Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Florida Senate Race: Rubio, Murphy Likely To Win Tuesday’s Primary

Florida Senate Race: Rubio, Murphy Likely To Win Tuesday’s Primary

. . . but are in a close contest in November’s general election

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/politics/political-pulse/os-poll-rubio-murphy-hold-huge-leads-in-u-s-senate-primaries-20160825-story.html

Back in May, I wrote about Harry Reid being “fairly certain” that Democrats can retake the Senate this year.  He has reason to be fairly certain in part because Republicans are defending far more Senate seats than Democrats: “Democrats need five Senate seats to retake the Senate, and while it’s not a lock, things don’t look good for Republicans who are defending 24 seats to the Democrats’ 10.”

Watch Bret Baier’s overview:

With the Senate hanging by a thread this November and the high stakes involved in losing it to the Democrats, we’ve been paying close attention to the Senate races across the country.

The Florida primaries are on Tuesday, and judging by the way Marco Rubio (R) and Patrick Murphy (D) are running their campaigns, they are each confident they will win their respective races.

The Miami Herald reports:

Florida’s primary elections are Tuesday, but you wouldn’t know it by watching either of the two top Republican candidates for the U.S. Senate over the past week.

Carlos Beruff, the brash, self-funding Republican hoping to take out Sen. Marco Rubio, has had just one campaign appearance over the last six days and reduced his television advertising spending.

Rubio has given three public campaign speeches totaling about one hour over three days and mentioned the looming primary race for all of 30 seconds. And in that short mention to campaign volunteers in Tallahassee, Rubio characterized Tuesday’s get-out-the-vote effort as “practice” for what his campaign will need in November.

. . . . The bitter competition of the Democratic primary has also tapered off in the final days and weeks of the contest.

Murphy — long considered the steady front-runner — has been in general-election mode for almost a month, targeting his attacks on Rubio rather than his primary opponents, fellow U.S. Rep. Alan Grayson and Pam Keith, a Miami labor attorney and former naval officer.

Murphy’s campaign stopped running TV ads the last two weeks to save money for the anticipated battle against Rubio, while also announcing Murphy prepaid $800,000 worth of fall advertising time.

Their internal polling must be as strong as the public polling for each to move on to the general election in the weeks leading up to the primary.

Newsmax has the numbers:

Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio and his chief opponent, Democratic Rep. Patrick Murphy, are likely to win their party primary races.

In the upcoming four-way Republican primary, Rubio holds a strong lead:

  • Marco Rubio: 61 percent;
  • Carlos Beruff: 22 percent;
  • Ernie Rivera: 1 percent;
  • Dwight Mark Anthony Young: 1 percent;
  • Undecided: 15 percent.

In the Democratic primary, with five candidates, Murphy enjoys a strong advantage:

  • Patrick Murphy: 55 percent;
  • Alan Grayson: 22 percent;
  • Pam Keith: 4 percent;
  • Roque De La Fuente: 0 percent;
  • Reginald Luster: 0 percent;
  • Undecided: 19 percent.

Should the polls hold on Tuesday, Rubio and Murphy are going to be running a much closer race leading up to the November election.

The Mason-Dixon poll has them in a virtual tie with Rubio at 46% and Murphy at 43%.

Rubio is ahead of Murphy by 46-43 percent — a virtual tie, given the poll’s error margin of 4 percentage points. Rubio leads among Republicans, independents, men, whites and Hispanics. Murphy is ahead among Democrats, women and African-Americans.

Murphy, a former Republican who has been endorsed by Obama, is seen as a centrist Democrat and is reviled by the progressive left.

The progressive outlet Salon has an entertaining take on Murphy.

The Senate . . . has long been considered doable and while that doesn’t solve the problem of that Blue Eyed devil Paul Ryan and his Tea Partying wrecking crew, it does mean something when it comes to things like Supreme Court judges and Executive Branch appointments. (And if the worst were to happen and, God forbid, Trump were to win the presidency, having the Senate majority could be the difference between simple dysfunction and total chaos.) It is a very important goal and one for which the Democrats have been preparing for some time.

