ON AIR NOW

LISTEN NOW

Weather

Sponsored By: Two Men and a Truck
cloudy-day
82°
Sct Thunderstorms
H 95° L 79°
  • cloudy-day
    82°
    Current Conditions
    Sct Thunderstorms. H 95° L 79°
  • partly-cloudy-tstorms-day
    91°
    Afternoon
    Sct Thunderstorms. H 95° L 79°
  • cloudy-day
    87°
    Evening
    Partly Cloudy. H 91° L 79°
LISTEN
PAUSE
ERROR

The latest top stories

00:00 | 00:00

LISTEN
PAUSE
ERROR

The latest traffic report

00:00 | 00:00

LISTEN
PAUSE
ERROR

The latest forecast

00:00 | 00:00

Schultz commentary: Charlie Crist as a Democrat for governor? Great Scott!

In addition to all the big election winners in Florida who are Democrats, there might be another who doesn’t belong to any party — but might soon: Charlie Crist.

Two days before the election, an Obama rally at a high school football stadium in Broward County drew a reported 23,000 people. One of the warm-up acts was Mr. Crist, last seen in 2010 running unsuccessfully for the U.S. Senate as an independent, his move from the Governor’s Mansion to Washington blocked by tea party Republicans.

Apparently bored with shilling for a personal injury law firm after losing to Marco Rubio, Mr. Crist recast himself as a disillusioned Republican and joined the Obama team. At that Broward rally, Mr. Crist was the last speaker before the main attraction, warming up the crowd by declaring, “I love Barack Obama!” Shades of the February 2009 hug in Fort Myers that then-Gov. Crist gave the newly elected president.

Almost nothing in politics happens by accident. Mr. Crist was all over the state this year at Obama rallies. Predictions can have the shelf life of fortune-cookie aphorisms, but mine is that Mr. Crist will run as a Democrat against Gov. Rick Scott in 2014. Yes, Mr. Crist’s wife famously dislikes Florida, and he might have been trolling for a job in Washington. But how appropriate, given his waddaya-want-me-to-be-today? attitude that Charlie Crist might pull off the biggest political flip-flop in Florida history.

After all, who else might the Democrats run against the governor they so want to beat? Alex Sink? The former chief financial officer lost by just 61,550 votes to Gov. Scott in 2010, after the governor had spent $70 million of his own money. Why not a second try?

Here’s one reason: Ms. Sink is half the answer to this trivia question: Which husband and wife both have lost running for governor of Florida? Bill McBride lost to Jeb Bush in 2002. In Mr. McBride’s campaign and her own, Ms. Sink came up way short in empathy with the voters. If the Democratic nomination is a personality contest between Ms. Sink and Charlie Crist, advantage Mr. Crist.

There’s U.S. Rep. Kathy Castor, from the politically strategic city of Tampa, but she could be reluctant to give up a safe seat. State Sen. Nan Rich, D-Weston, has announced that she intends to run. For all her capability as a state legislator, she will start with much less name recognition than Mr. Crist.

You can see the temptation to challenge the governor. Just after taking office, Gov. Scott laid down draconian restrictions on felons regaining their civil rights. That angered African-Americans. This year, his clumsy attempt to purge “non-citizens” from the voting rolls angered Latinos. In his 2010 primary, Gov. Scott’s ads scorched then-Attorney General Bill McCollum for not advocating an Arizona-style immigration law for Florida.

The governor refused all federal money associated with the federal health law except $2.5 million for an abstinence-only sex education program. That annoys many female voters. He’s bumbled around unhelpfully in higher education, which younger Floridians don’t like.

So when it comes to the Obama coalition that just won Florida, Gov. Scott is 0-for-4. Still, Mr. Crist would have to ask Democrats to forget a lot.

Democrats would have to forget, for example, that then-state Sen. Crist staged hearings in 1995 to accuse Gov./Democratic icon Lawton Chiles of using illegal “push polls” against Jeb Bush in 1994. Democrats would have to forget that in 1998 Mr. Crist railed against the tobacco lawsuit that was one of Mr. Chiles’ triumphs. Mr. Crist forgot that earlier opposition himself. As governor he raided the tobacco settlement trust fund to balance the budget.

Democrats would have to forget that before he joined the Obama reelection road show, Mr. Crist was “as conservative as you can get.” He adopted the slogan of his supposed mentor, former Republican Sen. Connie Mack, who called for “less taxes, less spending, less government, more freedom.” Democrats would have to forget that Mr. Crist called Jeb Bush “Florida’s greatest governor.”

