Day, I-4 was balanced, with Trump holding a 11K vote lead. But on Election Day, Trump won by 242K votes. In other words, 95.5 percent of Trump’s total margin in the Tampa and Orlando media markets came on Election Day. In total, Trump won 59 percent of the two-party vote in the Tampa and Orlando media markets on Election Day.

And of those 242K votes, 200K of that margin came from the nonurban counties in the media market, in other words. Just on Election Day.

And while it is true that Republicans always do better on Election Day, his Election Day “improvement”, particularly in the Tampa media markets, far exceeded Romney.

For example, in Pasco, his vote share was 7.69 percent higher on Election Day than in Early Vote, whereas Romney was 2.59 percent higher, or 5.1 percent greater than Romney. In Polk, he was also 5.1 percent higher, Seminole 5.1 percent, Sarasota 5.4 percent, and Pinellas 7.2 percent. We saw similar things in the outlying counties in the Palm Beach market, where in St. Lucie, his vote share was 11.1 percent higher on Election Day, a 5.2 percent increase on Romney, and in Martin County, where his Election Day improvement was 6.3 percent higher than Romney.

I could keep writing on this, but until we get actual voter data from Election Day back, there isn’t much else to add. I will do a piece on my thoughts on where the Democrats should go from here sometime in the next few weeks, but as I mentioned in my last piece, the Trump loss, at least regionally, looks a lot like the Bush win in 04 — and there is a road map for how to reverse it (see Obama).

And again, I don’t think it is as simple as Republicans had more voters left to vote, because best case scenario, that number was only about 100,000 more voters. No, this almost surely a cratering of Democratic turnout, all Election Day deciders going to Trump, and an Election Day surge contributing to the comeback.

The combination of two disliked candidates, Trump’s success at driving the narrative into the ground, and all the late-breaking issues going to Trump, it ended up being the perfect storm Nov. 8, or in Trump’s case, the perfect 3-wood over water to that green 250 yards away.

And I lied in the first sentence — I’ll be back once we have the full voter file with Election Day voters. Until then, happy holidays, unless you are a Jags fan, because we will surely all get a Gus Bradley extension for Christmas.

Americans thinking nation is divided hits all-time high, new polling shows

The number of Americans who think the nation is divided has reached an all-time high according to a new Gallup poll.

The poll found 77 percent of Americans see the country as divided, while 21 percent said the country was united.

In 2012, the last time Gallup measured perceptions of unity, 69 percent of respondents said the country was divided, with 29 percent saying American was united.

The lack of optimism is nothing new. Outside of a pair of polls shortly after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Americans have tended to perceive the country as divided.

The perception of a divided America is more intense among Democrats (83 percent) and independents (78 percent), likely due to the outcome of the presidential election, though more than two-thirds of Republicans hold the same view.

The party split was more apparent when respondents were asked whether President-elect Donald Trump would do more to unite or divide the country.

Nearly nine out of 10 Republicans think he will do more to unite the country, and 43 percent of independents felt the same. Just 12 percent of Democrats think Trump will act as a uniter, compared to 81 percent who think he will divide the country further.

Overall, 49 percent of Americans think Trump will do more to divide the country.

In 2012, 55 percent of Americans saw President Barack Obama would unite the country, and in 2004, 57 percent thought the same of former President George W. Bush.

The survey took in 1,019 responses from adults living in all 50 states and Washington D.C., and has a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.

Martin Dyckman: Hillary Clinton, Democrats must now live with futile victory, anachronism

Late on the afternoon of Oct. 8, 1966, the Florida State University football team was trailing its archrival, the University of Florida, 19 to 22. With 26 seconds remaining, FSU quarterback Gary Pajcic threw a 45-yard pass to the visitors’ end zone. Lane Fenner, a wide receiver fresh off the bench, had outraced two Florida defenders and the nearest official. Newspaper photographs clearly showed Fenner scoring the game-winning touchdown, clutching the ball with one knee on the turf a yard inside the chalk line before rolling out of bounds.

Trouble was, that’s not how field judge Doug Mosley saw it. He ruled the pass incomplete as Fenner and FSU people on the sidelines howled in protest. There was no instant replay then. Florida went home with the victory. An hour later, the photographs came out.

“I’m going to tell my boys they won the game,” said the FSU coach, Bill Peterson.

But, of course, they hadn’t. Mosley’s blown call was the reality. There was nothing for the team could do about it but determine to win the next Florida game, which they did by a score of 21-16—their first victory at Gainesville.

People still talk about “the catch.” The photo is in the state archives.

This is the second time that example has come to mind in a context far more significant than sports.

The first was 16 years ago, when Al Gore lost the Electoral College to George W. Bush despite winning the popular vote.

I telephoned Pajcic, a prominent lawyer and philanthropist at Jacksonville (he died in 2006), to ask how one copes with losing what you know you won.

You just go on, he said, and try to make the best of it.

That’s for Hillary Clinton and the Democrats to do following her futile popular vote victory, by a margin five times larger than Gore’s, undone by the same gross anachronism.

There’s a replay of sorts, but don’t expect it to change the reality. The recounts sought in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania would have to uncover massive fraud, for which there are only conspiracy theories rather than evidence.

The irony is that the Electoral College was premised on the notion of wiser people acting as surrogates for the voters, exercising their own best judgment. Enough electors presumably could do that now in states where the laws don’t bind them. But not enough will.

However, Clinton’s two-million vote margin is at least a moral victory that deprives Donald Trump of any claim to a mandate. It should oblige him to try to keep his postelection words about uniting the nation, though most of his appointments so far put that in the same category as the promises he is shedding even faster than the ones he makes to his wives.

His attorney general, who will be responsible for enforcing the civil rights laws, has spent his life opposing them.

His education secretary has spent her life trying to destroy the public schools. His senior adviser was the leading propagandist for the white supremacists and other punks now known, lamely, as the “alt right.” Trump would have everyone believe that Stephen Bannon doesn’t stand for what he was promoting. Trump can easily think that about Bannon because Trump does not seem to believe what he says himself.

It’s astonishing for him to be entertaining even the thought of the jaded Rudy Giuliani as a rival to Mitt Romney for secretary of state.

The Democrats in the Senate have a duty to resist nominees who are hostile to public education, the environment and civil rights. They have more than enough votes to filibuster and to attract that handful of Republicans who refused on principle to slink aboard Trump’s bandwagon.

They also have a duty to pursue the most ominous aspect of the election, which isn’t that Trump won but that he did it with the significant help of a hostile, dangerous foreign power.

If a Democrat were in that position, the Republican House would already be unlimbering the tumbrels of impeachment.

The Democrats need to keep after the Republicans until public opinion forces them establish a commission of inquiry into what Russia actually did to corrupt our election and what might be done about it.

It’s their duty also to keep the heat on Trump’s enormous and abundant conflicts of interest.

And, most of all, to fight like hell when Paul Ryan sets out to destroy Medicare by converting it into a voucher program. One of Trump’s promises was to protect Medicare. He should be held to that one, if nothing else.

The Congress is an imperfect representative of the people. Gerrymandering distorts the House. That every state has two senators gives inordinate power to those states that are thinly populated.

The presidency is the only true voice of the people. They gave Trump’s opponent some 2 million more votes than he got. For him to continue to act as if that doesn’t matter would set him up for a resounding defeat four years hence. Even the Electoral College more often calls it right, and the losing team often comes back.

___

Martin Dyckman is a retired associate editor of the newspaper now known as the Tampa Bay Times. He lives in suburban Asheville, North Carolina.

Show Buttons
Hide Buttons