Chris Mitchell: Democrats, if David Jolly’s the plan, we don’t have one

Let me say it plainly: if Florida Democrats are even entertaining the idea of David Jolly as the face of our ticket in 2026, we’re not serious about winning — or rebuilding.

We’re not serious about turnout. We’re not serious about base building. And we’re definitely not serious about revitalizing the Democratic brand in a state that just posted one of its worst election results in decades.

Jolly is many things: a skilled communicator, a reformed Republican, a familiar face on cable news. But he is not the candidate we need. His potential candidacy is emblematic of everything that’s gone wrong with how Florida Democrats think about leadership.

He might be good for a sound bite, but that’s not the same as building power.

And while his rhetoric often overlaps with Democratic priorities, there’s a crucial difference between speaking our language and actually carrying our values into the political arena.

This isn’t personal. I welcome Jolly to the party and believe he can play a crucial role in shaping its direction and raising the stakes of the moment. But that role shouldn’t be as our standard-bearer or our nominee for Governor in 2026.

After all, when someone converts to a new religion, the church doesn’t let them deliver the sermon moving forward.

We’ve been here before with Charlie Crist in 2014 and again in 2022. The assumption is always the same: nominate a moderate (usually former Republican) with name ID and a safe public persona and they will help us win back independents and peel off soft GOP voters.

But that bet hasn’t paid off. In 2022, Crist lost by nearly 20 points and in 2014, he lost a winnable race with a dispirited base. In both cycles, we learned the hard way that name recognition does not equal enthusiasm — or so I thought.

We came close once, remember 2018? Andrew Gillum didn’t just win the Democratic Primary as a progressive underdog; he nearly flipped the state.

Gillum was authentic; he excited the base and brought new voters into the fold. The campaign had its challenges, internal missteps and resource mismanagement at the end (but let’s save that for X to hash out), and of course, his post-election incident complicated the story.

But at the time, his campaign made one thing undeniably clear: Energizing our base works.

When we tell a bold and authentic story, voters respond, even in a state as tough as Florida.

And let’s not forget, Gillum wasn’t supposed to win that Primary. Gwen Graham was the presumed front-runner. She was well-liked, experienced, and carrying a recognizable name. But Gillum’s authenticity and grassroots energy broke through.

Would Graham have been a strong General Election candidate? Absolutely. In fact, in full disclosure, I voted for her in that Primary.

Gillum captured the momentum and energized the base in ways we hadn’t seen in years, but Graham represented something equally important, democratic values rooted in conviction, not convenience.

Graham didn’t adopt our platform because she had to; she believed in it from the start. That distinction matters. Unlike Jolly or Crist, her record never felt like a rebranding exercise. She governed and campaigned as a Democrat because she was one, not because she needed to be one to win a primary. That’s the real takeaway here.

Even in a race where a moderate was the presumed nominee, both options, Gillum and Graham, reflected our values and excited our party in different ways.

This isn’t about relitigating Gillum versus Graham. It’s about recognizing that both demonstrated how authentic Democratic leadership, whether progressive or pragmatic, can resonate when it’s rooted in genuine conviction, not political expediency.

The important takeaway isn’t that Gillum failed; it’s that authenticity, values, and base enthusiasm matter, and they don’t have to come at the expense of electability. The idea that we must default to a former Republican to win is a false choice.

What Florida Democrats need isn’t a return to a stale centrist playbook; it’s a generational reset!

Look at the leaders who are actually winning tough fights in Florida.

— Andrew Warren, removed by DeSantis for standing up for the rule of law and didn’t back down. He became a symbol of principled resistance and a national advocate for democracy and accountability.

— Jennifer Jenkins turned a Brevard School Board seat into a national platform for truth in education and never flinched, even under personal attack.

— In Miami-Dade, Mayor Daniella Levine Cava proves that governing with values doesn’t mean sacrificing coalition-building.

— And Sen. Shevrin Jones leads with empathy and resolve, standing up for marginalized communities and showing how to govern with both strength and compassion.

They don’t just stand for the Democratic Party; they reflect what it could be. Courageous, principled, and connected to the voters we’ve been losing.

(And yes, disclaimer time; more names belong in this category, but there’s only so much space in a single post!)

These leaders do more than inspire; they offer a practical blueprint for the kind of leadership that can rally our base and rekindle trust among disillusioned Democrats and independents. They speak plainly, connect with our base deeply, and are not afraid to pick a fight when the moment calls for it.

If we want to win back voters who’ve walked away or tuned us out, we need candidates who feel like fighters for something real because they are authentic to themselves.

Since 2019, Florida Democrats have lost over 700,000 registered voters, while Republicans gained nearly 900,000. That’s not a dip, it’s a political migration of historic proportions! National trends drive some of that, but much of it is self-inflicted.

Republicans have spent years investing in local offices, such as School Boards, City Councils, and County Commissions. And then using them as launchpads for deeper engagement and power-building.

Meanwhile, we’ve chased top-of-the-ticket heroes and handed over the ground game.

We also can’t ignore the demographic shifts reshaping Florida politics. Migration patterns, especially from conservative-leaning transplants, have tilted the electorate and intensified the challenge.

Democrats need more than just better messaging; we need trusted messengers rooted in communities who speak with clarity and conviction about the future we’re fighting for.

We need candidates who can speak to disaffected young voters, marginalized communities, LGBTQ+ Floridians, and working-class voters who’ve been fed culture war nonsense instead of economic relief.

That means bold, value-driven messaging. That means organizing, not just advertising. That means meeting voters where they are and actually listening to what they care about, whether it’s insurance rates, rent hikes, abortion access, or classroom censorship. The “don’t scare the middle” strategy isn’t just playing defense; it’s surrendering the field.

We cannot win if we continue to act like our base is a liability instead of our greatest strength.

It means investing in campaigns that don’t just aim to win the top of the ticket but build a bench, train volunteers, and leave behind a stronger infrastructure. It means making room for authenticity and rejecting the myth that “safe” is always synonymous with “electable.”

We need a campaign in 2026 that feels like something different, something real. Not a pundit play, not a placeholder, and certainly not a compromise candidate for the traditional Democratic insiders.

The path forward isn’t found in MSNBC green rooms or with reformed Republicans. It’s in classrooms, courthouses, community centers, and on the doors. Leaders like Jenkins and Warren have already shown us what fighting back looks like. It’s time we stopped rewarding the polished and started investing in the courageous.

We can’t afford another rerun of 2014 or 2022. We need candidates who bring more than a résumé. They must bring a vision, a reason to believe, and a willingness to challenge not just Republicans but the risk-averse culture of Democratic politics in this state.

Florida Democrats have a choice. We can recycle the past, or we can build the future. But we can’t do both.

___