View Full Version : Why did OK County and Tulsa County vote McCain?



Pages : [1] 2

okcsince1987
11-24-2008, 08:24 PM
I was looking at the larger cities in other states and it seems that all theirs voted Obama but ours voted McCain. Just wanted to know if anyone knew why. I'm not really into politics much so maybe I'm missing something. Maybe it's a stupid question.

Midtowner
11-24-2008, 08:55 PM
Smarter people.

kevinpate
11-24-2008, 09:03 PM
Of the minority of the populace who choose to vote, a majority, in each county, favored the thought of McCain/Palin at the helm of the ship than Obama/Biden.

The majority ticket devotes a tad more attention to God issues, a tad less to gay rights, a tad more to big business and a tad less to individual liberties. That's an over simplification, but not by much.

okcpulse
11-24-2008, 09:18 PM
So... does that mean that people in Pheonix are stupid? Huh? Because McCain took Maricopa County, the most populous county in Arizona. I think you people are reading too much into this crap.

lasomeday
11-24-2008, 09:24 PM
It is mainly because Tulsa and Oklahoma Counties aren't really in a recession and the other cities you are comparing are.

shane453
11-24-2008, 09:35 PM
Because the counties are larger than the major cities in them.

http://photos.newsok.com/2/showimage/519068/lead620/

roci28
11-24-2008, 09:51 PM
Smarter people.

Seriously!!!

Kerry
11-24-2008, 10:09 PM
Obama - Change you hope to believe in, or hope to believe in change, or... crap, I can't remember how it goes. Oh well, Yes we can... or did... or hope to do... or something like that.

I think I will go with Oklahomans being smarter.

southernskye
11-24-2008, 10:10 PM
Seriously!!!


:rolleyes:

soonerguru
11-24-2008, 10:24 PM
OKC voted Obama -- at least, "inside the loop." So did Tulsa. The burbs voted McCain by WIDE margins. Edmond was blood red. Norman also voted Obama.

Obama won every precinct in the loop of 1-235, 1-44 and 1-40. That's the OKC most of us think of when we think of OKC.

sgray
11-25-2008, 12:15 AM
...because much of OK has a nice 'default' vote that they're cozy with. I'm certain that if you would have switched the candidates, Obama would have won OK because a lot of folks just want the republican ticket to win because, to them it is either 'the right thing morally', or they must 'vote by the book'..."if we keep our vote on that ticket, things will get better. They will...they must." I could understand their side if it wasn't always the same outcome...but come on people, the numbers are almost always the same in OK's general election, no matter who is running. That's the thing...it doesn't matter who's on the ticket. While our neighboring states are mostly red, at least things shift around when the candidates change.

CHECK OUT THESE NUMBERS FOR STATE-WIDE GENERAL ELECTION:
DIFFERENT CANDIDATES ON BOTH SIDES!!!

2004
R-BUSH 959,792
D-KERRY 503,966

2008
R-MCCAIN 959,808
D-OBAMA 502,286

Same 'ol, same 'ol...


Part of my reasoning is also based things such as Inhofe winning so much of the vote, like always. Again, doesn't matter who's on the ticket...loook at Istook and Coburn...just as motionless. On a serious note, not joking or poking fun, does anyone here have some good, solid reasons for keeping Inhofe our senator? I seriously want to know...because I cannot justify his existence, no matter what I try to give him credit for.

Just my 3 cents.

NativeOkie
11-25-2008, 12:24 AM
Which areas have the highest welfare percentage?

sgray
11-25-2008, 12:32 AM
...'percentage'? likely the areas with the highest population. Why?

oneforone
11-25-2008, 02:56 AM
I am just curious......how much longer are we going to beat this dead horse?

Obama won so who really cares what counties he did or did not win.

The Mcain-Obama debate is nothing more than spliting hairs at this point.

sgray
11-25-2008, 03:49 AM
Thats what I thought until someone started a new thread on the subject...and I just had to get in on the fun! :dizzy:

kevinpate
11-25-2008, 07:35 AM
I hadn't realized there were fewer presidential votes cast in OK this time than there were in 04. That's mostly surprising in light of all the talk of getting the vote out this go around, from both sides.

