Repeal and Replace Amend 2 Now

Florida voters need to remove the term Prop 8 from their heads. It's gone now and it never affected them in the first place.

In all the excitement about rulings this week, entirely too much attention has been placed on Prop 8. Certainly, it's a big deal that same-sex marriage is legal in the largest state of the union, but more most of America, it is still against the law. And many Florida liberals have appeared startlingly unaware for years that on the same day California passed a law dashing marriage equality in one Sunshine State, Florida voters were preemptively discriminating against homosexuals here in the other one.

I imagine most of the readers on this obscure blog understand the landmark court decisions this week didn't legalize gay marriage nationwide. It's much more complicated. If you happen to live in one of a dozen states where court rulings, legislative action or voter referendum has come down on the side of human rights, your fight is over. But for Florida and 37 other states, the fight has only just begun.

Here, we need to do two things, and they won't be easy.

Hyperbole, Lunacy and Marco Rubio

I like to think this is just the primary season rearing its head and that the divisiveness of elections is simply an element of democracy that unavoidably comes and goes, but the extraordinary hyperbole being employed by conservatives to describe one of the most lackluster presidential administrations of the last 50 years is starting to get under my skin.

Today seems a good day to discuss it, based on remarks made by Marco Rubio, the distinguished senator from Florida, at the CPAC spectacle. Via The Christian Science Monitor:

---
“Unlike any leader in modern American history, we are led today by a president that has decided to pit Americans against each other,” Rubio thundered. “The basic argument he is making to our nation is that the reason why some of us are worse off than we used to be is because other people are doing too well. That the only way for some of us to do better is for some people to do worse.”
---

Having heard Rubio's voice before, I can't help but wonder how exactly it "thundered," but that's beside the point. What really gets me more and more each day is the mischaracterization of Barack Obama as some type of radical president. If I may speak for everyone in America whose philosophy tilts even slightly to the left, I would say to that "Ha!"

Since Rubio has been as plagued by the real nutty band of his party as much as Obama, let's just assume he is making reference to those polite disagreements in policy which Newt Gingrich likes to call socialist.

One is that Barack Obama wants the rich to pay their fair share in taxes. This is horrifying to the very rich, who have suggested it would prevent them from creating jobs. Never mind that the Great Recession began during a period of unprecedented tax relief for the top 1 percent, this beef with Obama ignores a significant face. While Obama ran upon and has stumped for a more fair tax program, he hasn't done jack about it. Not when Democrats controlled the House, not when a filibuster-proof majority was in the Senate, never!

As someone who is utterly confused how such a simple move as returning tax rates to mid-1990s levels would set this country somewhere it can't come back from (unless we ever, you know, elect a Republican president for even a year), I find it somewhat laughable that Rubio and his GOP consorts even find this abominable aspect of Obama's as anything beyond an empty threat. To recap, everything the Republicans fear about Obama's fiscal policies is utter exaggeration, and it's all crap anyways beyond Obama has never followed through even a little bit.

The same can be said for most any part of that crazy leftist agenda which Obama supposedly crams down our throats against our will. ObamaCare? A watered-down series of reforms which doesn't even contain a public option. An appeasement foreign policy? Right, except that it has been nothing but a continuation of Bush's foreign policy, the exact policies which made us the bane of the entire rest of the world.

So why is it that the Republicans fight so hard against this paper dragon of a president? I would like to offer my own theory.

It's because they are losing.

I know that comment can come bite me in the ass, and even working on the presumption this election is Obama's to lose, it is entirely possible he will. But the truth is that those Republicans who have found electoral success can see clearly that the party is not on that path for 2012.

Rubio's remarks today were eaten up by CPAC goers like a Roman emperor's commands to his bloodthirsty forces. This type of speech is called "red meat" for a reason. But what is being sold to primary voters right now is a false reality, and one which independent voters won't buy so easily.

This president is not a communist. He isn't anti-Christian. He isn't anti-business. He isn't anti-freedom. How do we know this? Because nothing has come of any of having a man with such an agenda in the White House for four years. The folks on the right are selling a lie. The country is not falling apart, and the fact a Super Bowl ad saying nothing more than that America can weather a recession shows how nefarious the motives of the Republicans are.

But America is strong, and it is strong enough to stand up to these lies and smart enough to see through this crap.

What Problem?

Politico has a story today entitled "Obama's Florida 2012 Problem," which is kind of silly title. The article is fine, I suppose, but the treatment of the story makes the mistake that folks in Washington always tend toward, assuming the last election is indicative of the next one.

Obama won Florida in 2008, but he won a lot of places. It was a landslide election. To suggest he may not see exactly the same results this November is lazy analysis. Of course he won't. He is in a completely different station, both professionally and in the course of time. An incumbent president will have to run a different campaign than a candidate looking to challenge the party in control, and that means we have a very different race on our hands from top to bottom. Consider a flip on the old proverb, to do things differently and expect the same results could be a second definition of insanity.

Florida was a swing state in 2008, and it will be again in 2012. It was also a swing state in 2004, 2000, 1996 and 1992. This is fourth most populous state in the union, and the only one that will actually be up for grabs this go-round.

All that is to say, Big Deal! Politico thinks the fact Florida is a battleground is a problem for the president? If so, it has been a problem for every president of the past 40 years. With the sole of exception of Ronald Reagan, who was reelected by an historic electoral college margin in 1984, every sitting president since Gerald Ford has found themselves worrying about winning Florida. The last two presidents— Bill Clinton and George W. Bush— both increased voter support in the states substantially during their reelection efforts, so there is some reason to believe this state warms to incumbents more than Washington observers realize. But no matter what, presidential candidates of either party, incumbent or not, have to campaign hard in Florida to win. Obama will be no exception.

A lot of people are fascinated with the prospect of a Marco Rubio vice presidential effect, but the more I think about it, the more laughable the constant conversation seems to me. It may be why Rubio has in past been dismissive of VP talks.

First off, the idea party activists can decide the vice president before they even select a nominee is a misunderstanding of the process. This is a personal decision made by a man running for president, and he doesn't want to succomb to public pressure. Bill Clinton once noted this is a presidential decision the nominee gets to make before they are elected president. If anything, the outcry for Rubio is probably a hindrance on his chances of actually getting the nod.

But let's assume, for the sake of argument, that Rubio does get selected as a running mate. Will it help the Republicans in November? Of course, but it won't take Florida off the table. Rubio, who barely won a majority of votes in the state in 2010 and only got elected after a bizarre series of events unlikely to happen again, does not take Florida off the list of swing states. Recall that Jeb Bush, who was widely popular at the time, could not help his brother win Florida in 2000 without an assist from the Supreme Court.