. . . . The Democrats meanwhile went out of their way to recruit one of the worst possible candidates available in any state, Congressman Patrick Murphy a two-term congressman with a very wealthy and generous Republican father. The Democrats had persuaded Murphy to switch his R to a D in 2012 and he unsurprisingly went on to compile one of the most conservative records in the House Democratic caucus. He was even one of the chief Benghazi witch hunters enthusiastically helping Republicans smear Hillary Clinton.

This could be a problem for Rubio because Murphy is the guy who unseated Colonel Allen West in a very close election in 2012 and easily won reelection two years later.  Murphy supports comprehensive immigration reform and a host of other progressive agenda items and would almost certainly be malleable once ensconced among Democrats in DC.

The Tampa Bay Times reports:

Murphy brushed off the skepticism about his Democratic values.

“I’m proud to support comprehensive immigration reform, I haven’t changed my position on marriage equality, on a woman’s right to choose, raising the minimum wage. These are all things that I support, along with getting our fiscal house in order,” Murphy told the Times.

With one Supreme Court nomination certain and potentially crippling ObamaCare measures kicked down the road by Obama and now scheduled to take effect in 2017, the Senate will be incredibly important for whomever wins the White House in November.

[Featured image via The Orlando Sentinel]

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

geee…. maybe if the GOPe wasn’t so busy trying to make Trump lose, they might be able to hang on to the Senate…

the party of stupid is 5t00pid.

    genes in reply to redc1c4. | August 28, 2016 at 7:40 pm

    Maybe if the Trump fanatics weren’t so intent on punishing everyone that didn’t bow down and kiss Trump’s behind when he announced his candidacy, we wouldn’t have a problem.

    Hi redc, I sincerely don’t understand Trump supporters’ lack of interest in or outright hostility to the very idea of the GOP keeping the Senate.

    I get that the GOP hasn’t done more, and I mean stuff within their power, not wasting time on passing stuff Obama will veto and they don’t have sufficient numbers to override, but have you considered where we would be if the GOP didn’t win the House in 2010 and the Senate in 2014? We got stuck with ObamaCare when the Dems controlled both Houses, and since then they’ve pushed gun control, truly destructive “climate change” measures, “free” college education, Common Core, and a long long list of other horrendous and disastrous policies. None of which have happened because the GOP controls the House and Senate.

    If the Dems still had the Senate, Obama’s Supremes pick would have been very different than Garland; it would have been an even more leftist, more activist judge (Garland’s bad enough, but Obama thought he might get it by the Senate).

    What do you think a President Trump will be able to do with a Republican House and a Democrat Senate? This isn’t even taking into account that the Dems could very well win the House, too (it’s not impossible or even improbable at this point). I’m being serious here. That wall? Funding it must be approved, you know. Trump’s not going to build it with his own money (you know that, right?).

    The only thing I can think of is that a lot of Trump fans aren’t interested in his presidency at all and are merely on the warpath to punish and eradicate the GOP. Why else tie Trump’s hands should he win?

      Estragon in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | August 28, 2016 at 8:27 pm

      Recall their angry insistence they would leave the GOP if Trump lost, they were always more about “burning it down” and taking revenge for perceived slights.

      They are the poorly educated talk radio fans, the stupid and gullible, the racists, xenophobes, neo-fascists, and conspiracy theorists. In short, they are everything I did not want to see in the GOP. Now they’ve driven me out.

      But I still support sensible Republicans down the ticket if they do not endorse Trump. The rest are on their own, unless they renounce their endorsement and denounce the orange clown.

        Barry in reply to Estragon. | August 28, 2016 at 8:59 pm

        “Now they’ve driven me out.”

        Good, at least one benefit to Trump.

        Who is your candidate? That’s right, you never had one. Shrillary would be fine with you.

          Because nothing says “big tent” and garnering Trump support like “good riddance, you Hillary shill.”

          Do you hear yourself?

          Barry in reply to Barry. | August 28, 2016 at 9:33 pm

          “Do you hear yourself?”

          I hear quite well. estragon has been running down every republican other than bush for the last year. One might get the idea estragon was nothing more than a democrat plant. or just a typical GOPe that cares nothing about Americans. If you read his actual wording you might just figure that out.

          Go ahead, ask who it supports. Maybe you can get an answer.

          Do you hear me now?