Kerry
11-25-2008, 08:28 AM
...because much of OK has a nice 'default' vote that they're cozy with. I'm certain that if you would have switched the candidates, Obama would have won OK because a lot of folks just want the republican ticket to win because, to them it is either 'the right thing morally', or they must 'vote by the book'..."if we keep our vote on that ticket, things will get better. They will...they must." I could understand their side if it wasn't always the same outcome...but come on people, the numbers are almost always the same in OK's general election, no matter who is running. That's the thing...it doesn't matter who's on the ticket. While our neighboring states are mostly red, at least things shift around when the candidates change.

CHECK OUT THESE NUMBERS FOR STATE-WIDE GENERAL ELECTION:
DIFFERENT CANDIDATES ON BOTH SIDES!!!

2004
R-BUSH 959,792
D-KERRY 503,966

2008
R-MCCAIN 959,808
D-OBAMA 502,286

Same 'ol, same 'ol...


Let me get the straight, are you saying the McCain voters voted for him just because he was the republican on the ticket while the Obama voters were judicial in their decision making process? In other words, if you switched the party affiliation Obama would have won 1,462,094 to 0. Or is it just possible that Obama voters are just as comfortable choosing a candidate (any candidate) with a 'D' next to their name.

bombermwc
11-25-2008, 08:42 AM
Old people love their republicans, and we've got a crap load of old people. The particular groups of greys that always vote the old republican ticket are on their way out. The younger vote in OK is democratic and tolerant.

In this election you had as many people vote for one candidate as the other simply because of their race. There are a lot of African Americans that voted Obama for that reason alone (there were some interesting polls regarding their reasoning too) and same goes for the White vote. It's racist and stupid, but it happened.

The real urban vote here was Obama. You don't see that in the county vote because, as said earlier, the county involves more than the city. IE OK county also has Edmond.

I wasn't surprised in the least that OK voted McCain, but I was surprised that it was an all county thing.

Also keep in mind that here in OK, we've been pretty happy with our state government, which has been turning more republican and obviously went majority this time. Most other places, you'll find people were not happy and wanted to change....ie Congress. This was always the democrats election to lose....the national vote showed that. OK is always ignored by campaigns and doesn't mean crap in the electoral college. Our dinky 6 votes are worthless so even though McCain won the state, who cares.

I voted Obama and I'm a boring vanilla while suburban dweller. For once, I actually had a candidate I was excited for.

Midtowner
11-25-2008, 09:22 AM
For the love of God...

"Democratic and tolerant"?

soonerguru
11-25-2008, 09:36 AM
This thread is annoying. And yes, Midtowner, there are many tolerant Democrats -- and even a few Repubs, too.

Oklahoma County voted McCain because of Edmond, Choctaw and the burbs of Moore/S. OKC. Pretty much every other area of the city voted for Obama, except the Quail Creek belt in the northwest.

OKC is not unlike other cities. Obama did very well with urban voters nationwide. Where we were different is in our inner suburbs, which Obama carried pretty much throughout the country but not here.

I'm guessing the exit polling showing that 51 percent of Oklahoma voters were self-identified evangelicals was a factor in voting. My friend who attends a megachurch told me their preacher talked about the "antichrist" and clearly was inferring that Obama was the black Satan.

I'm sure we had our share of bigots, too, given the phone calling I made at the Obama headquarters. The "n" word was frequently used. Also, "commie," "socialist," etc. Also, there were a lot of people in Oklahoma who received mail from the NRA saying that Obama was going to confiscate their guns. Then we had all of the morons (probably a third of all voters in Oklahoma) who believe that Obama is a "secret Muslim."

I'm sure there were principled reasons to vote for McCain, but there sure were a lot of dumb, misleading or even hateful reasons to vote for him expressed by many Oklahomans.

The way things are going, however, is the OK county went much BLUER than in 2004, even more so than Tulsa County. I expect this trend to continue. Edmond will remain the bloodiest color of red for the foreseeable future, as flocks of people go to places like Henderson Hills Baptist Church to gin up outrage about the abortionist antichrist in the White House. Meanwhile, OKC will become more and more friendly to modern thinkers, who tend to be a little more liberal in their viewpoints, until OKC is an island of blue in a sea of red statewide.

mecarr
11-25-2008, 09:57 AM
There's a reason why Oklahoma ranks last in so many different categories...

metro
11-25-2008, 10:02 AM
I was looking at the larger cities in other states and it seems that all theirs voted Obama but ours voted McCain. Just wanted to know if anyone knew why. I'm not really into politics much so maybe I'm missing something. Maybe it's a stupid question.