Rubio is actually better off personally sticking out a full term in the Senate, then running for president in 2016, or even 2020. If he avoids this campaign, he runs less risk of having the loser stink that plagues Sarah Palin and other running mates blamed (probably unfairly) for taking a losing ticket down.

So will Obama have to fight for Florida? Of course. That's why he's at Disney today, more than any other reason. But can he still win? Yes. Can he beat a Romney-Rubio or Gingrich-Rubio ticket? Yes. Is he still in a good position to be re-elected regardless of what happens in Florida? Yes.

So what's the problem?

What To Make of Cain

I have been trying last night to figure what the Herman Cain win in Florida means, since I feel like I really should say something about it. But honestly, the biggest thing I see is that this Presidency 5 poll turned out as worthless as Jon Huntsman and Newt Gingrich said it would be.

Rick Scott predicted beforehand that the winner of the straw poll would become the nominee. But that was when he figured Rick Perry would win, and it seems he has been looking for a good reason to endorse Rick Perry (please, oh please make yourself an albatross around that Texan's neck). Since Herman Cain won, though, I think anyone would be foolish to say that guarantees the nomination. Rather, this thing just gives Cain enough steam to keep his campaign doors open for a few extra weeks.

In truth, none of this is going to matter once the real primaries and caucuses begin. The greatest demonstration of the polls meaninglessness is the rapid implosion of Michele Bachmann two weeks after winning the Iowa straw poll. Will Cain similarly implode? He seems less gaffe-prone, so probably not, but he also seems highly unlikely to become the nominee.

I tend to think Cain is running for running mate right now, but willingly concede it is silly to ever run for running mate. That is ultimately a decision of the nominee. But one lasting impact of this straw poll win is a demonstration Cain can appeal to Florida voters. Since many Republican pundits have been anxious to preemptively name Marco Rubio as the running mate, this likely takes a huge argument in favor of Rubio (that he would help win Florida) off the scales should it come down to a choice between Cain and Rubio.

Of course, that brings to mind what seems to this liberal observer what may be the best take-away. Between the birthers and the more-rabid-than-justified rantings of the tea party, it has seemed obvious in the last few years that racism, at least passive racism, was more of a problem for Obama than anyone wanted to say out loud immediately after his election. But as a black man wins the Florida straw poll, the first such poll held in the South and a poll which was only supported by the most conservative and most involved voters, it does seem the most active Republicans are anxious to make racism a part of the past. Is there a little tokenism at play? Likely, but then there is some place for that. Generally, it seems that Cain won because the party is hungry for a CEO with private sector credentials instead of a politician with a government resume.

I don't want to suggest too much should be read into a truly insignificant poll. This isn't a bellweather on where the state is headed next November. It isn't an indicator who the Republican nominee would be. But it offers a taste of what Republican party regulars in Florida want out of a nominee. And they don't want to play it safe with a mealy-mouthed Romney or play to the rabid base with a tough-talkin' extra-dumb Perry.

And that likely means this field is still more wide open than it appeared over the last two weeks.

Why Republicans Should Hate Birthers

No, it isn't because they are crazy people who embarrass the entire party. You can't ever really shake that type of thing. Like the wasps that keep forming hives on my awning, destroying one nest doesn't stop the next one from forming a week later.

The big problem with ignoring birthers is that they won't stop with attacking a president you don't like very much for reasons that have nothing to do with his place of birth. Florida's own Sen. Marco Rubio is learning about that now. Via the Daily Caller:

---
There is already a movement afoot (led by some on the fringe) to disqualify him from serving as president (which would presumably disqualify him from serving as vice president). That’s right — some are arguing that Rubio is not eligible because he is not a “natural born citizen.”

Here’s how the logic works (according to World Net Daily’s Joe Kovacs): “While the Constitution does not define ‘natural-born citizen,’ there is strong evidence that the Founding Fathers understood it to mean someone born of two American citizens.”

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/08/24/coming-soon-rubio-birthers/#ixzz1VxZAMLqS
---

Unlike predecessor Mel Martinez, Rubio was actually born on American soil, so when people ask Rubio about his ambitions for the presidency or vice presidency, he can't so easily dismiss the suggestion. But birthers who have expended so much energy trying to discredit Obama's eligibility are now eating conservatives just to make a point.

World Net Daily, a guilty pleasure of mine when I really want to laugh at the stupidest people on the other side of the aisle, has never been content to simply allege Obama's birth documentation is all a bunch of forgeries. They have also regularly planted what you would think was a non issue to them, that even if the docs are real, Obama is still ineligible because his father was not American. And since Rubio is the son of immigrants, this warped logic leads to his ineligibility as well.

It is interesting to see these people cling to the notion that our founding fathers, who revolted and established a government with no monarchy, that the lineage of leaders would be of such importance to determining someone's eligibility for the White House. But I digress.

Rubio isn't the first conservative the birthers have targeted just to make a point. Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, once on the gossip list as a possible presidential contender, has also suffered because of birther zeal. (Of note, that link goes to a site which asks what Rubio, Jindal and Obama have in common. I would suggest an unlisted similarity is that all have skin a good bit darker than the poster.)

Of course, most of America long ago determined birthers were nuts. But enough members of the Republican voter base fall into that category that many GOP leaders have played too nice. Back when birther zeal was at its highest pitch, John Boehner was refusing to criticize birthers. And a number of members of Congress, including Florida's Bill Posey, have coddled or endorsed the birther position.

Short-term, this is bad news for Marco Rubio, and long-term, this is terrible news for the GOP. Birthers make it very difficult for people of color to rise to prominence in the Republican party, even as party leaders desperately seek for stars that provide diversity. While I am tempted to revel in the irony, this is also bad for the nation as a whole. When minorities, regardless of their personal values and philosophies, can only find electoral success in one party of a two-party government, and only get elected from gerrymandered districts, that limits minorities on a grand scale, which is bad news all around.

While I find many of his positions deplorable, Rubio deserves respect for beating the odds and becoming a leader of his party despite history and demographics being stacked against him. The recent assault from birthers should incite him to take a vocal and high-profile stance against this racist-driven movement within the conservative ranks. Honestly, it is a stance Republican leaders should have taken a long time ago.

