Opinion
[Opinion] DEEP STATE? We must stand with our President.
Published
9 years agoon
By
Randy RossORLANDO, Fla. (FNN NEWS) – So what exactly is the “deep state?”
I must admit, when I first heard the term “deep state” I thought of something dark, as in political horror movie. Then I realized I needed to do some more research to clearly understand where the darkness stems from. What I quickly realized is it’s basically anything or anyone that goes against the establishment. And it’s no secret our President certainly is going against the grain. Yet for 63,000,000 that’s exactly why we elected him. Remember?
Lately we’re hearing more and more about the “deep state,” but what exactly is this shadow government? “A body of people, typically influential members of government agencies or the military, believed to be involved in the secret manipulation or control of government policy,” is the traditional definition. Uniquely, with the election of President Trump, there are rumors the “deep state” is on the rise. And with the abnormal amount of media leaks we can “assume” the “deep state” is alive and well … and close to the oval office.
Here’s what we know. 2016 yielded a amazing victory for our President. One that has certainly sent the establishment into a tailspin. And we also know that establishment folks aren’t having it. From Senator McCain (Republican) to Senator Chuck Schumer (Democrat), there is certainly an underground effort to discredit our President and his Administration.
The purpose of this short is simply to ensure we all know what we’re talking about when we hear the term “deep state.” Don’t get it twisted: there is an underlying desire to undermine and discredit our President and his Administration and it’s being advanced by a group of existing and failed political figures that simply are in the way of the future–the future we elected our President to lead us into.
In the coming weeks I will continue to share insights into the “deep state”: what we know, and what we don’t, and moreover, what we must learn so that our President truly has a chance to “Make America Great Again.” A mission many are already making clear they will not allow advanced very easily.
__________________________________________________
Randy Ross is a political contributor for Florida National News.
Florida
FNN ANALYSIS: After 2024 Defections, Florida Democrats Face 2026 Election Test: Can They Rebuild as Republicans Expand Their Advantage?
Published
17 hours agoon
September 12, 2026Republicans built a legislative supermajority through elections before two House Democrats switched parties and the Senate Democratic leader became unaffiliated. Now Democrats are trying to rebuild amid a GOP voter-registration advantage exceeding 1.54 million — and signs that some Republican-held districts remain competitive.
By Florida National News
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (FNN) — Six years ago, Florida Democrats held enough seats in the state House to prevent Republicans from reaching a two-thirds supermajority.
Today, the political landscape looks dramatically different.
Republicans emerged from the 2020 election with 78 of the Florida House’s 120 seats, two short of the 80 required for a two-thirds majority. Democrats held 42.
By the end of the 2024 election, Republicans had 85 seats and Democrats 35. Then two newly reelected Democratic representatives — Susan Valdés of Tampa and Hillary Cassel of Broward County — switched to the Republican Party, expanding the GOP advantage to 87-33.
Four months later, another high-profile departure came in the Senate. Democratic Leader Jason Pizzo left his party and became unaffiliated.
Those defections attracted significant attention, but they can obscure the larger story of Florida’s political transformation.
Party switching did not create Republican control of Tallahassee. Elections did.
The subsequent defections widened an advantage Republicans had already established at the ballot box.
Now, with the Nov. 3, 2026, general election approaching, Democrats face a more complicated test than simply winning several competitive races. They are attempting to rebuild legislative representation while confronting a Republican voter-registration advantage of more than 1.54 million active voters.
At the same time, Democratic victories in several 2026 legislative contests suggest the statewide numbers do not necessarily determine what happens district by district.
That creates three questions heading into November: Can Democrats win back legislative seats? Can Republicans protect the districts underlying their supermajority? And can both parties retain the lawmakers voters elect under their banners?
From 42 House Democrats to Republican Supermajority
The clearest starting point is 2020.
Republicans won 78 House seats, compared with 42 for Democrats. With 80 seats needed for a two-thirds majority, Democrats retained enough representation to keep Republicans below that threshold.
Former Democratic Reps. Daisy Morales of Orange County and James Bush III of Miami-Dade County were among the lawmakers elected as part of that 42-member Democratic delegation.
The balance changed decisively two years later.
Republicans expanded their House majority to 85 seats in the 2022 election, crossing the two-thirds threshold. The 2024 election again produced an 85-35 Republican advantage.