I think the larger question is why do we have other forums on this website if nearly everyone lately is posting everything on every topic just about in OKC Metro Area just so it gets more views.

hoya
11-25-2008, 10:02 AM
Oklahoma was never in question. That's why no candidates ever visit. Campaigning in Oklahoma would be a waste of money (it's like campaigning in Washington DC).

As you see by the earlier numbers, John McCain got a total of 16 extra votes over Bush. Obama garnered about 1,700 fewer votes than John Kerry. Yeah, we're a real racist state. :rolleyes: Oklahoma voters are very predictable, especially when nobody bothers to spend any real time or money convincing them otherwise.

In general, our state has been doing well economically and we are happy with our local government. "Change" doesn't really sell as well here as it does in places like Ohio or Michigan, where the economy sucks. Why change if things are going good?

Obama won between 52 and 53% of the popular vote, depending on which sources you use (doing a little better than Bush's 51% in 2004). That's a solid win, but hardly a mandate. His electoral numbers were huge, because a small shift in votes was all it took to cause key large states to swing blue. The thing is, while a slight blue shift was enough in battleground states like Florida and Ohio, in Oklahoma it makes virtually zero difference.

Midtowner
11-25-2008, 10:04 AM
There's a reason why Oklahoma ranks last in so many different categories...

True. Now that the Republicans are finally in control of state government for the first time since statehood, maybe we'll head in a different direction.

okcpulse
11-25-2008, 10:13 AM
This thread is annoying. And yes, Midtowner, there are many tolerant Democrats -- and even a few Repubs, too.

Oklahoma County voted McCain because of Edmond, Choctaw and the burbs of Moore/S. OKC. Pretty much every other area of the city voted for Obama, except the Quail Creek belt in the northwest.

OKC is not unlike other cities. Obama did very well with urban voters nationwide. Where we were different is in our inner suburbs, which Obama carried pretty much throughout the country but not here.

I'm guessing the exit polling showing that 51 percent of Oklahoma voters were self-identified evangelicals was a factor in voting. My friend who attends a megachurch told me their preacher talked about the "antichrist" and clearly was inferring that Obama was the black Satan.

I'm sure we had our share of bigots, too, given the phone calling I made at the Obama headquarters. The "n" word was frequently used. Also, "commie," "socialist," etc. Also, there were a lot of people in Oklahoma who received mail from the NRA saying that Obama was going to confiscate their guns. Then we had all of the morons (probably a third of all voters in Oklahoma) who believe that Obama is a "secret Muslim."

I'm sure there were principled reasons to vote for McCain, but there sure were a lot of dumb, misleading or even hateful reasons to vote for him expressed by many Oklahomans.

The way things are going, however, is the OK county went much BLUER than in 2004, even more so than Tulsa County. I expect this trend to continue. Edmond will remain the bloodiest color of red for the foreseeable future, as flocks of people go to places like Henderson Hills Baptist Church to gin up outrage about the abortionist antichrist in the White House. Meanwhile, OKC will become more and more friendly to modern thinkers, who tend to be a little more liberal in their viewpoints, until OKC is an island of blue in a sea of red statewide.

Ugh, here we go again with some more of this red vs. blue mamba-jahamba. For the next election, why don't we go with different colors? How about banana-yellow? Aqua? Fuscia? Magenta? Burnt Sienna? Mango Orange? How about a nice touch of pastel green?

Seriously, the only time I want to see Red vs. Blue in front of my face is when I am downloading XBOX 360 Halo episodes. And since I am now officially registered as an Independant (as in I don't hang off the red or blue titty), I guess I will be purple.

hoya
11-25-2008, 10:42 AM
Ugh, here we go again with some more of this red vs. blue mamba-jahamba. For the next election, why don't we go with different colors? How about banana-yellow? Aqua? Fuscia? Magenta? Burnt Sienna? Mango Orange? How about a nice touch of pastel green?

