By Nick Davis

With one day left in the election season in what has seemed like an eternity, voters in Florida are getting their last helpings of Barack Obama and Mitt Romney. The Republican challenger is clinging to a one-point lead in the Sunshine State. Florida looks to be one of the absolutely critical states for both candidates due to its large amount of electoral votes, 29.

In the past, Florida has gone back and forth between both parties. In 2008, Obama won the state taking 51% of the vote while in 2004, George W. Bush won by a margin of 5% over his Democratic opponent, John Kerry.  Before Barack Obama, the last Democrat to win Florida was Clinton in 1996. Florida picks winners and that’s why each candidate isn’t taking the state lightly.

It’s likely that whoever wins Florida (and Ohio), will win the election, but don’t take my word for it, just look at numbers. In the last week alone, each candidate along with their running mates hasmade a combined 12 appearances. On top of that, the Wesleyan Media Project reported that a combined $133 million has been spent on just television advertising, breaking a Florida record.  

Another interesting, but relatively unknown fact about Florida that may explain it’s excellent presidential picks is Florida is the state where its demographics most closely resemble the nation’s as a whole. The proportion of young, old, white, black, Latino, men, and women are on par with the rest of the country according to University of South Florida political scientist, Susan MacManus.

 Not only do the candidates know the importance of Florida, the people do as well and they aren’t afraid to make a scene either. A recent Yahoo News article compiled letters from voters in Ohio and Florida, arguably the most important swing states, speaking to the political chaos and culture the state is embroiled in. One local university student attests to the overkill of political speeches, candidates, and media coverage surrounding his home. Another witnessed a band of older women shouting to anyone who would listen about the dangers of another Obama election win. There doesn’t seem to be a shortage of hostilities from either side.

While it seems like many people have made up their minds on who they are voting for, there is small chunk of independent voters in Florida who have yet to decide on a candidate. A recent poll of independent voters conducted by the Miami Herald/El Nuevo Herald/Tampa Bay Times indicated an advantage for Romney by a margin of 6 points. However, a more intriguing trend emerged among an unscientific email poll. Many who replied indicated that they were voting for their candidate in spite of the other, meaning that Florida voters may be unsatisfied with either candidate.

Given where the other states stand, it seems that Florida may be more important to Mitt Romney this campaign season than it is for Obama.  Florida is the only swing state among the top electoral vote holders, and of those, New York and California are sure bets for the Democrats. Together they combine for 84 votes, almost a third of the necessary 270. Anything can happen in the next 24 hours as evidenced by Superstorm Sandy and the ensuing chaos. Florida is surely going down to the wire.

On February 26^th, 2012, Hispanic-American neighborhood watchman George Zimmerman shot and killed 17-year old Trayvon Martin. The shooting has transfixed and divided the nation.  If Americans seem eternally hungry for yet another racially charged murder trial this is certainly their nine-course royal banquet.  In the Trayvon Martin shooting we have race, gun-violence, youth, as well as Florida’s controversial “stand your ground”, which throws some 2^nd Amendment flavor into the mix.

The sides were quickly drawn. The Miami Heat basketball team, among many other public figures, took to wearing hoodies in support of Martin. Barack Obama, in the wake of the shooting, stated, “If I had a son, he would like Trayvon Martin.”  On the other hand, FOX News Anchor Sean Hannity, among others, seemed to rally around Zimmerman for being unfairly targeted by the media.

The media frenzy that has ensued has taken different shapes and forms depending on the medium. The Pew Research Foundation found that on Cable TV and Talk Radio the conversation focused on Gun Control and Florida’s Stand Your Ground Law.  Bloggers across the web focused on race related issues. On Twitter there has been almost visceral outrage against George Zimmerman and calls for justice.

Several weeks after Martin’s death, Zimmerman was charged and arrested.  Many have raised the question to what  Is this arrest about the law, or is media pressure, egged on by social media, running the show?

In a trial of this magnitude, people from all different backgrounds have a strong and often polarizing opinion on the case. In politics, athletics, law, and entertainment, individuals are going to have their own views and make them known. Fifty years ago, if an actor or athlete wanted to voice their opinion regarding a criminal case, they would have to write a letter to a newspaper, or attempt to get interviewed. Today, social media has allowed for any individual to voice their opinion to millions in a matter of seconds. In the case of George Zimmerman, we see the positives and possible negatives of the reality and evolution of social media and technology. The positives can be found in the ability to unify large amounts of people, likeminded people, and people who wish to mourn the untimely death of a 17 year-old boy. The negatives, with all of the online talk regarding this case, can manifest themselves in an inability for George Zimmerman to have a fair trial.

The notion of fairness in this trial must pertain to both Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman. Can social media involvement on this level be fair and just for both parties? It is a difficult question to address. Already, many have issues with the charge coming over a month after the shooting. The delay can beg the question; did public support sway the decision of the Florida special prosecutor?  If in fact it did not, what other role has it played? Will it ever be possible to ascertain that role?