Rubio Staying Put

Sorry Tea Partiers. Marco Rubio isn't ready to ditch his new job yet. At least that is what he told ABC News:

---
"I am not running for president in 2012."
---

Exciting stuff.

Of course, this interview makes a lot of what I expected to be an easy-to-predict approach to his new job. Rubio is playing the role of junior Senator from Florida. Shock!

The tease also makes a big deal that Rubio won't rule out running for VP. Well, of course not. But let me note that you don't run for vice president. Your party's nominee appoints you to that spot on the ballot. And until we know who the Republican nominee for president in 2012 is going to be, speculation on this is nuts.

Do We Save Or Deny the Everglades

For those wondering why so little has appeared on this blog the last week, I got to spend most of last week in the Everglades chaperoning a class camping trip with my son. It was a great experience all around, but I wanted to share some political observations, and mirror those with the sad political reality we live in here in the Sunshine State.

Climate change is so very real. Any fool official who believes otherwise should spend a few days sleeping in the Everglades themselves. Perhaps it is easy to believe there are no problems with our water supply as long as the water still turns off in the Governor's mansion, but it was abundantly clear as we slogged through the slough of the Big Cypress National Preserve. The ranger who led us through our slog told us water levels had dropped about a foot in a week from the last time she was in the same part of the marsh. That's an astonishing rate.

Indeed, this is the driest year for the Everglades in the past 80 years. It is throwing the wildlife off terribly, with apple snails laying their eggs so far above the water marks the babies are unlikely to hatch (think about that pro-lifers). More water ought to be released by water districts into the Glades to help keep them wet, but that is only a short-term answer. Really, there needs to be a greater urgency placed on restoration projects to divert more natural waterflow back into the Glades. Since the marshes today are only between 10 and 20 percent the size they were a century ago, that really shouldn't be such a sacrifice for developed Florida to make.

Sadly, Florida has not been electing leaders of late who even believe mankind has had any effect on the environment. Gov. Rick Scott made it very clear early in the election cycle that he does not believe in climate change. Sen. Marco Rubio believes the same way. In fact, none of the Republicans elected to the US Senate last year believe in climate change.

It has become an ideological position to say "I don't believe in global warming." Politicians spout it as if proving they figured out Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy weren't real (spoiler alert!). It feeds into the stance that liberals are all liars who only secretly want to fund the multi-million industry that is promoting the global warming hoax. Not that the multi-billion industry that is destroying the environment has any reason to cook the numbers, but hey, they are good people, and the rangers leading school groups through the Everglades are obviously part of some left-wing conspiracy.

It astounds me how much traction denying global warming has found among people with no financial stake in denying global warming. But the term is admittedly bad branding. While not inaccurate (the earth has consistently risen in its global temperature year after year), it focuses attention on one narrow part of the problem and gives the deniers too great an opportunity to cling to their disbelief every time it gets cold enough to put on a coat.

But to deny mankind has had any effect on the environment? That is just dangerous, foolish and uneducated. I do not believe Rubio, Scott and their ilk are near as stupid as they would have me believe, so that leaves simply that they are sacrificing the well-being of Florida to satisfy big donors and score cheap political points with the knuckle-dragging crowd who try to disprove evolution by acting in ways so moronic it makes one wonder how the survival of the fittest could grant them immunity from harm.

Let me repeat, this is the driest season the Everglades has seen in 80 years. The water levels continue to drop year after year. There is no dispute - none - that this is a result of anything besides mankind's effect on the environment. And those who believe the environment is worth saving are ever to have any success at all in the political arena, something in messaging needs to change.

I do not know why every politician looking to nullify the Republican Party's successes isn't filming spots in the Everglades right now. I don't know why we don't see political advertisements quoting NASA astronauts explaining that water levels worldwide are going down at the same levels we see in Florida, and that they can see the change as the ride in the shuttles Republicans so badly want to keep in orbit. I don't know why campaign spots do not park rangers as frequently as they do law enforcement officers and television celebrities.

But for those living in Florida, the evidence of climate change is visible in every inch of the Everglades. And to let politicians who do not believe in it win the political discourse of today is evidence that we are all doomed.

Rubio Part of CPAC Boycott

Not that it has anything to do with a gay group being there. But Marco Rubio is sitting out the right-wing convention that made him a star.

Roll Call is reporting that Rubio will skip CPAC this year. Which is funny, since the American Conservative Union still has the senator's picture on its banner ads. In case it "disappears," here it is.

Readers of this blog probably notice Allen West also appears on the banner ad, and for now, it appears he is still set to speak at the event.

This whole CPAC boycott is just amusing to watch for liberals. The notion the tea party, apparently unsatiated by simply devouring the Republican, is apparently eating itself now just serves up a side of irony for spectators to enjoy.

But let's see how a little bit of perceived homophobia treats a Senator who hails from South Florida. I suspect America is moving much faster to the left on gay rights issues than many of these wingers realize, and Rubio is following the tea-partiers toward certain doom.

I thin more savvy politicians realize this. Sarah Palin, who seemed to Twitter-flirt with supporting a Don't Ask Don't Tell repeal earlier this month, will attend CPAC this year, despite NOT appearing on that banner ad above. Update: Palin has now declined a keynote speaker spot, but SarahPAC will still be at the event.

The GOP, which is supposed to be the party of personal freedom, really needs to find its footing on gay issues. But if this CPAC brouhaha is any sign, the party as a whole seems to be moving closer to the party-of-hate brand than it is away from it.

Dear Tea Party. It Was Fun, But...

Dear Tea Party,

I don't know how to say this, but I don't think I can continue our relationship at this point in my life. I wanted to tell you in person, but didn't have the courage to attend your caucus, so I have to say goodbye here.

It isn't you. Heck, you supported me when no one else thought I would amount to anything. Back when Senate Republicans were ignoring me, you held me up, and kept alive a campaign which by all convention accounts had no right to exist. Even when everybody seemed to like Charlie Crist more than me, you saw something special in me. Someone who wouldn't "listen to all sides," but would run on the right and against any and everything the Obama White House ever proposed.

And boy did we run. We had some great times: driving Crist from the party, comparing Obama's policies to Communist Cuba, and of course, winning the election.

But right now, I need a little 'Me' time. I just got to Washington, and it turns out you guys aren't nearly as popular in the beltway as you were on the campaign trail. In fact, people here think you are a little weird and scary. I need to make new friends now, and frankly, having you guys hanging around all the time is kind of bringing me down.