Seriously, the only time I want to see Red vs. Blue in front of my face is when I am downloading XBOX 360 Halo episodes. And since I am now officially registered as an Independant (as in I don't hang off the red or blue titty), I guess I will be purple.

That show is funny as hell.

mecarr
11-25-2008, 11:59 AM
True. Now that the Republicans are finally in control of state government for the first time since statehood, maybe we'll head in a different direction.

Yea, cutting taxes along with any sort of government investment in infrastructure and education...that'll sure do the trick! Oh and don't forget about tort reform, that'll save our health care system. Those greedy trial lawyers...

soonerguru
11-25-2008, 12:03 PM
True. Now that the Republicans are finally in control of state government for the first time since statehood, maybe we'll head in a different direction.

That's funny. I'll be sure and send you an IM when the GOP legislature gets right to work on the God, Gays and Guns agenda for change. I'm sure we'll see multiple abortion and "English only" bills, as well. I'm sure that will improve things for the state. We'll also probably see cuts in higher education funding, like what Saint Frank proposed while we were trying to land the Micron plant. Brilliant.

CuatrodeMayo
11-25-2008, 12:21 PM
I think the larger question is why do we have other forums on this website if nearly everyone lately is posting everything on every topic just about in OKC Metro Area just so it gets more views.

:ot:

Grant
11-25-2008, 12:48 PM
Old people love their republicans, and we've got a crap load of old people. The particular groups of greys that always vote the old republican ticket are on their way out. The younger vote in OK is democratic and tolerant.

So what you're saying is that Republicans/young Republicans are not tolerant? There are many many more reasons that led me to vote McCain than gay rights (which tends to be what Democrats refer to when speaking of tolerance). I voted McCain for his stances on small government, less taxes on people and businesses small and large, anti-abortion, pro Second Amendment, making able people work for their money, etc, etc, etc. Don't give me this tolerance junk. Democrats always seem to be quite intolerant as they tear others apart for not being "tolerant". In no way am I accusing you of tearing anyone down, because you didn't. I'm just saying that Democrats as a whole, or at least the many that I have listened to, read, or talked to, tend to start name calling when somebody disagrees, which is the very definition of intolerance. Ironic isn't it? They spew things about Republican voters being uneducated, rednecks, and bible thumpers. I am none of those. I'm simply a person who understands government, reads into things more advanced than gay marriage and abortion, probably does more research than most voters, believes in working for a living (through brain or brawn), wants to uphold the right to defend myself and my family, and consequently votes Republican almost every single time (I like some Libertarians too). That is my political ideology. Locally, I support an added 1% sales tax that builds something as nice as the canal, the Ford Center, the Ford Center remodel, the new library, etc. because the local government knows a whole lot more about whats good for Oklahoma City than the federal government. MAPS is not big government, it's smart government. If you think about the big picture, MAPS is basically the people of Oklahoma City all pitching in a little to build something nice that we can all use, which is completely fine by me.

mecarr
11-25-2008, 12:51 PM
I think one thing we can all agree on is that this thread should be in the political forum of OKCtalk, not this one.

fire121
11-25-2008, 01:05 PM
I think Grant sums it up well for most Okies. Me included. Good post.

TaoMaas
11-25-2008, 01:35 PM
I think Grant sums it up well for most Okies. Me included. Good post.

Too bad parts of it are as much a false stereotype as what bombermwc posted.

bretthexum
11-25-2008, 02:19 PM
Yawn. Next...

metro
11-25-2008, 02:36 PM
I think one thing we can all agree on is that this thread should be in the political forum of OKCtalk, not this one.

agreed

Lord Helmet
11-25-2008, 02:52 PM
Edmond will remain the bloodiest color of red for the foreseeable future, as flocks of people go to places like Henderson Hills Baptist Church to gin up outrage about the abortionist antichrist in the White House.

I was loving your post until that line...then I blew diet dr. pepper all over my poor macbook :)

CuatrodeMayo
11-25-2008, 03:09 PM
Apparently red & blue is the new black & white.

i.e. gray and purple do not exist.

route66gal
11-25-2008, 04:04 PM
broken voting machines.


Voting Machines Count Backwards in Okla
http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/7659/74136.html

okcpulse
11-25-2008, 05:13 PM
White vs Black = 2-bit society
Red vs Blue = 2-bit society

America obviously hasn't advanced. We haven't even made it to an 8-bit color scheme!