          LOL, yes, I can hear you now. Whazzzup!

          To your point, what do you care if Estragon “runs down” republicans? Or thinks “wrong thoughts” about the Great Cheeto? I guess I just don’t get your and some other Trump fans’ obsession with what other people think. You all seem to think that anyone who doesn’t support Trump is worthless, incapable of thought or emotion, and is offering themselves up as the Trump train punching bag of the day. We’re not any of those things, and you can no more change our minds than we can yours.

          To your other point about “Democrat plants”; Good grief. That sort of paranoia and defensiveness is unnecessary and bizarre. Even if Estragon were a Democrat plant (and I don’t think so), what do you care? How does it affect you? Is he going to change your mind with a few comments he taps out from time to time? Even if he spent 10 or 12 hours a day at LI showering us with his every thought, would he change your mind? Is he a threat to the Donald who will win by a landslide unseen since Goldwater?

          Why spend so much time obsessing about people’s audacity in daring to express ideas and thoughts you dislike and with which you disagree? What possible benefit can that have for you? You have no control over other people’s thoughts, their principles, or their values. Or anything else for that matter. Why keep banging your head against a wall when you could throw that energy into something productive and that you can control?

          And no, thank you, I will not be asking Estrgon or anyone else whom they support. You know why? Simple: it’s none of my business. A concept, it seems, that goes over the head of the average Trump fan.

          Barry in reply to Barry. | August 28, 2016 at 9:39 pm

          estragon:
          “They are the poorly educated talk radio fans, the stupid and gullible, the racists, xenophobes, neo-fascists, and conspiracy theorists.”

          There you are fuzzy, a clear example of hostility. I will return such hostility.

          I also notice that those that are in agreement with you regarding Trump are never called out by you for their “hostility”, or general nastiness. No, you find hostility in my comment to you, where there clearly is none.

          Barry, taking that much to heart and personalizing every generalization (he says “they” not “Barry”) about Trump fans must be exhausting. Have you always been so sensitive and thin-skinned or is this a new development? Me? I could care less what anyone says about #NeverTrumpers. I’m one and have been since 2011 . . . and with good reason. I’m secure about my choice and don’t care one iota what anyone says about #NeverTrump conservatives. I guess that’s why I don’t get your touchiness and somewhat precious response to someone else’s generalization about Trump fans. Does it hit too close to home? No matter. But you’re going to wear yourself out obsessing about, internalizing, and obsessing about every comment made about Trump or his fans. Why do that to yourself?

        I recall them speaking about this, but I just don’t understand it. What do they imagine will fill the void should the GOP “blow up”? I’m really trying to understand.

        The GOP is going nowhere in the foreseeable future, even if they lose both the House and Senate in November. The GOP has made astounding gains in the states, and record-breaking gains in Congressional elections. Trump himself is running as a Republican. I just don’t get what they think they’ll accomplish by saddling a President Trump with a Democrat Senate or Congress. He won’t be able to do any more for his base than Obama has done for his own, and he’ll be absolutely pilloried should he decide to take up his own pen and phone. And very likely impeached (successfully, even if the GOP retains the House).

        They keep asking about our “plan” if Hillary wins, but it seems they have no idea what to do to help Trump have a successful presidency should he win (not that I think he will, but they are knee-capping him by not working for a Congress he can actually work with and get things done).

        Maybe, in their heart of hearts, they understand that he has zero intention of fulfilling his promises and don’t want to be disillusioned. After all, if the Dems have the Senate, they can blame them, not Trump.

        It’s a puzzler.

        murkyv in reply to Estragon. | August 28, 2016 at 10:33 pm

        I bet it just bugs the hell out of you to think that those whom you believe are beneath you count the same on Election Day

      ” I sincerely don’t understand Trump supporters’ lack of interest in or outright hostility to the very idea of the GOP keeping the Senate. ”

      You keep pushing that when there is no reason for it.

      The number 1 guarantee of republican senators winning in a presidential election year is support of the republican nominee. Since you do not do this, the senate is in danger of being lost in a difficult year for the republicans.

      It is you and your never ending tirade against the republican nominee that endangers the senate, not your fantasy view of the typical trump supporter.