As previously mentioned, athletes and celebrities have taken to the web advocating their stance. As millions of people listen to and follow the words of public figures, what impact then do their statements have? Our criminal justice system is built on the concept of complete innocence until proven guilty. Prior to one opening statement, many feel Zimmerman’s guilt is not in question, and have made statements as such. Can this reality of social media give Zimmerman a fair and just trial is the real question, and a question that will soon be answered.

For many Americans, George Zimmerman will always be a name synonymous with the murder of Trayvon Martin. The court’s decision will not change this reality, and the databases of Twitter and Facebook will always contain the millions of statements made in the aftermath of Martin’s death. Social media has made this case famous, jeopardizing the prospect of a fair trial for Zimmerman.  It has also made him infamous, eliminating any normalcy he could have ever hoped for.  And that is the dark side of social media.

The not-Romney candidates have proven time and again they have staying power. Even after a decisive victory by Romney in Illinois (which was expected), Rick Santorum had just as strong a showing in southern states. Newt Gingrich, struggling to pay his bills this week, has promised to stay in the race, even if it means running his entire campaign by himself.

Given the amount of time and money that Mitt Romney is having to spend to fend off his erstwhile Republican nominees, some are expecting the 2012 general election to be relatively more easy for President Obama to be reelected. For Republicans this almost seems like snatching defeat from the jaws of victory when just a few months ago the President’s approval ratings nearly dropped below 40%.

Although Obama’s approval ratings are on the up and up, American presidential elections are not decided by the popular vote. I would still bet Obama if I were in Vegas, but there is little room for error in his campaign and much potential for the GOP to win the election through the Electoral College.

The math is relatively simple: if Romney can take McCain’s 173 votes for 2008, and add Republican leaning states and toss-ups, this is a close race.

For example, Virginia, North Carolina, and Indiana typically lean Republican, and were picked up by Bush in 2000 and 2004. So let’s give those to Romney, bringing him to 212.

Ohio and Florida are big toss-ups, also won by Bush in 2000 and 2004, and would bring Romney to 261 electoral votes (Florida has gained 2 votes since 2008). Not quite to 270, but damn close. And there are a lot of states left in play: Iowa, Colorado, Nevada, etc.

Obama currently holds a statistically solid lead in most of the aforementioned states, but it is likely that lead will shore up in those states once a clear candidate emerges from the GOP and the race gets underway.

There is a lot of time and opportunity left in this election season, and while Romney will have to battle to win states like Ohio and Florida, it is not outside the realm of possibility. There are factors and events yet that might sway the American electorate, but above all, we should remember that you cannot call a November election in March.

Hispanics are all the rage today, as far as politics are concerned.  As the fastest-growing minority group, Hispanics are the focus of elections, consumer items, and the future as a whole.  In general, they are considered a solidly Democratic voting bloc, but there are nuances to this view that come into play when talking about a Republican primary.  Hispanic-Americans come from different countries and cultures and arrive in America in different ways and settle in different areas, which means you cannot label them one way and call it a day.  Politicians and voters are becoming more aware of this and will need to tailor their approaches accordingly, which may not be easy given the multitude of factors in play.  This is especially evident in the run-up to today’s primary in Florida.

The main issue that comes up during speeches and debates by GOP candidates is immigration.  In general, most Republican candidates oppose policies that provide amnesty, do not strengthen border patrols or citizenship checks and legislation like the DREAM Act (which provides a path to citizenship via education).  These policies have allowed millions of Hispanic families to come to the U.S. over the years and so they place the GOP at odds with most Hispanic voters.  In Florida, however, things are a bit different.

The two main Hispanic blocs in Florida are Puerto Ricans and Cubans.  Puerto Ricans are American citizens, so their concerns over immigration – while not non-existent – are slightly different.  Puerto Ricans are free to move anywhere in the U.S. and are not restricted by any immigration policy or law put forward.  Traditionally, they vote Democrat.

Cuban-Americans, however, have the Communism/Castro factor.  Most Cuban-Americans in Florida fled Cuba during the Castro era.  They were able to escape an oppressive government and come to a land of freedoms, much like the boatloads of the downtrodden arriving at Ellis Island a century earlier.  Republicans fought (and continue to fight) against the scourge of Communism, having toppled the USSR and gone to war against the Viet Cong, North Korea and Red China.  The GOP’s continued resistance to Castro and Communism attracts Cuban-Americans to their rolls and has ensured the bloc’s support for many years.  Also, because of the so-called “wet foot, dry foot” policy from the mid-1990s, Cubans who make it to American soil are allowed to stay (whereas those intercepted off the coast are turned back).  This means that arrival in the U.S. is a near-guarantee of safe haven, as opposed to those immigrants that come from Mexico, Central and South American, who risk being sent back even after crossing the border.

The Republican presidential candidates have had their time to oppose immigration while focusing on the Hispanic vote in Florida.  We will see what the impact of their statements is as the primaries move on to other states.  Will they alienate the most coveted voting bloc elsewhere?  Will they change course once Florida is done with and soften their stance in an effort to woo the voters?  Voice your opinions in the discussion section.