Midtowner
11-25-2008, 05:21 PM
Yea, cutting taxes along with any sort of government investment in infrastructure and education...that'll sure do the trick! Oh and don't forget about tort reform, that'll save our health care system. Those greedy trial lawyers...

What the heck are you talking about???

The parties are equally in the pockets of highway contractors. Those guys spread the wealth.

The simple fact is that we've been under 1 party rule for around a century. That has created some very entrenched and powerful special interests (highway contractors, the OEA, anyone who has ever been friends with Gene Stipe).

As far as education goes, under Republicans, look for increased pressure to consolidate rural school districts, cut back on administration and sending more dollars to the classroom.

As far as tort reform is concerned, the Supreme Court has thus far struck every single tort reform measure down which has come before it. I'm not worried at all about that stuff passing constitutional scrutiny. Brad Henry with his veto just saved our courts some time.

route66gal
11-25-2008, 05:38 PM
So what you're saying is that Republicans/young Republicans are not tolerant? There are many many more reasons that led me to vote McCain than gay rights (which tends to be what Democrats refer to when speaking of tolerance). I voted McCain for his stances on small government, less taxes on people and businesses small and large, anti-abortion, pro Second Amendment, making able people work for their money, etc, etc, etc. Don't give me this tolerance junk. Democrats always seem to be quite intolerant as they tear others apart for not being "tolerant". In no way am I accusing you of tearing anyone down, because you didn't. I'm just saying that Democrats as a whole, or at least the many that I have listened to, read, or talked to, tend to start name calling when somebody disagrees, which is the very definition of intolerance. Ironic isn't it? They spew things about Republican voters being uneducated, rednecks, and bible thumpers. I am none of those. I'm simply a person who understands government, reads into things more advanced than gay marriage and abortion, probably does more research than most voters, believes in working for a living (through brain or brawn), wants to uphold the right to defend myself and my family, and consequently votes Republican almost every single time (I like some Libertarians too). That is my political ideology. Locally, I support an added 1% sales tax that builds something as nice as the canal, the Ford Center, the Ford Center remodel, the new library, etc. because the local government knows a whole lot more about whats good for Oklahoma City than the federal government. MAPS is not big government, it's smart government. If you think about the big picture, MAPS is basically the people of Oklahoma City all pitching in a little to build something nice that we can all use, which is completely fine by me.

http://www.catholicsinalliance.org/files/CACG_Final.pdf
Woe to the Hypocrites (http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0922-21.htm)

No sorry its the republican that have hyper inflated our national debt, drove abortions numbers up by cutting services to women and children. They Start wars costing us trillians, our very childrens future, killing thousands of people--based on false evidence. And have shown intolerance beyond what I have ever seen during this past election. Republicans are not fiscally responsible and do not stand for any of the things they claim. Only by fruits do you know a man.

route66gal
11-25-2008, 05:47 PM
:ot:

are you a moderator because you sure go around here calling people trolls and telling them they are OT and such. If you are not a mod, that is called BULLYING.

sgray
11-25-2008, 06:46 PM
Kerry-

Just to clarify, what I said is that you could swap the candidates, even change them out altogether and the numbers would not change! Just for kicks, we should place funny names on the ballot...various celebrities, fake names, etc...the numbers will not change.

The numbers are stuck...Somebody throw me a crowbar! :fighting2



:band:

kevinpate
11-25-2008, 08:34 PM
pssst, did anyone notice? There's a small 3 inch diameter rock over there, no, not that one, to your right. no, no, no, don't touch it. there might be a conspiracy under it. Just try not to trip on it and walk slowly away :)

okcpulse
11-25-2008, 08:50 PM
http://www.catholicsinalliance.org/files/CACG_Final.pdf
Woe to the Hypocrites (http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0922-21.htm)

No sorry its the republican that have hyper inflated our national debt, drove abortions numbers up by cutting services to women and children. They Start wars costing us trillians, our very childrens future, killing thousands of people--based on false evidence. And have shown intolerance beyond what I have ever seen during this past election. Republicans are not fiscally responsible and do not stand for any of the things they claim. Only by fruits do you know a man.

