Talk:Patrick Murphy (Florida politician)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

West refusing to concede[edit]

Marilyn Musgrave never conceded, either. Results show Allen West lost. It's outside recount range. Judges have knocked down West's requests for injunctions. Murphy is congressman-elect. -Kudzu1 (talk) 22:59, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Request for comment[edit]

The West campaign conceded to Murphy on November 20, 2012 (see here). There were no comments after November 18, so there didn't seem to be any problems or doubts of the Politico source. Eight people responded: Instaurare, Kudzu1, Rklear, Philosopher, Elcid89, RedSoxFan2434, TheRedPenOfDoom, and Orangemike.Dreambeaver(talk)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

With the election being disputed in court, should the article label Murphy the representative-elect?

  • No. The race is too close to call according to the Associated Press. Legal motions by West are pending and none of the results are officially certified. I think it would be best to call him the Democratic nominee and say the results show he holds a 2,000 vote lead over West with the race too close to call, then go into further detail. Calling him congressman-elect is not in line with what the sources are saying. Instaurare (talk) 06:20, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes. The election results have been certified by the state of Florida. West being a sore loser is not cause to completely ignore reality here. Murphy won, West lost. -Kudzu1 (talk) 07:49, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Editorializing doesn't make a good argument. Instaurare (talk) 02:27, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Neither does saying you didn't lose when you clearly lost. -Kudzu1 (talk) 03:34, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What does that have to do with the encyclopedia? Instaurare (talk) 06:05, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Huh? West is behind in the vote count. The state certified the result. We can't refuse to acknowledge reality on this article just because your preferred candidate is refusing to do so. -Kudzu1 (talk) 19:06, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
We rely on sources here, not your personal opinion of West. Instaurare (talk) 19:07, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The numbers ain't an opinion. -Kudzu1 (talk) 19:09, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
How can the numbers be "unofficial" when they have been certified by the official certifying authority? The first paragraph contradicts itself at this point. Rklear (talk) 19:38, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Which brings up an interesting question: Instaurare says they aren't certified; Kudzu1 says they are, who's right? If they are certified, list him as a representative-elect and note the dispute in the article; if they aren't certified, note him as a candidate with so-and-so lead. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 19:55, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No results are yet "certified". Counties in Florida have until tomorrow (Sunday 18 NOV) to report their certified (i.e. final) results to the state. That said, every House election in the state is reported as having been decided on the basis of unofficial results (i.e. those which have already reported to the state) other than this one. At the risk of seeming accusatory, which is not intentional, this entire discussion seems to me to be underpinned by an attempt by the OP to push a particular POV. We can't pretend that the election is finalized and decided, but we also can't essentially pretend that it never happened at all & no results of any sort have been reported. Acknowledge the reality as it currently exists on the ground and avoid editorializing. Elcid89 (talk) 20:03, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, or perhaps as "disputed Representative-elect". Even with recently-denied request for recount, it hasn't been officially called, according to the AP. [2] RedSoxFan2434 (talk) 02:32, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • we follow the sources - what are the reliable sources using? -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 15:20, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That is a question of which sources. The situation on the ground seems to be that: Murphy has been reported to the state as having won via unofficial results. He's already attending orientation events in Washington. There is some dispute as to the validity of the results (raised by West) which have resulted in a mandated recount in St. Lucie County. That may or may not change the end result. It seems to me that pretending that the election essentially hasn't produced a result at all (which is what "No" above does) is pushing a partisan POV. That said, pretending that it's a settled issue is also a POV problem. Accordingly, the best course of action is probably to acknowledge both - Murphy has tentatively won the election, and West is contesting the results. Both should be noted in the article, with it being presented as an ongoing issue. Elcid89 (talk) 19:48, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
none of the sources that I saw are calling Murphy anything. They are saying that he won the initial vote count and that West is challenging and there is now a recount in process. I think we should follow their lead. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 20:36, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Not to split hairs, but isn't that what I suggested? Elcid89 (talk) 01:44, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Patrick Murphy (born March 30, 1983)[1][2] is a Democratic politician who ran against incumbent Allen West in a contest for the United States House of Representatives for Florida's 18th congressional district in the 2012 elections. As of November 17, 2012, the election board had initially certified Murphy as the winner of the race by a narrow margin, and is conducting a recount of the early votes.[3]

The current wording looks fine to me. The proposed replacement above seems to me to place undue weight on West's protest. --Orange Mike | Talk 22:26, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

