Which Florida victory was more impressive: 2004 for Bush or 2020 for Trump?

[Woody]

?

[Schiff for Senate]

2020, of course. Yes, the margin for Trump was 'only' 3.36%, and it was about 5% for Bush - but you must remember Bush won the popular vote and the election in 2004, while Trump lost the popular vote by 4 points and the electoral college. To put some perspective, GA and AZ voted to the left of Florida in 2020 (while FL voted to the left of both in 2004).

[Vosem]

Florida was two points right of the nation in 2004, but eight points right of the nation in 2020.

[bagelman]

Trump managed to completely revert the Cuban vote back to the way it was in the past.

[TwinGeeks99]

Obviously 2020 was far more impressive of a win. For one thing in 2004, Bush decisively won the popular vote nationwide, so Florida wasn't as much to the right of the country as a whole. He also had the advantage in that his brother was the popular governor of the state at the time. In 2020 however, Florida voted so much more to the right of the nation. Not only was this one of the few states that Trump improved on compared to four years prior, he also managed to reverse 16 years of Democratic trends in Miami-Dade by doing very well among Cuban-American and other Latino groups in the county.

[Sir Mohamed]

2020 is without a doubt the answer. It's not so much because of the polls; Trump gained among Hispanic voters, including several Clinton '16 voters. It's even more impressive by considering Trump actually lost the 2020 election nationally while W improved almost across the board in 2004 vs. 2000.

Before 2016 and perhaps even until 2018, Trump was considered a bad fit for the state and 2016 more of a fluke. In 2000, it was the opposite and actually surprising W didn't win FL outright.

[Mr.Phips]

2020 is without a doubt the answer. It's not so much because of the polls; Trump gained among Hispanic voters, including several Clinton '16 voters. It's even more impressive by considering Trump actually lost the 2020 election nationally while W improved almost across the board in 2004 vs. 2000.

Before 2016 and perhaps even until 2018, Trump was considered a bad fit for the state and 2016 more of a fluke. In 2000, it was the opposite and actually surprising W didn't win FL outright.

Yeah Gore’s performance in Florida in 2000 was actually pretty impressive given that he only barely won the popular vote.

[Alben Barkley]

2020 is without a doubt the answer. It's not so much because of the polls; Trump gained among Hispanic voters, including several Clinton '16 voters. It's even more impressive by considering Trump actually lost the 2020 election nationally while W improved almost across the board in 2004 vs. 2000.

Before 2016 and perhaps even until 2018, Trump was considered a bad fit for the state and 2016 more of a fluke. In 2000, it was the opposite and actually surprising W didn't win FL outright.

Yeah Gore’s performance in Florida in 2000 was actually pretty impressive given that he only barely won the popular vote.

It was because he won the senior vote. Partly thanks to some New Deal Democrats still being alive (and retiring in Florida), partly thanks to his talk of a Social Security "lockbox" while Dubya talked about gutting/"reforming" the system. That alone really should have won the state for him, combined with Lieberman as his running mate. The fact that it was ultimately a virtual tie that, along with other states he should have won (such as New Hampshire and Tennessee), cost him the election, is not really impressive all things considered.

Gore should have been favored to win Florida and the whole election quite comfortably given Clinton's popularity and the state of the economy as well as his more popular policies and Bush's nepotism and lack of experience, but his campaign was really not very good. Distancing himself from Clinton was a completely unnecessary, fatal self-own. Lieberman also did not help in Florida nearly as much as someone like Graham would have, while also probably hurting the ticket elsewhere (losing left-wing voters to Nader). And Gore barely bothered to campaign in his own home state while Dubya seized on the opportunity to embarrass him there. Not letting Clinton campaign also probably cost him Arkansas. Shaheen also would have been a better choice of running mate to lock down New Hampshire.

Really, lots of horrendous mistakes in that campaign. If anything it's a miracle it was as close as it was given how poorly it was run. Goes to show how much Clinton's popularity ensured that any Democratic campaign had a high floor. Gore basically had to try to lose, and that's pretty much exactly what he did by distancing himself from one of the most popular presidents in history. One of the most baffling and bone-headed campaign strategies of all-time. I don't think the fact that he almost won Florida anyway comes close to making up for it.