Umm, democrats aren't exactly angels, either. Why do you think I quit both parties? Because I am a free thinker, not of any sheep that make up America.

By the way, park the intolerance crap. Save it for CNN. Democrats are just as intolerant.

Midtowner
11-25-2008, 09:02 PM
Yup.

And what the hell does it matter what's going on in D.C. anyhow? Or rather, how can anything we in Oklahoma say or do have much effect there? We sent Coburn up there. While he has made some noise, the only difference seems to be the lack of bringin' home the bacon to Oklahoma.

Local politics are far more important and far more fun if you pay attention.

Yah.. I know it's tough for some if they don't have their syndicated pundits to tell them what to think/do.

sgray
11-25-2008, 10:31 PM
Um Midtowner,

Do you sincerely believe what you said, "what does it matter what's going on in D.C. anyhow?"

You seem to believe that Coburn was supposed to have been something different than he has shown himself to be. Not sure how much you watch Coburn...while his appearances in Washington are somewhat rare, when he does appear, it is just to stall legislation...has proposes little or no alternate or opinion (other than "it's wrong"), no intelligent debate, just zero productivity. Occasionally he will support someone else's bill, but I don't believe I have ever seen him introduce anything useful on his own. Especially not Inhofe. You are right about Coburn and the noise...that's about all he is good for.

You were asking how we can have an affect up there (in DC)...well, did you actually expect Coburn to do any better than Inhofe???

Just out of curiosity, have you watched either of them in action? Not in the news reports, but in-action on like c-span? He and Inhofe are not too different.


And OKCPulse, you mention quitting both parties. So, what are you gonna do when the next party fails you? And the next? Or the 100th one? You don't think it more productive to fight for change within your party rather than keep creating new ones everytime something goes wrong? While route66gal is correct in the things that the Republican party has done recently, not all Republicans are this way or have been this way. I know republicans that are fighting (especially after this election) to get the party back on track.

mecarr
11-25-2008, 10:44 PM
What the heck are you talking about???

The parties are equally in the pockets of highway contractors. Those guys spread the wealth.

The simple fact is that we've been under 1 party rule for around a century. That has created some very entrenched and powerful special interests (highway contractors, the OEA, anyone who has ever been friends with Gene Stipe).

As far as education goes, under Republicans, look for increased pressure to consolidate rural school districts, cut back on administration and sending more dollars to the classroom.

As far as tort reform is concerned, the Supreme Court has thus far struck every single tort reform measure down which has come before it. I'm not worried at all about that stuff passing constitutional scrutiny. Brad Henry with his veto just saved our courts some time.

Where have you gotten the idea that Oklahoma has been consistently dominated by one party rule? Keating was governor for 8 years in the 1990s. Repubs have been in control of the house for the last several years. Yes I know that the state senate had been in the Dems control, but that's just one piece of it.

The Supreme Court has not struck down every tort reform measure. There's still a cap on non-economic damages for some types of medical malpractice claims. I could list some more but I'll leave it up to do the homework.

Republicans in this state care about god, guns & gays and the republican party makes no bones about it. If those are the things you really care about, then that's your party. While those wedge issues might help them get elected, it does little to inspire ideas on how to improve our state's economy, education and health care system. This is why so many young people flee this state the first chance they get...

sgray
11-25-2008, 10:54 PM
mecarr is right. This state has been under republican leadership plenty of the time. Personally, I do not see a huge difference between the majority of the Rep and Dem party in OK. The whole dang thing is at a dead standstill. (not directed to those here that are not part of that majority--what I call the critical thinkers)

All both parties do here in OK historically is work to stall each other's bills so that effectively nothing happens. It doesn't matter how good or bad the proposed changes are--they are the work of the 'other party' so we cannot support it--let alone even look at it.

okcpulse
11-26-2008, 06:02 AM
http://www.catholicsinalliance.org/files/CACG_Final.pdf
Woe to the Hypocrites (http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0922-21.htm)

No sorry its the republican that have hyper inflated our national debt, drove abortions numbers up by cutting services to women and children. They Start wars costing us trillians, our very childrens future, killing thousands of people--based on false evidence. And have shown intolerance beyond what I have ever seen during this past election. Republicans are not fiscally responsible and do not stand for any of the things they claim. Only by fruits do you know a man.