Let's not pretend things have been perfect. You really put me on the spot about that whole Arizona law. My folks still think that was really uncool, by the way. It has been obvious since November that this wasn't going to work out. I can't govern as an extremist. I'm a Senator now, and that means I have to work with people on both sides of the aisle. And I run statewide in a purple state. The whole tea party mantel may have worked in a wave year, but I have a future to think about. Does anyone really think people will care about a tea party caucus in 2016?

So like Fergie would say, I've got to get a move on with my life. I've got to be a big Senator now, and big Senators don't cry. But I hope we can still be friends, especially if someone asks me to run for vice president in two years. I don't want things to be too strange when we run into each other at political party events. And even though I know I am hurting you now, and have only been in office less than a month, I hope this doesn't discourage you from sending me checks.

With love and respect (but from a safe political distance), I tell you goodbye.

Sen. Marco Rubio,
The Distinguished Gentleman from Florida

Hypocrisy on Cuban Policy

Whenever any change in U.S. Policy is considered regarding Cuba, we as a nation must endure the same hypocritical moralizing from extremists. Castro is a terrible ruler. The Castros treat political prisoners badly. We can't appease a corrupt regime.

A round of such inanity was fired this week because President Obama was easing travel restrictions for Americans who want to go to Cuba. This is no bold move, mind you. There is still an embargo on Cuba. We still apply the bizarre wet foot-dry-foot policy for refugees. But now certain organized and authorized missionary and school groups, in licensed charter flights, can travel there, and non-family members can send $500 remittances to people there.

This has been labeled by Fox News as a slap in the face of political prisoners, by Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen as an undermining of foreign policy and security objectives and by Sen. Marco Rubio as an "unthinkable" enrichment of a totalitarian regime.

Now, let me make clear I do not think Cuba is better off for the fact Fidel Castro was ever born. The accusations against him, while typically relayed in a histrionic fashion, are true. The regime has historically been intolerant of dissent and has done more to disempower people living on the island than it has ever done to empower them.

So why do I find such objections regarding Obama's policies so offensive? Because so little regard is shown with similar despots around the world.

Ros-Lehtinen, now the chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, proudly boasted her her credential as a hawk to the St. Petersburg Times, and noted her relentless support of Israel, a nation hated everywhere but America for its ethnic segregation policies and unapologetic smothering of dissenting voices. She has also continued to support propping up a corrupt administration in Afghanistan.

Rubio, while far newer to the foreign policy debate in Washington, just returned from a trip to Afghanistan where he said supporting the regime there was a top priority so that denizens don't see the "bad guys" back in power. As if the drug-peddling, vote-rigging administration of Hamid Karzai is the pinnacle of good leadership. On the campaign trail last year, he suggested America wasn't propping Israel up enough.

It is amazing to me that fiscal conservatives would want America acting as policeman for every wicked regime in the world, but if that is the stand they want to take fine. That said, you cannot scream full-throated about the evils of the Castro regime while propping up governments who are far more corrupt and guilty of more heinous human right violations.

And then there is America's alleged ongoing abuse of its foreign prisoners. In Cuba.

Rubio opposes using the American court process to bring those prisoners to justice and favors military tribunals conducted in a country where American civilians aren't allowed to travel. Ros-Lehtinen went further last year and said the administration it was a waste of taxpayer dollars to provide human treatment to Guantanamo prisoners. "It is time for the president to focus on the security and economic needs of the American people, rather than on the needs of those dangerous extremists who seek to do us harm," she said in a statement last February.

Every politician says the endgame of the Cuban embargo is to force Cuba to be a humane regime, yet they support policies which are inhumane on their face, both for our more questionable allies abroad and for our own military if the mood fits. Even though the Raul Castro regime has been far less onerous than Fidel, the rhetoric of American politicians hasn't changed at all.

If we truly want to end such practices in Cuba, we should start with our own actions there.

Don't Expect Nelson-Rubio 'Clash' to Last

This is the sort of headline that will make conservatives giggle with glee, but I expect when things really get moving that Marco Rubio will do little to stop Sen. Bill Nelson from bringing bacon back to Florida.

The headline comes from the Daily Caller: "Rubio, Nelson Already Clash Over Earmarks." But the article simply alludes to statements made on the Hill by the Senator-elect, after a meeting with the senior senator, but Nelson isn't quoted at all. My guess is there is no abnormal tension between these two men. Basic politics will drive them to different public positions on this issue, but neither wants Florida, a state which historically sees far few federal dollars come back compared to the amount which go out, to receive less than its fair share.

It is good politics for Rubio to oppose earmarks. Everyone loves a good government waste story about a $600 toilet seat or a study on the flow of ketchup. That is why Rubio has gone so far as to promise co-sponsorship of a Jim DeMint ban on the practice of barreling pork.

But the truth is, earmarks constitute a tiny part of the federal budget, about one-fifth of one percent according to this ABC report. So it actually will do very little in terms of deficit reduction, or even the feel-good "cut government spending" rhetoric that right-of-center voters eat up like leftover Halloween candy. Plus, the Republicans in the Senate are still in the minority.

Nelson, of course, is not going to pick this cycle of all cycles to abandon Florida earmarks. He is up for re-election in 2012, and may be playing ball in as nasty an environment as he's had to play since 2000. The man wants every project funded, every ribbon cut, every roadway opened to stand as a "Re-Elect Bill Nelson" billboard in the minds of the voters who benefit the most.

The question then is whether Rubio will do anything to undermine Nelson. Of course, there is a old-school rule that incumbents in Florida's Congressional delegation won't campaign on behalf of efforts to unseat other incumbents. Of course, Bill Nelson may be more responsible than anyone for that pact falling apart. Ric Keller in 2002 was expressing irritation the senator was donating money to potential challengers for his seat, and by 2008, Nelson was openly campaigning to unseat GOP House members in Florida.

So maybe Rubio will join efforts to replace Nelson with a Republican, but I doubt standing in the way of transportation projects and performing arts hall grants will be his approach. This little get-together on the Hill is no sign of a deep clash. Rubio has been in legislative bodies before. He is smart enough to know not to pick a fight with a more powerful senator representing his same constituency before even getting sworn in.

FL-Sen: Meek-Rubio-Crist

Update 2: Rubio is on TV now claiming victory. I'm curious to know if he broke 50 or not, but that's about all left to learn about this disaster.

Update: Right now it seems like Marco Rubio is going to win with more than 50 percent of the vote. If that sticks, I guess the great Crist or Meek debate is moot.