That chronology is important because it separates two different political developments.
Republicans gained the supermajority through elections. The Democratic defections came afterward.
The distinction also provides a clearer measurement of Democratic decline: from 42 House seats after the 2020 election to 35 after the 2024 election — a net reduction of seven seats before either Valdés or Cassel changed parties.
Two House Democrats Switch Parties
The first post-election departure came quickly.
On Dec. 9, 2024, Valdés announced she was leaving the Democratic Party and joining the Republican Party, just weeks after voters reelected her as a Democrat.
Her switch moved the House from 85 Republicans and 35 Democrats to 86-34.
Less than three weeks later, Cassel followed.
On Dec. 27, Cassel announced she also was leaving the Democratic Party for the GOP.
The House moved to 87 Republicans and 33 Democrats.
Florida Democratic Party Chair Nikki Fried criticized Cassel’s decision at the time while acknowledging the difficult political environment facing Democrats.
The significance went beyond losing two caucus members.
A direct switch from Democrat to Republican changes the partisan margin by two: Democrats lose one seat while Republicans simultaneously gain one.
The two defections therefore transformed an 85-35 House into an 87-33 chamber without another general election being held.
Senate Democratic Leader Becomes Unaffiliated
The next departure was politically significant but fundamentally different.
On April 24, 2025, Pizzo announced he was leaving the Democratic Party while serving as Senate Democratic leader. His voter registration became No Party Affiliation the following day.
He did not become a Republican.
That distinction matters when measuring party switching. Valdés and Cassel directly increased the Republican House caucus. Pizzo’s departure did not add a Republican senator.
It nevertheless cost Democrats a sitting senator and their caucus leader. Sen. Lori Berman subsequently became Senate Democratic leader.
An FNN review of these high-profile departures from 2020 through 2026 therefore identifies three sitting Democratic state lawmakers leaving the party:
Valdés: Democrat → Republican
Cassel: Democrat → Republican
Pizzo: Democrat → No Party Affiliation
FNN’s review did not identify a comparable sitting Republican Florida legislator who switched directly to the Democratic Party during the same period.
But the numbers reinforce the larger point: the movement of individual lawmakers accelerated a political shift that had already occurred through elections.
The Bigger Transformation Is Outside the Capitol
The change in Florida’s voter-registration balance has been even more dramatic than the movement inside the Legislature.
In 2020, Florida reported 5,315,954 active registered Democrats and 5,218,739 Republicans.
Democrats held an advantage of 97,215 voters.
As of July 31, 2026, Florida reported:
| Party affiliation | Active voters |
|---|---|
| Republican | 5,607,836 |
| Democratic | 4,066,503 |
| No Party Affiliation | 3,327,656 |
| Minor parties | 497,679 |
| Total | 13,499,674 |
Republicans now lead Democrats by 1,541,333 active registered voters, according to the Florida Division of Elections.
Measured from the Democratic advantage in 2020 to the Republican advantage in July 2026, the Republican-Democratic registration margin shifted by approximately 1.64 million voters.
That is one of the most important numbers for understanding Florida politics entering the 2026 general election.
But it also requires careful interpretation.
A decline in active Democratic registration cannot automatically be described as more than a million Democrats becoming Republicans.
Voter rolls change for multiple reasons, including deaths, people moving into or out of Florida, new registrations, inactive classifications, list maintenance and voters changing party affiliation.
The more defensible conclusion is narrower but still consequential:
Florida moved from a slight Democratic registration advantage in 2020 to a Republican advantage exceeding 1.5 million active voters by mid-2026.
That is a structural change extending far beyond a handful of lawmakers changing parties.
More Than 3.3 Million Voters Belong to Neither Major Party
There is another number that complicates any attempt to translate registration totals directly into election outcomes.
Florida had more than 3.32 million active voters registered with no party affiliation as of July 31.
That electorate is larger than the population of many states.
Those voters do not form a single ideological bloc, and their existence does not erase the GOP registration advantage. But they reinforce why statewide party registration alone cannot determine the outcome of individual legislative races.
Florida legislative elections are decided district by district.
Candidate quality, fundraising, turnout, district boundaries, local demographics, campaign organization and voter enthusiasm can produce outcomes that differ from statewide trends.