On an added note, don'tt put ALL the blame on Republicans for being fiscally irresponsible. Look at Oklahoma democrats at the state capitol and what they did to the state in the 1980s and 1990s. They were tax and spend mongers.

okcpulse
11-26-2008, 06:11 AM
Um Midtowner,

Do you sincerely believe what you said, "what does it matter what's going on in D.C. anyhow?"

You seem to believe that Coburn was supposed to have been something different than he has shown himself to be. Not sure how much you watch Coburn...while his appearances in Washington are somewhat rare, when he does appear, it is just to stall legislation...has proposes little or no alternate or opinion (other than "it's wrong"), no intelligent debate, just zero productivity. Occasionally he will support someone else's bill, but I don't believe I have ever seen him introduce anything useful on his own. Especially not Inhofe. You are right about Coburn and the noise...that's about all he is good for.

You were asking how we can have an affect up there (in DC)...well, did you actually expect Coburn to do any better than Inhofe???

Just out of curiosity, have you watched either of them in action? Not in the news reports, but in-action on like c-span? He and Inhofe are not too different.


And OKCPulse, you mention quitting both parties. So, what are you gonna do when the next party fails you? And the next? Or the 100th one? You don't think it more productive to fight for change within your party rather than keep creating new ones everytime something goes wrong? While route66gal is correct in the things that the Republican party has done recently, not all Republicans are this way or have been this way. I know republicans that are fighting (especially after this election) to get the party back on track.

The next party won't fail me because there won't BE a next party for me. Both parties have evolved into nothing more than high-school clicks. I fight for change that works and makes sense. I don't fight for partisan change. I feel party labels and color labels are distracting badly misinformed Americans from the heart of our problems.

The two-party system was created to maintain balance in our government. But people today do not possess the maturity and wit to respect that balance. They only care about being Republican or Democrat as well as preach false facts fed to them by very bad sources.

This was the ugliest election in U.S. history. Not because of whom we were voting for, but because of the way most voters treated each other. We had sore winners and sore losers. Does someone need to take the lollipop from these people and explain the candy will be returned when they stop acting like whiny children? Does anyone anymore get the concept of courtesy? A few do, but most don't.

sgray
11-26-2008, 06:55 AM
OKCPulse-

on your 1st post, on what did the state Democrats (or Republicans for that matter) turn loose on spending??? Cause I sure haven't seen it...unless it was some overpayment to an "in bed with" contractor or something that was kept hush..hush. I never saw anything that you speak of...perhaps you could provide some examples. I remember the I-40 bridge collapse in east OK way back during that time you mention and I don't recall anything being spent by either party on that thing prior to it collapsing and making national news.

on your last post, what do you expect to happen when you move to "party x" that represents this "change that works and makes sense" and something eventually happens that makes it not necessarily represent that "change" any more. Unless you are running yourself, you are gonna have to join and vote for "a" parties' candidate.

I really have to call you out on your comment about this being the "ugliest election in U.S. history." Way off! You really think this was worse than the 2000 elections...not only with the Florida fiasco, but where all the protests and then the riots at the motorcade occurred??? Then we had all the Ohio crap in 2004... Seriously, on what do you base that statement? While we had some close races in some areas, this year went way way way way smooth! We knew who our next president was going to be on the night of the election and most of the other stuff no later than late night/early next morning. And as it turns out, the prez election ended up with close to 8.5m extra votes when it was all said and done. Hardly close as any in recent years.

"they only care about being republican or democrat" you say? Hmm...if Obama puts some republicans in his cabinet, which is looking to be the case, what then say you? And in defense of some republicans, Lindsey Graham and John McCain were of the first senators up there meeting with Obama right after he won, looking to begin on some common ground. Maybe it was all for show...but they did do it and that's something you did not see with this administration now. You name me one time when you've seen an Oklahoma party come across the aisle after the election and look to work together.

...and what you said about the way voters treated each other...man, I was blown away by how nice folks were. On the 1st early vote day, I was in that mile-long line (for almost 3 hrs) early in the morning to vote at the OK county election board and that was one of the few things that impressed me...and to have the news out there showing how folks were handling themselves. While folks may have had opinions, they were really cool with one another. People treated each other the way I would expect them to.