---

If you trust the polls, this is all but over. Rubio will win in a blowout, with Crist in second and Meek in third.

I have made my feelings abundantly known. There will be no deathbed conversion for me. I vote proudly for Meek.

And while it gives me no pleasure to see Marco Rubio prep for the Senate, I revel in watching Crist's poor strategizing and constant double-crossing of values blow up in his face.

Sorry, Charlie.

Once Again, Why Meek Must Continue On

Based on the reporting being done all over the state and in Washington, D.C., it now seems apparent to me that Bill Clinton did at least broach the topic of Meek dropping out, and that Meek absolutely will not do it.

I have spent much of the last six months trying to tell progressives why they should vote for Meek and ignore Charlie Crist. I don't think I have been nearly successful enough in that endeavor, but it is clear to me now the major focus needs to be on the Democratic establishment demonstrating its support for Meek. I will lay out my reasoning below.

1. Kendrick Meek is the qualified nominee. He won a difficult and sometimes uncertain primary against Jeff Greene, and a lot of supporters weathered some heavy criticism at the time. The battle was viewed by many, including myself, felt the credibility of all Florida Democrats was on the line. The better candidate won out, and he has an obligation to carry the standard through election day.

2. This will hurt the entire party with black voters. I have argued in recent days how frustrating it is to see national Democrats rally around the very fresh-faced Scott McAdams in a three-way race in Alaska. It has occurred to me, probably wrongly, that the "demographic appeal" of one of those men may be playing into the choices. Most low-info voters don't follow all the national blogs, but I guarantee it will suppress black turnout in Florida if Democratic leaders turn their back on the first credible candidate for the Senate from Florida since reconstruction. Now, I am by no means saying, as Smooth Like Remy once said of a Kos interpretation, that "the only use Democrats have for Meek is to get the n--- out to vote for Alex Sink." Far from it. But betraying the entire African-American community in Florida isn't good for the Democrats short-term or long-term.

3. Coattails. Some may argue that with Meek polling at 15 that this doesn't matter much. But the Senate race is the TOP item on the ballot this year. There are voters who come out specifically for Meek, and almost all of them are likely to vote for Democrats in every other state office. That doesn't just include the highly-important governor's race, but races for Attorney General, Agriculture Commissioner and Chief Financial Officer. There are also six or seven vital Congressional races in Florida this year where turnout is going to be what determines if we win or lose. And for goodness sake, if the DCCC is reserving ad time for Allen Boyd right now, national Democrats can at least pretend they want a Democrat running for Senate to win this race. That will help Boyd too.

4. This is an offense race for us. With all the hyperbole about how awful it would be for Rubio to be the next Senator, we tend to forget this is a seat the Republicans are defending. This isn't like races in West Virginia or Illinois where seats held today by Democrats are at risk of flipping to the other side. If you don't think Meek can win this race, just focus on another race then. Don't sabotage an outstanding, progressive Congressman's political career by throwing him under a political bus to make way for a value-less, disloyal hack like Charlie Crist.

5. When this whole fiasco got underway in April, I did suspect Crist could win, but he blew it by going exclusively for the left-wing vote. He was running like a Democrat, but was too cowardly to jump into the Democratic primary. That is what has all but won Marco Rubio this Senate seat. Rewarding that sort of behavior is not the way to set up a future where Democrats are taken seriously by Florida voters.

I'm under no delusions right now. I am casting my vote for Kendrick Meek because it is the right thing to do, not because I still believe he can win. I do think he could have taken this race if not for the meddling of Charlie Crist.

Why I'd Rather Lose to Rubio Than Win with Crist

As the sad reality of the polls sinks in for Meek supporters like myself, I realize many are pondering more seriously than ever whether they should jump ship and vote for Crist as the lesser of two evils. I cannot do so. Why? Three major reasons:

1. Rubio doesn't scare me.

2. Crist cannot be trusted.

3. Meek is still the best candidate in this race.

Now, the longer version.

For all the talk about the energy he has brought to politics, Marco Rubio is not a public official who inspires a broad group of voters. His world is one large tea party, and he only has a shot right now because of the odd dynamics of the race this year. I have seen one poll, and it was a Razzie so buyer beware, that showed Rubio at 50 percent, the normal threshold for a race. Since he is on course to win, it's easy to forget he is doing far more poorly in polls than either Alex Sink or Rick Scott in the governor's race.

That doesn't matter, I know. As I've said since I started the blog, it doesn't take much to win a three-man race like this. Someone with 40 percent is likely the landslide victor. But what do they win? With Rubio, not that much.

Rubio will be the junior senator from Florida, and a member of what is almost surely the minority caucus. The odds of the GOP taking the Senate are much lower than of them overthrowing the House. So Rubio would go to Washington with a party that is out of power, in the back of the line for any decent chairmanships, and still bears the mark of a usurper he drove Washington's hand-picked candidate out of the party. He will be there for six years, but if he spends that time boosting big oil and advocating for corporations ahead of the people, the majority of voters who in November will likely vote for someone besides Rubio are going to be ready to take the seat back for the people.

I see many out there concerned Rubio will serve as a good running mate on the GOP 2012 ticket. Folks, someone is going to run against Barack Obama in 2012. The GOP will try to put up the best they have. It is up to the president to beat out the best they have. If Rubio is the most they can muster, I'm no more worried about the president's re-election chances than I ever have been, and I haven't ever been that worried.

Now, as for Charlie, I think it is very easy for people outside Florida, or people who haven't been at all engaged in Florida politics for a long time, to forget that Charlie Crist is crazy, selfish and stupid. I wish they could see the signs on display today, but I have beaten the drums on recent issues enough. Perhaps people need some history.

This isn't the first time Crist has run for the Senate. He ran in 1998, back when incumbent Bob Graham was the most popular politician in Florida and the GOP nominee was a standard-bearer making a poetic statement while he waited for some illness to strike the Graham family. Back then, he was a hard-on crime nutjob who advocated eliminating the IRS completely. BTW, this is an interesting debate transcript, where Crist calls on Bill Clinton to resign. Why would a supposedly moderate politician say such extreme things? It served him politically. He was fairly moderate on abortion, but steered further right in coming years on that topic, not further left. For the most part, all of his positions were ones held to excite the right. Tea Party may be a new term, but the right-wing crazies have run things in Republican circles for a while. He danced for them back then, just as tried to until April this year.