That distinction has become especially relevant in 2026.
Democrats Have Shown They Can Still Flip Republican-Held Seats
For Democrats, the strongest counterargument to the state’s broader Republican trend has come from actual election results.
Democrat Emily Gregory flipped House District 87 in a March 2026 special election, defeating Republican Jon Maples.
The result drew attention because Republican Mike Caruso had carried the district by roughly 19 percentage points in 2024.
Democrat Brian Nathan also flipped Senate District 14, defeating Republican Josie Tomkow by just over 400 votes.
Those results demonstrated that at least some Republican-held legislative districts remain competitive under the right electoral conditions.
Florida Democrats have also expanded year-round organizing and made breaking the Republican legislative supermajority a central objective of the 2026 cycle.
But special elections come with an important warning.
They typically involve smaller and sometimes substantially different electorates than November general elections.
Republicans have pointed to House District 35 as evidence of that difference. Democrat Tom Keen won the Orlando-area seat in a January 2024 special election, only for Republicans to reclaim it during the November general election.
The 2026 Democratic flips therefore provide evidence of competitiveness, not proof of a statewide reversal.
November will provide the larger test.
Republicans Have a Structural Advantage — But Still Must Defend It
The challenge facing Republicans is different.
They do not need to rebuild a legislative majority. They already possess one.
They enter the election with a House supermajority and a statewide registration advantage that would have been difficult to envision when Democrats still led voter registration in 2020.
The question is whether those structural advantages continue translating into legislative victories across Florida.
A statewide registration lead does not make every Republican-held district equally secure.
The Gregory and Nathan victories demonstrate that Democrats can still win Republican-held territory, particularly when turnout, candidate performance and district conditions align.
For Republicans, November therefore becomes a test of durability.
Can the party maintain the legislative gains it accumulated over multiple election cycles while defending districts Democrats now view as opportunities?
The Democratic Challenge Is Now Twofold: Win Seats and Keep Them
For Democrats, the experience following the 2024 election introduces another issue that cannot be measured solely on election night.
Political parties invest substantial resources recruiting candidates, raising money, organizing voters and winning legislative seats.
But caucus strength ultimately depends on keeping those lawmakers after they take office.
The Valdés and Cassel switches demonstrated how quickly that calculation can change.
Democrats won 35 House seats in November 2024. Weeks later, they had 33 members because two lawmakers elected as Democrats joined Republicans.
Pizzo’s departure presented a different version of the same organizational problem: Democrats lost their Senate leader even though he did not join the Republican Party.
That creates two separate measurements for Democratic rebuilding:
Electoral growth: Can Democrats increase the number of legislative seats they win?
Caucus stability: Can they retain the lawmakers elected as Democrats?
Winning without retention can limit rebuilding. Retention without winning additional districts leaves the party’s minority position largely unchanged.
Democrats need both if their objective is to reduce Republican legislative dominance.
Former Lawmakers Add Another Dimension to the Rebuilding Debate
The 2026 cycle also raises questions about how a minority party decides where to invest limited political resources.
Morales and Bush were members of the 42-seat Democratic House delegation elected in 2020. Both later left the Legislature and subsequently sought returns through Democratic primaries.
Their races, districts and political circumstances are different and should be evaluated separately.
But their candidacies illustrate a broader strategic issue facing any party attempting to rebuild:
How should resources be divided among defending incumbents, supporting challengers in opposition-held districts, recruiting newcomers and considering former lawmakers seeking a return to office?
There is no single formula.
A former legislator may bring name recognition, fundraising relationships and legislative experience. A newcomer may offer stronger district appeal or represent a changing electorate. An incumbent may require significant resources simply to prevent the party from losing another seat.
The effectiveness of those decisions ultimately can be measured by outcomes.
Does the party gain seats?
Does it protect vulnerable seats?
Does it expand into territory previously controlled by the opposition?
And does it retain the lawmakers it helped elect?
Those questions become particularly important when one party is operating from a substantial numerical disadvantage.
What Has Actually Changed Since 2024?
For Democrats, there are identifiable changes since the immediate aftermath of the 2024 election.
The Florida Democratic Party retained Nikki Fried as chair in 2025, expanded its year-round organizing operation and increased regional staffing ahead of the 2026 cycle.
