Former Florida Gov. Charlie Crist wants his old job back. This time, he’s running as Democrat.
Crist filed paperwork on Friday, and plans to make the official announcement Monday in St. Petersburg, Florida.
The Republican-turned-Democrat is considered a front-runner for the Democratic ticket. He would likely be up against current Gov. Rick Scott, a Republican. Scott represents a far more conservative version of the GOP than Crist ever did…..
“I’m an optimist but let’s face it, the last few years have been tough: government on the fringes, donors in politics above you the people,” said Crist in the video. “You’ve seen the attacks against full-time working people and their health care; against women and their doctors; against teachers, public schools and college affordability; And even against the simple act of casting your vote. It’s not working.”
SOURCE: Charlie Crist running for Florida governor as a Democrat | MSNBC.
I have been following politics for a long time now. When the national conventions actually meant something I was a gavel-to-gavel viewer. I stayed up very late into the mornings to see who would eventually be the party nominee. I watched both the Republican and Democrat conventions with the same fervor. There was some pretty rough politicking going on but unlike today is was mostly civil.
One thing I have noticed is that politics as the State level is quite different from at the national level. And politics at the local level is down right weird 🙂 At the State and particularly at the local level the “sticking to principles” concept is played much more loosely. It is more about getting things done than beating the other guy.
So when Charlie Crist turned from a Republican to a Democrat I was not terribly surprised. He no longer fit into the mold of a Republican so he moved on to the next party. I wonder if that will be the fate of more moderates, that is those who want to actually accomplish something. Will they fight to take back control of their party from the present wing nuts or will they simply abandon it? For me, that question is still very much up in the air but I hope they fight to keep their brand. We have lost too many once noble institutions already in this country. I really don’t relish losing another one.
Yes, I am a social progressive but I am also a fiscal conservative. As long as there is a balance between my political choices I freely switched back and forth depending on which candidate could best accomplish the compassionate balancing act between those two worlds. It has been several years now since that balance has been near the center. I pray that someday it will level out again.
But I am just a simple guy so what do I know…..
RJ's Corner - Old Version 
Younger then you- but a gavel to gavel watcher as well. My first gavel to gavel was the ’68 election. I would say that they are far more civil now. I prefer the ones that are crazy- with people arguing in the isles. They hammered out what the planks were in the party line in front of us.
Now we have loads of lip service. We, the viewers, are simply that. We hold no weight. There are no arguments.
There is a false belief that life was so much more calm and civil those days. I remember the Vietnam war protests. Those got things changed. Now we are lucky if anyone even says anything when a President says one thing and their own congress does something different….
LikeLike
Good morning Janette. What I call civil is different than you. I do agree that the 60’s conventions were rancorous. There was a lot of arguing and screening but there was not the hatred that seems so prevalent today. It was more of a battle of ideas than a demonization of a person.
You are right, the crazy stuff is what made the conventions so interesting. That and the fact that many times the final candidate was not already pre-chosen. I would have loved to have been able to watch the 1860 convention. Talk about rancorous!
LikeLike