It also was advantageous when he supported the FCAT system and vouchers, things which have hurt classroom education significantly but got the Charlie stamp of approval when he was education commissioner. Even just four years ago, his positions on education should have made any believer in public education wince. This man was the last elected Education Commissioner, and the GOP-controlled legislature had so little confidence in Crist's abilities to lead the Education Department that they severely limited his powers in that role.

Crist is an opportunist who has run in every single statewide election cycle since 1998 - once as Education Commissioner, once as Attorney General, once as Governor and twice as Senator. In that period, he has been all over the map on politics. That, more than any difference on environmental legislation, is what drove conservatives nuts about the guy, but just because he drives wingers nuts doesn't mean he is good news for progressives.

Right now, it serves Crist to play to the left. So he vetoes a bill the teachers hate. And he tries to convince us he's pro-choice again. Oh, and he likes gay rights now. The only difference between his shifting of positions now and then is that now, he has made miscalculations politically, and he is losing an election he might have won. If he does pull out victory, he probably will caucus with the Dems, but who knows. If the GOP took the Senate in 2012 or 2014, I am almost certain he would caucus with them. Progressives should not enable this behavior and risk the balance of the Senate on a candidates bathed in inconsistencies.

Meanwhile, Meek is running a meek campaign, but advocating principles which are perfectly in line with what true liberals want out of a Senator. He would be the first progressive representing Florida in the upper chamber since Claude Pepper, and we shouldn't spit at that opportunity. And should he get there, he will hold power.

First off, if Meek won, there would be no way for the GOP to take the Senate. None. So he would be in the majority. Plus, he would be one of few members of the Black Congressional Caucus to ever win a spot among the 100 kings. That would mean major power within that bloc, even though he would be a junior member of the Senate. Meek has more experience in Washington than any candidate in this race, and more experience as a lawmaker than either Crist, a six-year state senator, or Rubio, a former speaker term limited to eight years in the Florida House.

So I'm sticking with Meek. If he goes down in flames, so be it. It's the right thing to do. And more than any other reason, good people's willingness to toss ideals to satisfy short-term political gains is why our political system is broken. I view this as a contest between two genuine candidates: Rubio, whose politics I detest but in which many sincerely believe, and Meek, a qualified and credentialed progressive whom I am proud to support. Crist is a spoiler, an ego-maniac who plays by the rules when he can win by them, then throws out the rulebook when it proves restrictive.

This seems a simple choice to me.

Kos is Dead Wrong on This!

The mothership for progressive blogs in Daily Kos, and the site is indeed a big reason why I have a blog at all. But the front page post today by Markos is one I cannot simply ignore. The site is too influential, and the conclusion it has drawn is just too wrong.

Kos suggests that Kendrick Meek ought to drop out of the Senate race and let Charlie Crist and Marco Rubio battle head-to-head. He figures Rubio would be the likely victor anyway, but would rather see Indy Crist go down instead of Meek. I totally disagree.

Here is the nut of Kos' argument:

---

It's clear that in a three-way race, this is a done deal. Democrat Kendrick Meek and Independent Gov. Charlie Crist have almost exclusively targeted each other, nuking each other while Rubio heads virtually unscathed into the Senate. So given those dynamics, this is about the only thing that might shake up the race.

---

I don't want to be naive about things right now. Rubio is the clear front-runner at the moment. And it is clear the only way Rubio loses is for the roughly 60 percent of likely voters who don't want him as Senator to band around one candidate.

But think about that. Six out of every 10 Floridians are telling pollsters they will vote for someone besides Rubio, and yet he is winning. This guy is so far from a mainstream candidate he can't approach 50 percent. Crist and Meek for months have been staking out the left. And as a result, they are between the two of them holding a strong majority of support in the polls.

So who just progressives rally around? The guy with no values who a few months ago was touting his conservative credentials? Or the long-time progressive with every hope of being the first true liberal Florida has sent to Washington since Claude Pepper?

The choice is obvious to me. We have a winning strategy going with a genuine progressive.

Kos ought to calling for a deal that gets Crist out of the race. If he had any political principles at all, he would have left this race when it was clear he would lose the primary. Then he could watch Rubio go down in flames against Meek, and come back in a few years promising to bring the big tent philosophy back to the GOP after the inevitable teabagger burnout just over the horizon.

Instead, the most important and influential progressive blog online is suggesting Meek tuck tail and hide. Disgraceful. I hope Florida progressives know better than that.

Screw the Sierra Club

And the Teachers' Union too.

Well, maybe not forever. I mean, those are groups that often help energize the Democratic vote in Florida, and there aren't very many of us.

But I can't really blame Kendrick Meek for his angry rebuke today of the greenies who tried to split their endorsement and go all purple. Like the Florida Education Association before them, the Sierra Club tried to split the difference and endorse both Kendrick Meek and Charlie Crist.

From Meek:
---
"This election is about taking a stand and fighting for principles you believe in. Today's Sierra Club co-endorsement is an insult to Florida's environmental community. The Sierra Club has chosen to stand with a governor who stood on stage applauding as Sarah Palin chanted, 'Drill, Baby, Drill,' a governor who signed a law making it easier for big developers to drain the Everglades, a governor who endorsed a bill that would have allowed drilling just three miles away from Florida beaches, and a governor who used polluter talking points to attack climate change legislation."
---
I do tend to agree. For a group which exists purely on principles, the split-the-baby approach is entirely unbecoming.

But perhaps more important in this late stage of the game, doing a co-endorsement does more damage than good to both of these candidates. For anyone who hasn't noticed, Marco Rubio is winning this race right now, and he is doing it with six of every 10 Floridians voting against him. Does anyone think having the Sierra Club take an anyone-but-Marco stance right now will chip into those numbers? Rubio is winning the base, and only the base. These 'baggers probably don't believe there is an Everglades.

By essentially telling voters there is no marked difference between Meek and Crist on environmental policy, the Sierra Club is telling voters they don't care if the left splits its votes between a pro-development lifelong GOP darling and a member of the House progressive caucus. But having that vote split right now is exactly why Rubio is winning in the polls.

This is the same problem with the FEA, and they has just as shaky ground splitting the nod, if not shakier. That came on the heels of Crist vetoing a terrible education bill tying teacher pay to student performance, a move which would leave faculty stabbing one another to get the Honors classes and running like heck from the special ed classes, even though the lower performing students are the ones who need a good educator the most. Obviously, it is good Crist vetoed this bill, but he did not after supporting the measure the entire time it was moving through the Legislature.