The party has continued its Take Back Local initiative aimed at municipal and local races while placing greater emphasis on legislative contests.
And Democrats have produced tangible 2026 victories, including Republican-held legislative seats.
Those developments provide evidence of organizational activity and some electoral progress.
They have not, however, erased the larger structural imbalance.
Republicans still hold the legislative supermajority.
Republicans still lead statewide active voter registration by more than 1.54 million.
Democrats still must gain substantially more legislative ground before control of either chamber becomes competitive.
The most accurate description of the Democratic position heading toward November is therefore neither collapse nor comeback.
It is a rebuilding test whose results remain unresolved.
Why It Matters to Florida Voters
The significance extends beyond the internal fortunes of either political party.
A legislative supermajority can affect the balance of power in Tallahassee because it gives the majority party sufficient numbers to take actions that require more than a simple majority.
The size of the minority caucus also affects committee representation, legislative negotiations, the ability to sustain or challenge certain procedural actions and the overall political leverage available to the opposition.
That makes legislative competition relevant even when control of a chamber is not immediately in doubt.
For Democratic voters, 2026 provides a measurable test of whether the party can translate organizing and special-election victories into broader legislative gains.
For Republican voters, it tests whether the political coalition that produced the GOP’s current advantage remains durable in a general election.
For NPA and minor-party voters, it underscores the potential importance of voters outside either major party in competitive districts.
And for Florida voters generally, it provides a way to distinguish political narratives from measurable results.
The Numbers to Watch on Nov. 3
The 2026 general election is scheduled for Nov. 3. Florida’s voter-registration deadline is Oct. 5, with mandatory statewide early voting scheduled for Oct. 24-31.
Rather than judging Florida’s political direction from one race, three measurements will provide a clearer picture.
First: Legislative seats.
Do Democrats finish the election with more House and Senate seats than they entered with, or do Republicans maintain or expand their advantage?
Second: Republican registration advantage versus district results.
Does the GOP’s statewide registration lead translate consistently into legislative victories, or do Democrats continue outperforming the statewide environment in selected districts?
Third: Caucus stability.
After voters choose their lawmakers, do the members remain with the parties under whose banners they were elected?
Together, those measurements will provide a better indication of Florida’s direction than any isolated special election, party switch or registration statistic.
A Six-Year Transformation
The numbers tell the story clearly.
In 2020, Democrats held 42 Florida House seats, and Republicans were two seats short of a supermajority.
Democrats also held a 97,215-voter statewide registration advantage.
By 2024, Republicans had won 85 House seats, already exceeding the supermajority threshold.
Two Democratic defections subsequently increased the Republican House caucus to 87 while reducing Democrats to 33.
And by July 2026, Republicans held a statewide registration advantage of 1,541,333 active voters.
Those developments represent a profound shift in Florida politics.
But elections are snapshots, not permanent guarantees.
Democrats’ 2026 legislative flips show that Republican-held districts can still change hands. Republicans’ statewide numbers show the scale of the challenge Democrats face in turning isolated victories into sustained gains.
That is why Nov. 3 matters.
The central question is no longer simply whether Florida has moved toward Republicans. The electoral and registration numbers already establish that Republicans have gained substantial ground since 2020.
The unanswered question is whether that movement has reached a durable plateau — or whether Democrats have begun rebuilding enough support to reverse some of those losses.
The first meaningful statewide answer comes in November.
NEXT FNN ANALYSIS: Where Is the Money Going?
Election results are only one measure of rebuilding. Political investment is another.
FNN’s next examination should follow the money behind Florida House races: where Democratic political organizations are spending, which candidates receive institutional support, how much is directed toward Democratic primaries and how those expenditures compare with resources devoted to defending Democratic seats or challenging Republican-held districts.
That examination can include the Florida House Democratic Campaign Committee, campaign committees and related political spending while carefully distinguishing verified campaign-finance transactions from allegations or disputed claims involving individual campaigns.
The central question is measurable:
At a time when Democrats say they are trying to break the Republican supermajority, are Democratic political resources being deployed in ways that expand, protect or reduce the party’s representation in the Florida House?
That is a separate story — and one best answered through campaign-finance records rather than political rhetoric.
Florida
FNN Perspective: Cynthia Moore Chestnut’s Byron Donalds Endorsement Spotlights Nearly Four Decades of Public Service and Cross-Party Politics
Published
6 days agoon
September 6, 2026Gainesville Democrat’s support for the Republican nominee renews debate over Black representation, party loyalty, political choice and the freedom to disagree
FNN PERSPECTIVE — Gainesville City Commissioner Cynthia Moore Chestnut’s endorsement of Republican gubernatorial nominee Byron Donalds has generated criticism from fellow Democrats and opened a broader discussion about party loyalty, Black political representation and an American political tradition that allows voters and public figures to cross party lines for many different reasons.
This perspective examines Chestnut’s decision in the context of her nearly four decades of public service, her stated reasons for supporting Donalds, historical examples of cross-party endorsements and the freedom of Americans to support — and criticize — political candidates.
Cynthia Moore Chestnut’s Nearly Four Decades of Public Service
Chestnut’s endorsement represents one decision in a public-service career extending back nearly four decades.
A Tallahassee native, Chestnut earned a bachelor’s degree in speech pathology from Florida A&M University, a master’s degree in speech pathology from Florida State University and a doctorate in public administration from Nova Southeastern University.
She became the first Black woman elected to the Gainesville City Commission, then broke additional barriers in state and county government. She became the first woman and first Black person elected to represent Florida House District 23 and later the first Black woman elected to the Alachua County Commission and the first to chair it, according to her official city biography.
Chestnut also became deeply involved in Democratic Party leadership, including service in county and state party organizations.
That history helps explain why her decision to support a Republican for governor has attracted attention beyond an ordinary political endorsement.
Why Cynthia Moore Chestnut Endorsed Byron Donalds
Chestnut has made clear that she remains a Democrat.
She initially emphasized political independence, her belief that Black voters should not be considered the property of either party and her desire to see Florida elect its first Black governor.
But Chestnut has since provided additional context.
In a Sept. 5 interview, she said Democratic nominee David Jolly’s selection of Gwen Graham as his running mate significantly influenced her decision. Chestnut criticized what she called an “all-white ticket” and said she believed Jolly missed an opportunity to select a Black or Hispanic running mate who could broaden the ticket’s representation and appeal.
Chestnut also said she spoke with Donalds and came away impressed that he listened to her. She told the interviewer that supporting Donalds does not mean she is becoming a Republican and said she does not support President Donald Trump.
Those additional details are important because they demonstrate that Chestnut’s endorsement cannot accurately be reduced to a single consideration.
LaVon Bracy Davis Strongly Disagrees With Chestnut
Democratic state Sen. LaVon Bracy Davis has offered a sharply different assessment.
Bracy Davis criticized the endorsement and questioned how Chestnut could reconcile her history of Democratic and Black political leadership with Donalds’ political record.
Her objections have included Donalds’ positions on voting rights and his relationship with the MAGA movement. Bracy Davis also rejected the idea that the possibility of electing Florida’s first Black governor should outweigh her concerns about Donalds’ policies.
The disagreement illustrates an important feature of political expression: Chestnut is free to explain why she crossed party lines, while Bracy Davis and others are equally free to challenge the reasoning behind that decision.
Cross-Party Endorsements Happen for Many Different Reasons
There is no single explanation for crossing party lines.
Voters and political leaders may support someone from another party because of policy, qualifications, leadership, personal relationships, representation, dissatisfaction with their own party, a particular issue or their individual assessment of the candidates in a particular election.
American political history contains numerous examples.
Some Democrats have supported Republicans. Some Republicans have supported Democrats. Others have left one party entirely or changed their registration.
Those decisions should be examined individually rather than treated as politically equivalent.
Gen. Colin Powell and Other Republicans Crossed Party Lines for Barack Obama
One prominent example occurred during the historic 2008 presidential election.
Republican former Secretary of State and retired Gen. Colin Powell endorsed Democratic nominee Barack Obama over Republican nominee John McCain, despite Powell’s longstanding friendship with McCain.
Powell cited several considerations, including leadership, economic issues, foreign policy, the direction of the Republican campaign and McCain’s selection of Sarah Palin. He described Obama as a “transformational figure” and said that although he recognized the racial significance of the election, race was not the dominant reason for his endorsement.
Powell was not alone.
Obama’s campaign organized a Republicans for Obama effort that included former Republican Rep. Jim Leach of Iowa, former Republican Sen. Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island and former Bush foreign-policy adviser Rita Hauser. Republican Fairbanks Mayor Jim Whitaker also endorsed Obama.
Leach cited foreign policy and the national interest in explaining his decision. The various Republicans who supported Obama therefore did not necessarily cross party lines for precisely the same reason.
Obama went on to become the first Black president of the United States.
Obama and Donalds Are Different — The Comparison Is Cross-Party Choice
The historical comparison should have clear limits.
Barack Obama and Byron Donalds are different candidates, from different political eras, with different records, constituencies and policy positions. Likewise, Powell’s reasons for endorsing Obama were his own and should not be equated with Chestnut’s reasons for endorsing Donalds.
The relevant historical connection is narrower: prominent political figures have crossed party lines for different reasons throughout American political history.
Powell made one decision based on his assessment of the 2008 candidates. Chestnut has made another based on her stated considerations in Florida’s 2026 governor’s race.
Neither example establishes how someone else should vote.
John McCain Demonstrated That Opposition Does Not Require Misinformation
The 2008 campaign provides another relevant lesson — this time about political disagreement rather than endorsement.
McCain was trying to defeat Obama.
Yet during an October 2008 campaign event, McCain corrected supporters who expressed fear about Obama and rejected a woman’s false characterization of Obama as an Arab.
McCain described Obama as a “decent family man” and citizen with whom he had serious disagreements on fundamental issues. He also urged his supporters to remain respectful.
McCain did not stop opposing Obama. He continued campaigning against him.
The episode demonstrated that vigorous political opposition and respect for factual accuracy do not have to be mutually exclusive.
Political Expression Includes Endorsement and Criticism
That principle brings the discussion back to Chestnut.
Political speech and association receive substantial protection from government infringement under the First Amendment, subject to established legal limitations.
Americans can advocate for candidates, criticize public officials, associate politically, change parties or decline to follow a party’s preferred candidate.
But freedom of expression does not insulate a political decision from criticism.
Chestnut can explain why she believes Donalds deserves her support. Bracy Davis and others can argue that Donalds’ record should disqualify him from receiving that support.
Political freedom does not require everyone to reach the same conclusion.
David Jolly’s Political Journey Adds Another Dimension
The 2026 governor’s race itself demonstrates that political affiliations can change.
Democratic nominee David Jolly previously represented Florida in Congress as a Republican. He subsequently left the Republican Party, became unaffiliated and registered as a Democrat in 2025 before seeking the Democratic nomination for governor.
His situation is different from Chestnut’s.
Jolly changed parties. Chestnut says she remains a Democrat while supporting the Republican nominee.
But the two circumstances reinforce a broader point: party affiliation can be important without determining every political decision an individual makes.
One Endorsement, Nearly Four Decades of Public Service
Chestnut’s Donalds endorsement may become one of the most debated decisions of her long political career.
Critics can consider it significant. They can examine Donalds’ record, Chestnut’s stated reasons and her history in Democratic politics and reach their own conclusions.
Her broader record is also part of the story.
For nearly four decades, Chestnut has served in municipal, state and county government, broken racial and gender barriers, participated in Democratic Party leadership and remained active in Gainesville and Alachua County civic life.
One endorsement does not require the public to disregard that history. And nearly four decades of public service do not place one endorsement beyond public scrutiny.
Both can be examined together.
Florida Voters Will Make Their Own Choice
Ultimately, an endorsement does not cast anyone else’s ballot.
Chestnut has made her choice and explained her reasons. Her critics have exercised their freedom to challenge that choice. Donalds and Jolly will make their cases to voters.
Floridians will make the final decision for themselves.
That may be the larger lesson of the controversy surrounding Chestnut.
Cross-party endorsements happen for different reasons. Political affiliations can change. People who share a party affiliation can reach very different conclusions about candidates.
The ability to support, oppose, endorse, criticize, organize and vote reflects political freedoms that generations of Americans fought to expand — including Black Americans who confronted Jim Crow disenfranchisement and discrimination in the struggle for full political participation.
Chestnut’s nearly four decades of public service form part of that broader history.
Her endorsement of Donalds is now another chapter — one Floridians remain free to support, oppose, question or debate.