        The hostility, Barry, comes from you. I am asking a reasonable question with all sincerity. The person to whom I posed the question stated quite clearly that unless candidates support Trump, he (or maybe she) doesn’t care about the stupid party. The question I have is what is the stupid party candidate supposed to do if saddled with a Democrat Senate?

        Also, just as an aside, there is no “guarantee” about down ticket races and support for the presidential nominee. You may want to review the stats on that before you claim it to be fact. For example, Clinton LOST seats so did Eisenhower. And on. Heck, even President Reagan lost two Senate seats in 1984. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/presidential_elections_seats.php

        I have no problem chatting with you, Barry, but I don’t appreciate the hostility. And by the way, I have not said that Trump endangers the Senate (honest, but feel free to check my posts and comments).

          “I have no problem chatting with you, Barry, but I don’t appreciate the hostility.”

          There was nothing, not one thing, in my comment that was hostile. Please explain what you find “hostile”. I have no desire to be hostile towards you. Disagree? Yes, 100% on this issue.

          “…I have not said that Trump endangers the Senate…”

          I didn’t say you said trump endangered the senate. My comment was in response to what you say over and over, “I sincerely don’t understand Trump supporters’ lack of interest in or outright hostility to the very idea of the GOP keeping the Senate.”

          And I didn’t use the word “guarantee” in the sense it is a lock, I said it was the number 1 guarantee, which it is, for republicans. But no, it is not a lock. OTOH, had Reagan lost in 1984, more senate seats may have been lost. We cannot know the alternate history, we can only know that we have, and that is as I stated – Republicans do better in senate elections in presidential election years when the republican wins the election.

          Maybe redc1c4 was making the same point.

          That’s good to hear, Barry. I guess it’s gotten to the point that I read everything you write in the same “voice” (loud, obnoxious, sing-song Hectoring, and sneering contempt). I guess that reading so many of your other comments has actually shaped how I “hear” you. I guess that goes both ways. It’s kind of sad, really.

          You wrote:

          My comment was in response to what you say over and over, “I sincerely don’t understand Trump supporters’ lack of interest in or outright hostility to the very idea of the GOP keeping the Senate.”

          I say that over and over because I sincerely don’t understand it. You’ve not seen the scores of comments in these threads about how important it is to “blow it all up” and “burn it all down”? That there is no difference at all between Congressional Dems and Republicans? That this lack of difference means the Republicans need to be “punished”? Trump fans say this stuff all the time and not just here. The basic premise is “the GOP holds both Houses of Congress, Congress hasn’t met my expectations, therefore, I don’t care about Congress and feel that since Republicans are the problem, the solution is definitely not to elect more Republicans.” It varies, but that’s always the core message. You must know that.

          Sorry my reply is so late. Work interrupted my commentary…

          You brush over the fact you were calling me hostile to you personally, something you have done before. And I have never been hostile to you in any way.

          Using a response to the kook edge, someone you were cheering on, a person that has declared they are voting for Hillary, has nothing to do with my response to you. Absolutely nothing.

          Is Rags “hostile”? Of course, not that you care since he is on your side. I don’t care either. He is what he is, doesn’t bother me. But then, I’m not the one complaining about people being hostile, you are.

          As far the rest of your response, you should read what I say and then read what you have said. Apparently you read something different than what I say, calling me “hostile” in my response to you for example, but then you have to dig up your evidence in a comment to someone else. Nonsense.

          You site a few commenters and their lack of interest in the senate/house elections to justify your belief that no one cares, boo-hoo. They do not represent the vast majority of those that support Trump. It’s in your head, like all things trump. We have a term for it: Trump Derangement Syndrome. it’s alive and well.

          Now, if you wish to make the case that many Trump supporters are disappointed and outright hostile towards many of the GOPe and ruling party politicians, I’m on board. That would describe me as well. But I would like to replace the scum with actual conservatives / people that put the Americans first.

          My name is on my comments. Feel free to just skip them since you are incapable of reading them comprehensively and they upset you.

          Oh, you’re wrong about Trump. So there 🙂

Subotai Bahadur | August 28, 2016 at 10:21 pm

Like it or not, a Republican House or Senate candidate’s stand on Trump is going to affect the vote they get in their own races.