CuatrodeMayo
11-26-2008, 07:41 AM
are you a moderator because you sure go around here calling people trolls and telling them they are OT and such. If you are not a mod, that is called BULLYING.

Sorry for hurting your precious feelings.

Midtowner
11-26-2008, 08:00 AM
The Supreme Court has not struck down every tort reform measure. There's still a cap on non-economic damages for some types of medical malpractice claims. I could list some more but I'll leave it up to do the homework.

See... I actually agree with the caps as they're currently written. Tying some sort of civil mens rea requirement to award makes sense. I mean.. the lowest is what... $250K? I know medmal trials cost a crapton to put on, but I would think 1/3 of $250K plus 1/3 of what is probably a good deal of economic damages isn't too bad.


Republicans in this state care about god, guns & gays and the republican party makes no bones about it.

Again, I'm not too worried. In fact, the civil libertarian in me wants the Republican party to go hog wild passing as much reactionary nonsense as they possibly can. Let's get the Supreme Court of Oklahoma or the SCOTUS to overturn some crazy laws, setting valuable precedent. I'm fine with this.


If those are the things you really care about, then that's your party. While those wedge issues might help them get elected, it does little to inspire ideas on how to improve our state's economy, education and health care system. This is why so many young people flee this state the first chance they get...

Ah.. you get it. Those are wedge issues. For the most part, I think Republicans are not like Sally Kern. They see wedge issues for what they are -- issues which are good for one thing only -- marshalling useful idiots to the polls.

I'm not saying that Glen Coffee or Chris Benge are inherently better or smarter (in fact, Coffee is an embarrassment considering his moronic defense of his own tort reform bill in '07). It's just that someone else now gets a shot.

And look... if you really want to argue that we haven't been under single party rule because we've had what... 12 or 16 years of Republican governors, and about what.. 4 years of the house being Republican, that's great. But you can hardly blame the guys currently in charge for the dismal failure that has been state government since around WWII.

route66gal
11-26-2008, 10:59 AM
On an added note, don'tt put ALL the blame on Republicans for being fiscally irresponsible. Look at Oklahoma democrats at the state capitol and what they did to the state in the 1980s and 1990s. They were tax and spend mongers.

Oh but we have our pretty disney ditch down in Bricktown :rolleyes:
and Bass Pro and and and and..all republican agendas.

http://i34.tinypic.com/14c71qt.jpg

oknacreous
11-26-2008, 12:22 PM
Republicans in this state care about god, guns & gays and the republican party makes no bones about it. If those are the things you really care about, then that's your party. While those wedge issues might help them get elected, it does little to inspire ideas on how to improve our state's economy, education and health care system. This is why so many young people flee this state the first chance they get...

Bravo, well said. But you forgot about teaching creationism and other anti-science and anti-intellectual efforts. I'm certain the state GOP acts deliberately to keep the people as stupid as possible to maintain their power through fear-mongering on meaningless wedge issues. I also have to keep reminding people, despite midtowner's claims, Sally Kern IS the face of the state GOP. After all they gave Sally Kern a standing ovation at a recent meeting, and there is a strong element in that party that wants to nominate her for Governor in 2010.

bretthexum
11-26-2008, 12:40 PM
Let's be honest here. An Oklahoma Democrat isn't really a die hard liberal.

soonerguru
11-26-2008, 05:45 PM
Oklahoma is probably the only state in the union in which a majority of its citizens would argue that the Republican party has done a good job running the country (into the ground). OK, Utah, Wyoming and Idaho are probably in that mix. Sheer hilarity. :omg:

OKCPulse cracks me up. The old, "It doesn't matter who wins, they're the same" argument. Right. We're buying that.

fire121
11-26-2008, 07:49 PM
The president doesn't spend money, congress does. You could build the same graph for who controlled congress at the time to sell the opposite viewpoint.

sgray
11-26-2008, 10:03 PM
fire121,

So what happened in 1995-2006 then??? According to the chart, the debt was starting to come back down (before repubs took over congress) and retained that path during the clinton term...then right when W came in...BAM! Started going right back up. And WAY up!

Keep in mind republicans were in control of congress this entire time.


Apparently you dont recall too much of bush's high-flyin plans he slid through the system and his famous "and congress is gonna have to find a way to pay for it" speeches.