+1 - Agree Elcid89 (talk) 01:41, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "Patrick Murphy, Vice President, Coastal Environmental Services". Coastal Environmental Services. Retrieved September 29, 2012.
  2. ^ "Patrick Murphy". Sierra Club Voter Guide. Retrieved October 3, 2012.
  3. ^ [1]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Can't verify Murphy's CPA[edit]

There is no record of a CPA for Patrick Murphy in Florida. In what state did he acquire his certification? It's all over the web that he claims to be a CPA, and there are 2 CPAs by that name in Florida, but neither are this person. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.92.14.172 (talk) 23:40, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Patrick Erin Murphy was initially licensed as a CPA in the State of Colorado. Colorado license number CPA.0027662, currently active and originally issued on 09/04/2009, last renewed on 06/01/2012. Valid through 11/30/2013. Elcid89 (talk) 06:13, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Undue focus on 2003 arrest[edit]

I'm wondering whether there is undue focus on Murphy's 2003 arrest. Not that I don't think it should be in the article, but being arrested when he was 19 doesn't seem to warrant a full paragraph to me.

I'd probably say something like "As a 19-year-old freshman college student in 2003, Murphy was arrested outside a Miami Beach night club on charges of disorderly intoxication and possessing a fake driver's license. Though the charges were ultimately dropped, Murphy has called the incident "the biggest mistake of my life" and the "biggest learning experience of my life".

Thoughts? Orser67 (talk) 17:21, 13 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure it needs to be in the article at all. It's pretty trivial. You proposed version is certainly better than the lengthy paragraph in the article now.- MrX 18:17, 13 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Orser's proposed two-sentence version seems good to me. Neutralitytalk 22:10, 13 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Given that nobody has expressed an objection, I've gone ahead and made the change. Neutralitytalk 18:16, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Accountant[edit]

According to Politico, Murphy is (or was) a licensed CPA, though "he only worked as a practicing CPA for less than a year." So it's accurate that he's an accountant, though given his limited tenure as one, it doesn't seem notable enough for the lede. Champaign Supernova (talk) 18:00, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That is correct. The category should be restored and attribution tag removed. It's a simple, verifiable fact.- MrX 19:24, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I've agree, and have gone ahead and restored that content. There's no dispute that Murphy is a CPA and did work as an accountant, albeit rather briefly. I've also slightly broadened the first sentence's descriptor to "American businessman, accountant, politician..." because he's probably identified as a businessman as much as an accountant. This pretty much reflects what the sources say. Neutralitytalk 21:47, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Murphy is not an Accountant. He has a CPA from Colorado, this does not satisfy the Florida Accountant licensing criteria. He is ineligible from practicing as an Accountant. He has never worked as an Accountant. He worked as an Auditor for 8 months, which is a separate profession requiring no license in the state of Florida. It would be reasonable to say that he is an Auditor, it is not reasonable to say that he is an Accountant, a profession for which he is unlicensed to practice and a position which he has never held. Tex249 (talk) 00:09, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article doesn't claim that he is licensed in Florida so I don't see the problem. Also, see the comments above.- MrX 00:28, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I added some context to the body of the article on his accounting career. I think the lede is fine. It makes no claims on how long he served as an accountant. Champaign Supernova (talk) 01:22, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Does it make any claims about how long he served as a doctor? Cause it's the same amount. He has never been an Accountant, he was an Auditor. He lacks the license to be an Accountant. He never held the position of Accountant at Deloitte, he held the position of Auditor. Clients never paid him as an Accountant, which he lacks the license for, they paid him as an Auditor. Tex249 (talk) 02:51, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tex249: if you have a CPA, you're an accountant. Even if is/was only licensed in Colorado and even if he worked only briefly "as an" accountant, he's still an accountant. Neutralitytalk 14:07, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
One other thing: People are often described by the profession they were educated for. Someone who has an engineering degree and start her own business could still be described as an engineer. The same applies to doctors, lawyers, accountants, scientists, and so on.- MrX 14:14, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
He has not worked "briefly as an accountant", to do so would be a violation of Florida State Law. He has worked briefly as an Auditor, but never at any time as an Accountant.
He was not educated to be an accountant. He holds a degree in Business Administration and never went back for the requisite Accounting courses. This is why he has never been able to practice accounting: http://www.myfloridalicense.com/dbpr/pro/division/Servicesthatrequirealicense_cpa.html Tex249 (talk) 20:00, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Tex249: Would you please read and follow WP:THREAD? It's very difficult to know who you are responding to. Thanks.- MrX 21:19, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Superdelegate[edit]

Does this fit a pattern of corruption? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.138.224.249 (talk) 20:11, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Patrick_Murphy_(Florida_politician)&oldid=1208178923"