Of course, Mr. Crist could remind Democrats that in 2006 he blew off President George W. Bush, who was campaigning for Republicans in Pensacola. He could remind Democrats that his first act as governor was a property insurance bill designed to cut rates, whereas Gov. Scott wanted rates to be unregulated. He could remind Democrats that he vetoed the first teacher merit-pay bill, legislation teachers detested. Who cares if that was the Charlie Crist who was seeking support for that independent Senate run?

Indeed, maybe a Crist-Scott matchup makes sense. The current governor is trying to remake himself into a fan of education despite cutting $1.3 billion from public school his first year, signing only a slightly less-bad teacher merit-pay bill, and cutting $300 million from universities this year. The big winner could be the candidate whose voters have the shortest memories.

Read More
VIEW COMMENTS

There are no comments yet. Be the first to post your thoughts. or Register.

The Latest News Headlines

  • The Long Beach chapter of the United Daughters of the Confederacy has removed a monument to the Confederacy at Hollywood Forever Cemetery. KABC reported that many were unaware that the Confederate memorial was in the cemetery. It was installed in 1925. >> Read more trending news “The Daughters said we are a benevolent organization. We didn’t seek this attention. We don't want to be part of this uproar,” president and co-owner of the cemetery, Tyler Cassity, told KABC. The monument was removed around 4 a.m. Tuesday, KNBC reported. Cassity told told the Los Angeles Times someone wrote, “No” in black marker under the monument’s plaque. Related: There are hundreds of Confederate monuments, not just in the South Significant attention was drawn to the monument after the LA Times wrote an op-ed about California’s Civil War history. The violence at a white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, which led to the death of Heather Heyer, an anti-racist counterportester, increased demand for the monument’s removal. “Some people said, ‘If you don't take it down, we will,’” Cassity told KNBC. After the vandalism, Cassity contacted the Daughters of the Confederacy about removing the monument. “All we wanted was peace, quiet, as we had for many years,” a Daughters of the Confederacy spokeswoman said. “Cemeteries should be respected.” Theodore Hovey, a spokesman for the cemetery, told the Los Angeles Times the monument will be moved to an undisclosed location.
  • Although many monuments to the Confederacy in the United States bear his name, image or both, Robert E. Lee was not in favor of Confederate monuments. >> Read more trending news According to documents from the University of Virginia, Lee declined andinvitation to join officers at the site of the battle of Gettysburg to mark memorials, saying he “could not add anything material to the information existing on the subject.” “I think it wiser, moreover, not to keep open the sores of war but to follow the examples of those nations who endeavored to obliterate the marks of civil strife, to commit to oblivion the feelings engendered,” he said. Related: There are hundreds of Confederate monuments, not just in the South But it does not mean Lee opposed slavery. Lee simply thought it was best not to create monuments to remind the country of a time in which there was nationwide conflict.  Robert E. Lee V, Lee’s great-great grandson, told CNN Wednesday removing the Confederate statues and placing them in a museum may be an option. “Eventually, someone is going to have to make a decision, and if that's the local lawmaker, so be it. But we have to be able to have that conversation without all of the hatred and the violence. And if they choose to take those statues down, fine,” the 54-year-old, who lives in Washington, D.C., said. “Maybe it’s appropriate to have them in museums or to put them in some sort of historical context in that regard.” Related: At least 109 schools named after Confederate figures, study says In an 1856 letter to his wife, Mary Anna Lee, he said of slavery, “I think it however a greater evil to the white man than to the black race, & while my feelings are strongly enlisted in behalf of the latter, my sympathies are more strong for the former. The blacks are immeasurably better off here than in Africa, morally, socially & physically. The painful discipline they are undergoing, is necessary for their instruction as a race, & I hope will prepare & lead them to better things.” Lee died of heart disease in 1870 in Lexington, Virginia, five years after the end of the Civil War.
  • President Donald Trump on Wednesday announced that he is disbanding a pair of White House councils after a receiving a rash of resignations in response to his failure to immediately and forcefully denounce white supremacists in the wake of violent protests in Charlottesville, Virginia. >> Read more trending news “Rather than putting pressure on the businesspeople of the manufacturing council (and) strategy (and) policy forum, I am ending both,” Trump wrote Wednesday in a tweet. “Thank you all!”