That doesn't even get into the fact that Crist as a state senator wrote the bill which made Charter Schools possible in Florida, a system the FEA has fought against hard from the start. It also forgets that Crist as Education Commissioner supported such right-wing lunacy as private school vouchers and helped escalate the importance of the teacher-frustrating FCAT.

The Sierra Club doesn't mind that Charlie supported oil drilling off the coast of Florida purely so that he could be considered as a VP candidate for John McCain, and wouldn't reverse his stance until an oil rig literally exploded in the Gulf of Mexico. The FEA doesn't care that Charlie opposed measures like classroom size restrictions, or for that matter that Meek was the one carrying the union's water on that one. It's awful.

But even if these groups want to take such an unprincipled stance and back Crist, it is politically stupid to co-endorse. The position is obviously that both Crist and Meek would be better for the respective causes than Marco Rubio. Ironically, this dumb statement may be what gets Rubio a seat in the United States Senate.

Morons.

Et Tu, Wexler?

Watching the way this Senate race has played out since Charlie Crist took his Republican clothes off and started trumping down the streets in his naked independence, it has frustrated me to no end how many otherwise sensible liberals have nodded, applauded and cheered that the Emperor had beautiful new liberal credentials.

Now, fire-breathing liberal Robert Wexler has jumped in. This makes me very angry. But it's just the latest in a long list of backers that includes Charlie Whitehead and a number of other high- and low-level Democrats. And the governor is touting his support from the left pretty loudly.

To be honest, I am starting to wonder if Crist really is trying to win this anymore. Since taking a hard tack to the left, he has done nothing but bleed Republican support to the advantage of Marco Rubio while splitting Democrats with Kendrick Meek.

I worry, in my most cynical moments, that Kos is right about Rubio getting a free pass and this race tilting totally in the wrong direction. I don't want to kid myself into thinking this would have been a cakewalk if Crist died quietly in the GOP primary and there had ended up being a genuine Meek-Rubio battle in November, but I certainly think things might be easier is Crist wasn't chipping at the left full-time right now.

But people like Wexler fuel the myth that Crist is the only thing standing between Marco Rubio and the Senate. A united left would stop Rubio, and do it more forcefully than squishy Charlie ever could. That is why the Wexler endorsement hurts so much. This man literally wrote the book on standing up for liberal values, and has now thrown his weight behind a guy whose politics shift with the sands. How can someone who stood up to Bush rhetoric even at the height of jingoism now be snuggling up to Crist?

I want Meek to win. I haven't been shy about saying that. I also always figured Crist went into this race the favorite because he could siphon from the left and the right. But I never expected Crist to run this piss-poor of a campaign, and I now fear he will prove me wrong by placing poorly and ruin my hopes of a Meek win by taking the Democrats down with the ship.

But hey. Maybe I'm just in pessimistic mood. Maybe I was more on the mark last week. And for some reason, there aren't a billion polls coming out on this race right now, despite no candidate polling above 43 on a good day.

People have been chiding me for months, telling me a vote for Meek is a vote for Rubio. Well look at the world around. Crist is spoiling this race for us. He has tossed out his political future on the right, and is scorching the fields as he explores life on the left. Crist won't win this way, but can do a lot of damage. And Wexler is enabling the destruction.

Maybe I'm too pessimistic right now, and was more on spot last week. Hopefully the polling will turn around a bit as all candidates take to the airwaves with a little more oomph. Meek has people like Al Gore, Bill Clinton and Joe Biden behind him, and those should be worth more outside a small part of South Florida than Wexler could ever dream. But things have to swing into gear quick.

What It Means To Lose A Country

Obama is just like Castro. That seems to be the message behind this advertisement from the Marco Rubio campaign. Check out the last line.

"As the son of exiles, I understand what it means to lose a country."

So he understands what happens when communist revolutionaries take over a nation through an armed revolt and turn dissenters into political prisoners. A lot of connection to what's happening in America today, right?

I mean, seeing the Democrats win landslide elections the past two election cycles, including watching President Obama receive nearly 70 million votes, more than any candidate in American history, is exactly like witnessing a violent revolution. Exactly the same.

And seeing left-of-center programs programs like the very watered-down health care package, and proposals intended to save the world, is kind of like tossing your enemies into political prisons and letting them die from dehydration. Exactly the same.

And suffering through less than two years of President Obama has to be exactly like dealing with 36 years of continuous, uninterrupted tyranny on behalf of the Castro brothers. Why, it's just amazing conservatives aren't fleeing to Costa Rica to escape the terrible, oppressive regime in power within the United States right now.

The funny thing, of course, is that the Tea Party camp is the crew dressing up like revolutionaries right now.

But this also shows just how far Rubio will go to push the meme Democrats are really some type of destructive force pushing not only a philosophically wrong agenda, but one that will totally end the American way of life. The hyperbole is ludicrous.

All this is especially funny to me since there is no way Marco Rubio will get a majority of votes in the Senate race this year. He could win, of course, but the current front-runner is polling in the low 40s. I guess it's fine to conservatives win with a plurality as long as they are Republicans.

But even if the Rubios and Joe Millers win on Election Day, I'd like someone to point out they are coming in without the majority support of their state voters, and they they represent not an outspoken majority but a group of well-organized activists who came out ahead in three-way races during a mid-term. And then I hope they remember that people like Rubio did so comparing the Obama administration to one that seized power and allowed zero dissent.

Hopefully, though, a majority of Florida voters will see through this insane, extremist rhetoric, and remind Rubio that voters can still stop nutjobs from seizing the reins of power here.

Something To Note on Rubio's Surge

A few recent polls have shown Marco Rubio surging in the polls, most recently an Ipsos/Reuters which pegs the race Rubio 40, Charlie Crist 26 and Meek 21. I won't sugarcoat anything. The polls are consistent right now, so this is no outlier. Rubio is the favorite right now. But lest Democrats, or even Crist supporters, lose heart, there are some things to keep in mind.

Any pollster worth his salt knows you don't get good results randomly calling anybody with a listed phone number. Getting some hick in the woods who doesn't know where his polling place is and asking him who he supports in the Senate race will do no good. Pollsters screen voters in a ton of different ways, and the first step is usually calling people who have regularly voted before.

This election year, though, each of the three major candidates offers something to groups who have not always participated in elections before. The most notable political movement this year, of course, has been the Tea Party, and Rubio was among the first revolutionaries to benefit from the crazy zeitgeist. But if I may rub against conventional wisdom a little bit, I am not sure how many of those energized by the right-wing conservatism are truly new voters. These activists, while not folks I would characterize as smart, are informed on policy.