1) Once again, like it or not, the Republican candidate for president is Donald Trump. The only REAL alternative with a chance of election is Hillary Clinton. Neither Eggs MacMuffin, nor the Libertarian, nor the Green Party candidate is going to get 271 electoral votes.

2) Trump having won the nomination, the majority of Republican voters accept and support Trump over Clinton. There are those who don’t, preferring Hillary over Trump or hoping for a miracle candidate to appear out of nowhere, but they are not the majority.

3) There are those Republican candidates for the US House and Senate who are openly anti-Trump. Mike Coffman of Colorado’s 6th District comes to mind having cut commercials in English and Spanish promising to always oppose Trump in both the General Election, but also as president if Trump is elected.

If he is promising to be a Democrat in both the election and afterwards, how many Trump supporters do you think are going to be going all out to re-elect Coffman? Similarly, GOPe Senator Cory Gardner, elected in 2014, is functionally campaigning against Republican Darryl Glenn [Conservative, Constitutionalist, Black, AFA grad., and retired LTC who draws large crowds even in Democrat Pueblo County] who won the nomination handily over the Party’s objections. This is one of the Senate seats that could easily be taken away from the Democrats, and the NRSCC is refusing to help. Republican Gardner is cited in Democrat Michael Bennet’s ads as someone Bennet is working with across the aisle, and Gardner is going along with him in that. And to be honest it is true, in that Republican Gardner votes identically to Democrat Bennet. [I did the report card on his votes for our county TEA Party.]

The Republican Party is actively working to lose both the presidency and Congress. If they wanted to keep Congress, they would not be working actively to piss off Republican voters.

    A couple of quick points, SB. Trump did indeed win the most votes for him, but he also won the most votes against him than any Republican presidential candidate in history. He also had the lowest percentage of votes of any Republican presidential candidate since Reagan in 1968 (see aforementioned linked source).

    And frankly, I wouldn’t care if every single Republican primary voter except me voted for Trump in the primaries. I would still be #NeverTrump because it doesn’t matter how many people are drawn in, right is right (didn’t we learn that with Obama?).

    Yes, I am in the minority in terms of the Republican side of the aisle. Is that supposed to matter to me? I have no compulsion to follow the herd or walk in lockstep or otherwise abandon my own conscience. Peer pressure didn’t work on me in junior high school; it’s certainly not gong to work now.

    The choice about the Senate and House races is yours to make. If you think an anti-Trump Republican is a worst choice than a Democrat, that is your prerogative. If you think it’s better to have a Democrat Senate than a GOP Senate peppered with anti-Trump pols, okay. I think that’s unwise, but I am entitled to my opinion just as you are yours.

    As far as candidates running against other candidates and sharing their viewpoint and positions . . . um, when did this become a problem? I get being upset that some GOPe aren’t supporting “Trump candidates”; I was certainly upset when they worked against the Tea Party. But I didn’t imagine for a moment that no one should run against a Tea Party candidate. I expected the Tea Party candidate to run a good race and win. Sometimes they did, sometimes they didn’t (often with the help of Trump’s donations to Democrats, by the way). I can’t imagine, though, risking the loss of the Senate just because some Republican didn’t leap enthusiastically to support my candidate. That’s just ludicrous. Even Obama didn’t demand that kind of devotion and “allowed” Democrats to distance themselves from him in districts that were not pro-Obama.

    As a bit of an aside, GOP lack of support for Trump does not “piss off” all Republican voters, including many Republican voters who dislike the GOPe. This is a problem for Trump whether you like it or wish to acknowledge it or not.

      When they claim that Trump got the most votes of anyone in a GOP primary, they neglect the fact that the population has grown considerably. it’s about double what it was in 82.

    If he is promising to be a Democrat in both the election and afterwards

    That’s a lie right there. He is not promising to be a Democrat, he’s promising to be a Republican, which means opposing Trump, since Trump’s policies are opposed to Republican values.

I will say one thing, that it will be nice to see Alan Grayson booted out of Washington again.

Thane_Eichenauer | August 29, 2016 at 3:45 am

I hope that Augustus Invictus prevails in the Libertarian Party primary and is able to mix it up in the upcoming election season against his general election opponents.

http://invictusforsenate.com/

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend