In this election cycle the OutSFL Editorial Board has adopted an across-the-board Democratic endorsement for the 2026 general election.

Shocking, we know. An LGBTQ newspaper in Florida endorsing Democrats. 

But there is something unusual about this decision.

Historically, our endorsements have been selective. 

We have evaluated individual candidates, examined their records and considered the merits of particular races. An endorsement was never intended to be automatic simply because a candidate had a D or an R beside their name.

This year, the board has taken a different approach.

That decision comes after eight years of Ron DeSantis scapegoating and targeting the LGBTQ community; Republican lawmakers rubber-stamping his hatefulness and divisiveness; and two years of Donald Trump reviving the politics of grievance, division, unparalleled corruption, and personal loyalty at the national level.

During that period, Florida has experienced significant debates over LGBTQ rights, public education, reproductive freedom and the limits of government authority. At the national level, longstanding expectations surrounding presidential conduct, political rhetoric and respect for democratic institutions have faced intense scrutiny.

These developments form the backdrop to our decision.

They also raise a larger question about the kind of political leadership Florida needs and the standards voters should expect from those seeking office.

But changes are in the air, and hope is on the horizon.

As Donald Trump once asked, “What do you have to lose?”

That question has been answered repeatedly over the last two years.

From tariffs to inflation, from affordability to the erosion of economic security, from attacks on democratic institutions to the scapegoating of LGBTQ people, we know what we have to lose. We know what there is to lose.

Which brings us to some specific candidates. We understand there are some deep divisions within the Democratic Party right now. 

Angie Nixon comes from its progressive wing and has been associated with democratic socialism. David Jolly is a former Republican congressman who joined the Democratic Party after breaking with his former political home.

There are Democrats who question Nixon’s ideological positions. Others remain skeptical of Jolly’s Republican history.

Those disagreements are real. Political records matter, and no candidate should be immune from criticism.

But a political coalition does not require unanimous agreement on every issue. It requires identifying common objectives while acknowledging that its members may disagree about how best to achieve them.

The differences between Nixon and Jolly illustrate both the possibilities and the difficulties of building such a coalition.

They also demonstrate why political labels alone cannot tell voters everything they need to know about a candidate.

We recently saw a prominent LGBTQ activist urge their followers to reject Democrats they perceive as anti-transgender. We understand that gut reaction. Transgender rights are human rights, and our community has every reason to demand better from those who seek our support.

But there is more at stake than the positions of a handful of Democrats on trans issues. And there is a difference between a politician who has yet to embrace full equality, and one who actively works to undermine it.

History offers a valuable lesson. Not so long ago, many Democrats opposed marriage equality and other LGBTQ rights. Over time, many evolved, listened, learned and ultimately became advocates for the very rights they once resisted.

Imagine if our community had written off every one of those politicians before they had the opportunity to change. Imagine if we had refused to engage, persuade or build alliances with those who were not yet fully on our side.

Progress rarely happens overnight, and it seldom happens by demanding ideological perfection from everyone who might become an ally.

That does not mean giving Democrats a free pass on trans rights. Far from it. It means continuing to challenge them, educate them and hold them accountable while recognizing that political change often requires bringing people along rather than pushing them away.

We should never compromise our commitment to trans equality. But neither should we confuse the work of changing hearts and minds with the expectation that everyone must already agree with us.

Character and judgment matter. So does the willingness to maintain standards of conduct even in the heat of a difficult campaign.

The recent controversy involving Republican gubernatorial candidate Vivek Ramaswamy in Ohio illustrates how far political decency has fallen.

Ramaswamy’s campaign released an advertisement featuring the estranged mother of his Democratic opponent, Amy Acton, attacking her daughter’s honesty while omitting Acton’s history of childhood sexual abuse by her stepfather, who was indicted but fled before trial.

Even Republican Gov. Mike DeWine called for the ad’s withdrawal. Ramaswamy refused, President Donald Trump defended it, and Vice President JD Vance urged Republicans to focus on winning rather than criticizing the campaign.

An election campaign can be vigorous, confrontational and uncompromising without abandoning basic standards of conduct. And voters are entitled to evaluate not only what candidates promise to accomplish, but how they conduct themselves while seeking power.

That principle applies to Democrats as well.

An endorsement is not a declaration that a candidate is perfect. It does not mean every position is beyond dispute, every campaign promise will be fulfilled or every decision made in office will deserve approval.

Nor is an endorsement a lifetime commitment.

If elected officials disappoint their constituents, those constituents have every right to challenge their policies, organize, demand accountability and ultimately support different candidates in future elections.

That is a fundamental part of representative democracy.

Florida’s political future cannot be separated from its political history. Republicans have controlled the governor’s office for nearly three decades, and the party’s legislative super majorities have given it considerable influence over state policy.

Changing that political landscape requires more than identifying problems. It requires developing alternatives, building coalitions and persuading voters that different leadership can produce meaningful results.

For Florida’s LGBTQ community, the consequences of government decisions are especially tangible. Policies involving nondiscrimination protections, education, health care and individual liberties directly affect our readers and the communities this newspaper serves.

These issues remain central to OutSFL’s editorial priorities.

The Democratic Party contains progressives, moderates, former Republicans and people whose political views do not fit comfortably into any single ideological category.

Their disagreements will not disappear after Election Day. Nor should they. Political debate and dissent are essential to accountable government.

But cooperation does not require ideological uniformity, and political support does not require abandoning the right to criticize.

The OutSFL Editorial Board’s 2026 endorsement reflects its judgment about Florida’s political direction and the need for a different approach to governing.

So on Nov. 3 we recommend you vote blue, no matter who.