As demonstrated by races in Utah and Delaware, the movement has been about conservative purists taking back the party platform using the machinations of politics. For example, less than 60,000 people voted in the Delaware primary Tuesday, only about 32 percent of the Republicans in the state. Like Florida, the state has a closed primary, or else the defeat of Mike Castle surely would not have taken place. In Utah, the voting pool that ousted incumbent Sen. Bob Bennett was even more selective. Only 3,452 delegates were present at the state party convention where Bennett garnered just 26 percent and was booted from even appearing on a broad ballot.

All this is to say the Tea Party isn't made up of previously uninvolved voters. It is made up of reliable, super-involved voters. Crist would have seen the same fate as Castle had he stayed in Florida's Republican primary, but he saw the chances were better in November, and he is still right.

Crist has appeal to moderate, independent voters who normally only come out for presidential elections. And he is the rare independent who has plenty of money in the bank to reach out. While many Republican politicians yanked their support from the governor as soon as he went Indy, Crist's financial supporters have stayed true. That means he can go on TV, and can send out mailers. He can reach a target audience of people who don't like the partisanship of Washington politics and normally sit mid-terms out. As it happens, those are exactly the people he needs to motivate and get to the polls.

And they are people who don't show up for pollsters. They often get screened out, if they get called at all. Polls predicted candidates like ex-Minnesota Gov. Jesse Ventura would lose in 1998 for precisely this reason. Ventura won by getting people voting who had never voted.

And as for my favorite candidate? I would note Meek has been surging in the polls since he won the primary. Once polling in the low teens, he is now firmly back in the 20s, and going up. Why? For one, Democrats realize he can win. He trounced the over-monied Jeff Greene in August, and he finally got his mug on television sets. Plus, he also has an appeal to a big voting group - blacks - who notoriously are under-reprented in most elections.

Barack Obama attracted more than 65 percent of black voters to come out in 2008, surprising no one. That was about 5 percent more than came out for John Kerry, who was attempting to become out whitest president ever. Now, nobody thinks Meek has the political energy of Obama, but he can ride the coattails well. Registration increased among blacks in 2008 as well, so more voters are involved in a process to which they once felt disenfranchised. Once Meek is coating the airwaves with advertising, he will inspire voters to come out in hopes of electing Florida's first black Senator since reconstruction.

So the polls favor Rubio today, but the pollsters likely ignore the greatest sources of political opportunity which exist for Meek or Crist. And as noted before, this has been the most dynamic election year ever in Florida. I wouldn't underestimate the possibility of any outcome on Election Day.

Come Home to Meek!

Florida Democrats, unlike voters in some parties, cannot be won over by flashy yachts, glitzy ad campaigns and an self-funded onslaught of distortion. That was proven Tuesday evening when the Democratic nomination for U.S. Senate went handily to U.S. Rep. Kendrick Meek. It has yet to be proven, though, whether the slick pseudo-independent message of Gov. Charlie Crist can sway the well-informed but highly pragmatic voters in the Sunshine State.

I hope the larger message about Meek that comes from the primary is that Meek is a winner. Admittedly a young and untested politician, the South Florida Democrat showed he can endure a well-financed and vicious campaign. He showed that more than a half-million voters can be inspired to come out in August and throw their support to progressive, fresh face.

Meek's 58-35 victory of billionaire Jeff Greene shows on its face a resounding endorsement. A deeper look at the numbers reveals Meek won big in those parts of Florida which will be most important to Democrats this fall. He didn't take all counties. Far from it. But the places where Greene played well, in Southwest Florida and the Panhandle, are places notorious for large Dixiecrat voters poisoning the progressive pool.

I've often said I trust a Dixiecrat less than a conservative Republican. After all, the Republican is honest about his or her ideals, however wrong-headed, and will boost the party platform closest to those ideals. A Dixiecrat often votes against the party, particularly in federal races, angry at the way national Democrats in the past 40 years have embraced blacks and started hugging trees. Back in the Strom Thurmond days, Southern Democrats had their own plans about blacks and trees.

So let's just say those Panhandle voters saw something with Jeff Greene that they could relate too which had little to do with ideology. Or perhaps they were even attempting to sabotage the primary and elect the Democrat with the least general election appeal. Either way, I'm not so concerned to see Kendrick lose in Okaloosa County, or in rural parts of the peninsula like Glades and Hendry counties. I'm not even too upset to see Greene take Lee and Collier counties. All of those places are going to be the Republicans fighting ground come November. And with any luck, GOP nominee Marco Rubio and Crist will be fighting it out in those places.

I suspect Crist will try and shore up those areas where he has won before. While he has philosophically tacked left since first toying with independence, he has yet to win a race as anything but a Republican.

And there is a growing consensus that Meek's presence on the ballot makes Crist a weaker candidate. Die-hard Cristies have even argued with me on liberal blogs that Meek is going to "split the Democratic vote." That's like saying Al Gore siphoned off too many votes from Ralph Nader in 2000. Democratic votes that go to Crist will be ones lost to Meek, not the other way around.

I can't lie and say a Meek victory will anything but a tough row. But starting today, I think this will shift more toward being a Meek-Rubio race. That is hard enough with out Crist's orange glow interfering with the political landscape. Rubio, in primary with no serious opposition, got more than 1 million votes last night. Certainly, more voters came to the polls for the tight gubernatorial race, but Rubio was the clear choice of nearly 85 percent of Republicans even when Rick Scott and Bill McCollum were creating a rift in their party. By comparison, Alex Sink took less than 76 percent of the Democratic vote against token opposition the gubernatorial primary.

Public Policy Polling put out a highly-pubicized poll Tuesday (yeah, I'm talking about polls again) which showed Rubio at 40 percent going into the general election campaign. But I think that's all the support he will ever see. Unfortunately, in a three-man race that is enough if Meek and Crist split the vote. But that is why Democrats need to rally around the real Democrat in the race.

Meek will caucus with the Democrats. Crist won't say, likely because he knows many of his supporters still want him to go to Washington in effect a Republican. But even if Crist does caucus with Dems, he will never be a progressive. We will have our own Joe Liberman, at best! With Meek, we get the most progressive politician to represent Florida in the Senate since Claude Pepper.

There are 10 weeks to decide, but in choosing, don't write off Meek as a candidate who can't win. Indeed, he is the only candidate running to have a won a contested race in this Senate campaign. Remember that.