Entertainment
Bad Bunny’s Halftime Show Was a Master Class in American Culture
Published
7 months agoon
February 19, 2026A reminder that diversity is not a threat — it is America’s strength.
By The Honorable Rick Singh
Former Orange County Property Appraiser
Bad Bunny’s halftime performance reminded us of something every American needs to hear right now:
We may come from different places, but we share far more in common than we sometimes realize. Our greatest strength has always been our willingness to embrace diversity — not fear it.
As an elected official, I delivered many speeches over the years. But one of the most meaningful moments of my public service was speaking to newly sworn American citizens — individuals who had taken their oath of citizenship just minutes before I addressed them.
I can tell you this: they were some of the proudest Americans I have ever encountered — men and women from every corner of the world, united by one oath and one dream.
For many, English was a second language. For some, this was the first country they had ever traveled to. But the pride in their eyes was unmistakable.
Watching them always brought me back to my own story.
I still remember arriving in America as a 10-year-old after spending my first decade of life in tropical Guyana — and experiencing so many things for the first time: winter in New York City without a coat, running water, electricity, trains, cars, and even an escalator, which absolutely terrified me.
I shared those experiences with them. I also shared my mother’s journey — her strength and sacrifice — which inspired me and reminded me of what so many immigrant families endure with quiet courage.
And I reminded those new Americans of something important:
Be proud of your culture.
Be proud of your food.
Be proud of your faith.
Be proud of your music.
Not only be proud of it — share it.
Share it with your American neighbors and friends, because that’s how we foster harmony and understanding.
When we share our traditions, we don’t just celebrate who we are — we educate. We break down stereotypes. We replace fear with familiarity. And we turn strangers into neighbors.
That is how we grow closer. That is how we build community.
And that brings me back to Bad Bunny.
His performance spoke powerfully to the idea of diversity — and to the universal language that connects all people: music. In many ways, it was world culture presented on one of America’s biggest stages.
It was also a master class in Puerto Rican culture — which I must remind some people is American culture.
Like so much of Latin America and the Caribbean, it also carried a deeper story: slavery and the legacy of indentured laborers, including those brought from India, who cut sugar cane and planted crops that fueled global empires.
When I saw the sugar cane fields in the performance visuals, I was reminded of where I was born — Guyana — where I spent my first ten years of life. My parents were humble sugar cane farmers.
The coconut stand selling fresh coconuts reminded me of Bourda Market in Georgetown.
And the vibrant Latin music took me right back to my childhood in the Bronx — hearing legends like El Gran Combo de Puerto Rico, Tito Puente, Eddie Palmieri, and Iris Chacón playing from apartment windows or speakers on fire escapes.
Different cultures.
Different rhythms.
Different drums from different lands.
But one shared spirit.
That’s America.
And when we embrace that truth, we don’t become weaker — we become stronger.
Because the reality is simple:
Together, we are all American.
Across Latin America and the Caribbean — regardless of language, flag, or heritage — we share lived experiences shaped by common history: agricultural roots, multi-generational homes, the neighborhood bodega or corner shop, struggle and resilience, rhythm and resistance, elders playing dominoes, and families gathering around food and music.
It’s not geography.
It’s identity.
It’s music.
In the end, Bad Bunny delivered something meaningful — not just for Puerto Ricans, but for every immigrant and every family with a story like mine.
His performance wasn’t just music and spectacle. It was a reflection of who we are, where we come from, and what we’ve overcome.
It reminded millions that being American isn’t about looking a certain way or speaking a certain language. It’s about owning your story, celebrating your roots, and contributing that richness to the shared tapestry of this country.
Boricua love, baby — you’ve got to love it.
Trending
Business4 days agoAdventHealth Recruiting Nurses, Technologists and Clinical Professionals at 8 Central Florida Locations
Crimes and Courts5 days agoDOJ Charges Five in Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Wisconsin in Alleged Illegal Voting, Voter Registration Cases
Central Florida News3 days agoState House Democratic Nominee Samuel Vilchez Santiago Faces Defamation Lawsuit, Election Law Investigation
Business5 days agoDOJ, DOT and DHS Launch Nationwide Crackdown on CDL Fraud, Trucking Schools and Unqualified Drivers
Crimes and Courts5 days agoDOJ: Man Charged With Laundering Conspiracy in $1.3 Billion Medicare, Health Insurance Fraud Scheme