  • Hope Hicks, the White House director of strategic communications, will serve as the interim White House communications director, White House officials confirmed to Wednesday. The news of the interim post was first reported by The New York Times on Wednesday morning, citing a “senior administration official.” >> Read more trending news In a statement released to the Wall Street Journal, an unnamed official said an announcement about a permanent White House communications director would come “at an appropriate time.” The Times report came after the Daily Caller, citing a 'White House insider,' reported early Wednesday that Hicks had accepted the White House communications director job most recently held by Anthony Scaramucci, who was ousted after 10 days. Also on Wednesday morning, CNN reported that Hicks would “likely take on the role of White House communications director,” citing three unnamed sources. “Discussions are in the final stages,” CNN reported. >> PREVIOUS STORY: Anthony Scaramucci out as White House communications director Hicks, 28, was press secretary for President Donald Trump's campaign and previously worked for the Trump Organization. Read more here.
  • Now-former Democratic Congresswoman Corrine Brown has been denied a new trial, after being convicted on 18 of 22 federal fraud-related charges in May. A judge has also issued an order denying a motion for acquittal. Brown’s sentencing has now been set for November 16th. Brown was found guilty of soliciting hundreds of thousands of dollars for a sham charity called “One Door For Education”, using the money for personal expenses and lavish events instead. Her Chief of Staff Ronnie Simmons and the President of One Door Carla Wiley both pleaded guilty and testified against Brown at trial. Simmons has now been formally adjudicated guilty and his sentencing has been set for November 15th. Wiley was adjudicated shortly after entering her plea in March 2016, but her sentencing has now also been set for November 15th, to take place in the same courtroom at the same time as Simmons. FULL COVERAGE: Federal fraud trial of former Congresswoman Corrine Brown Brown had sought a new trial by claiming the judge improperly dismissed a juror after deliberations had already started, because that juror said at the outset of deliberations that the “Holy Spirit” had told him Brown was innocent. In the initial order dismissing the juror, District Judge Timothy Corrigan had carefully worded his ruling, saying that it would not have violated the jury process to pray for guidance, but to have an influence that prevents the juror from considering only the evidence- like a determination of innocence from a “Holy Spirit”- crosses the line. “Had Juror No. 13 simply stated to his fellow jurors that he was praying for guidance during the deliberations, that would not have been problematic,” Corrigan’s order says. “But that’s not what happened here.” Jurors are instructed only to consider the evidence of the case presented at trial and the court’s instruction on the law in determining a verdict. Some of that instruction included that jurors must discuss the case with one another and only make their verdict determination after considering all of the evidence with the other jurors. During the jury selection process, they also all agreed they had no religious or moral beliefs that would preclude them from serving in a fair and impartial panel.  Corrigan says he believes the juror felt he was obeying the court’s instructions on deliberations, but that he violated it by holding this conviction before deliberations even started. Corrigan further says he would have come to the same determination if the “Holy Spirit” had told Corrigan that Brown was guilty as well. An alternate juror was seated and the panel was instructed to start deliberations from scratch. The verdicts of guilty on 18 counts and not guilty on 4 counts were unanimously reached after about eleven hours of deliberations. “Corrine Brown is entitled to a fair trial with an impartial jury that reaches a verdict in accordance with the law. That is what she received,” Corrigan’s ruling says. Brown’s motion for acquittal said that prosecutors had not shown she had criminal intent, claiming instead that she had poorly managed her finances and office, but never intended to defraud anyone. Corrigan’s ruling detailed some of the evidence laid out by prosecutors and said the jury could reasonably infer guilt from that. Brown’s attorney further contended that the fact that Brown was found not guilty on four of the charges diminished the government’s proof. Corrigan belives that shows the jury carefully deliberated the evidence and merits of each specific charge. “Suffice it to say, there was more than sufficient evidence to justify the jury’s verdict on each count of conviction,” Corrigan’s ruling says. Brown’s attorney James Smith tells us she’s “understandably saddened and disappointed” by the judge’s rulings, but she remains strong and maintains her innocence. She further wants supporters to know that she appreciates their prayers and will continue fighting. While Smith said Brown is planning to pursue “any and all available legal options”, he declined to get in to many specifics on what those avenues include. He says their focus right now is geting her the best sentence possible, and a motion for reconsideration is something they could look at in the future. The US Attorney’s Office declined to comment about the rulings at this time.

The Latest News Videos