Florida's First Congressional Seat

[RLLD 4,230]

10 hours ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Most incumbent presidents lose the congress. Libtards are going to act like it’s some great shift. 

We cannot afford to lose congress.

Democrats have shown they will abuse every process and system within reach.  Notably, they abused the impeachment process.  I presume that they would once again recklessly abuse that process.  When in power the Democrats have demonstrated they will stop at nothing.....and ruthlessly pursue power, crushing all before them if needed.  Protecting us from the modern Democrat party is an absolute imperative. 

[Sean Mooney 1,983]

10 hours ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

Ahhh...no.  You're trying to read into something that isn't there.

A win is a win. Nobody cares by how much they won or lost by.  There are no moral victories.

Off presidential year elections are all about canary in the coal mine looks at where to spend money in future elections for both parties. No different than a strategic move of pulling Stefanik's nomination to try and keep a House seat in New York.

I do think Florida is probably a lost cause for Democrats..but the Wisconsin Supreme Court win should give them some hope.  

[EternalShinyAndChrome 4,106]

32 minutes ago, Mike Honcho said:

Didn't need to in Wisconsin. Musk helped the GOP to a 10M advantage in the most expensive judicial race ever and the Dem supported candidate won by 10 points. When you consider Wisconsin has been a toss up in the last 3 presidential elections, that's pretty tellingly. All three races show a reaction to the early moves of the administration-IMO.

That is incorrect.  Crawford's campaint spent 22 million while Schimmels had HALF that.  It's even in your own link:

Quote

Zoom in: Crawford's own campaign spent more than $22 million, while Schimel's spent almost half at more than $11 million, according to an analysis from the Brennan Center for Justice.

• Schimel was supported by groups including Musk-created America PAC, which spent more than $12 million.

For all the complaining the left does about billionaires, Crawford was backed by none other than Soros himself.  So the one takeaway we can get from this is that liberals are very okay with billionaires and the oligarchy as long it is THEIR billionaires and oligarchy.

[EternalShinyAndChrome 4,106]

28 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

Off presidential year elections are all about canary in the coal mine looks at where to spend money in future elections for both parties. No different than a strategic move of pulling Stefanik's nomination to try and keep a House seat in New York.

I do think Florida is probably a lost cause for Democrats..but the Wisconsin Supreme Court win should give them some hope.  

Meh.  The problem with this off presidential elections is that damn near nobody votes in them.  They just aren't that exciting and the takeaways from these are minimal at best.  Conservatives flaw in, in general, is that they don't flock to these off elections while liberals tend to more.  It's like this all the time.  Unless the race is "exciting", conservatives don't vote in these - to their detriment.

So, basically, what we have like 10 people voting in these things, the liberal candidate wins and then liberals proclaiming that "the tide is turning!".  

[Sean Mooney 1,983]

3 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

Meh.  The problem with this off presidential elections is that damn near nobody votes in them.  They just aren't that exciting and the takeaways from these are minimal at best.  Conservatives flaw in, in general, is that they don't flock to these off elections while liberals tend to more.  It's like this all the time.  Unless the race is "exciting", conservatives don't vote in these - to their detriment.

So, basically, what we have like 10 people voting in these things, the liberal candidate wins and then liberals proclaiming that "the tide is turning!".  

It depends.....I think in a lot of places the turnout is far more Republican based in off Presidential year elections. 

[SaintsInDome2006 441]

I don’t think the best performance by a Dem in 30 years in 2 separate Florida districts is really just a blip either, while obviously I agree a W is a W. - I saw DeSantis this morning on Fox saying that the GOPer in FL1 was a Rino & I thought that was interesting, that might be what saved him not what cost him.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,435]

3 hours ago, Mike Honcho said:

Didn't need to in Wisconsin. Musk helped the GOP to a 10M advantage in the most expensive judicial race ever and the Dem supported candidate won by 10 points. When you consider Wisconsin has been a toss up in the last 3 presidential elections, that's pretty tellingly. All three races show a reaction to the early moves of the administration-IMO.

Yes.   They maintained a 4-3 majority. Status quo. Huuuuuuge win

[Fnord 2,272]

17 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Yes.   They maintained a 4-3 majority. Status quo. Huuuuuuge win

It is. Wisconsin was one of the most gerrymandered states in the union until Crawford tilted the court. Now districts there are legal and much more representative of the population, which is pretty evenly split rep/dem. I wouldn't expect you to know that, though. Tucker probably doesn't mention it much.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,435]

4 minutes ago, Fnord said:

It is. Wisconsin was one of the most gerrymandered states in the union until Crawford tilted the court. Now districts there are legal and much more representative of the population, which is pretty evenly split rep/dem. I wouldn't expect you to know that, though. Tucker probably doesn't mention it much.

Then why did she run on redistricting if it’s so fair? Ya fockin moron. 

[Fnord 2,272]

13 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Then why did she run on redistricting if it’s so fair? Ya fockin moron. 

Because it's an issue that people care about dipshit. Wisconsinites were damn sick of the gerrymander, and don't want it to return.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,435]

12 minutes ago, Fnord said:

Because it's an issue that people care about dipshit. Wisconsinites were damn sick of the gerrymander, and don't want it to return.

She said shes going to redraw the map. Amazing you’re the one calling others out for being uninformed. 

[Engorgeous George 2,331]

On 3/22/2025 at 8:11 AM, The Real timschochet said:

I honestly think Democrats will win elections in many surprising places next year, so long as they stick to a simple message: 

1. We’re against tariffs. 
2. We will protect Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. 
 

That’s it. That’s the entire message. Stick to it they will win big. 

Will they continue defending or protecting Social Security and Medicare by enabling and not rooting out the fraud which is cankrupting the systems?

[Engorgeous George 2,331]

4 hours ago, Mike Honcho said:

Didn't need to in Wisconsin. Musk helped the GOP to a 10M advantage in the most expensive judicial race ever and the Dem supported candidate won by 10 points. When you consider Wisconsin has been a toss up in the last 3 presidential elections, that's pretty tellingly. All three races show a reaction to the early moves of the administration-IMO.

Wisconsin is always interesting.  Milwaukee and Dane County go heavily blue, the majority of the rest of the state red with a pocket or two around Janesville/Beloit and Eau Claire.  This is the state that gave us Fighting Bob LaFollette, a socialist.  Wisconsinites unite on only two matters, We love and support the Packers and we are always suspicious of FIBs.

[Fnord 2,272]

26 minutes ago, Engorgeous George said:

Wisconsin is always interesting.  Milwaukee and Dane County go heavily blue, the majority of the rest of the state red with a pocket or two around Janesville/Beloit and Eau Claire.  This is the state that gave us Fighting Bob LaFollette, a socialist.  Wisconsinites unite on only two matters, We love and support the Packers and we are always suspicious of FIBs.

There is a third unification: Booze. Never been somewhere that drinking was so enmeshed in the culture.

[Fnord 2,272]

43 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

She said shes going to redraw the map. Amazing you’re the one calling others out for being uninformed. 

Link?

Also, I'm just calling you out, nobody else.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,435]

49 minutes ago, Fnord said:

Link?

Also, I'm just calling you out, nobody else.

You need a link to her campaign promise while you act as if you are informed ? Here’s a link: My ass and your face. 

[Engorgeous George 2,331]

57 minutes ago, Fnord said:

There is a third unification: Booze. Never been somewhere that drinking was so enmeshed in the culture.

True.

[Voltaire 5,316]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/democrat-flips-florida-county-that-donald-trump-won-by-19-points/ar-AA1C8l2N?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=7b4057d0a6a64543802ff752d4fef267&ei=35

 

In his victory speech, Patronis said Tuesday's results show that $6 million cannot "overcome one simple post on social media by Donald Trump," in reference to the endorsement he got from the president.

---

That's exactly what happened ... the Dems went all out while Patronis sat on his ass, relying almost exclusively on Trump's endorsement to counteract the $6 million spent against him.

One tweet, posted by Trump, is pretty much the entirety of the effort the GOP put into this race.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,435]

Heard this guy Patronis in a few interviews through the day. Sharp guy, very energetic.  Trump and the RNC made a great choice.