what kind of a degree? Engineering and technology .... or music appriciation and ethnic studies ...
Walters has the best chance of losing of those three. Expect him to run several points behind Stitt.Stitt is an arrogant little emperor and I hope he loses. Ditto with Ryan Walters who wants to brainwash our teachers at some cultish institute. Finally Markwayne Mullin is basically another Stitt but obviously less intelligent. Had to vote against all 3 of these guys.
Otherwise I think most of my votes were cast for Republicans.
Well he is the worst of the three imo. Stitt (and his "swagger") is bad but not quite as bad. But I would love to be done with both.Walters has the best chance of losing of those three. Expect him to run several points behind Stitt.
And the stupid thing is, if Stitt wins and Walters loses, Stitt will reappoint him to the Sec. of Education made up role.Walters has the best chance of losing of those three. Expect him to run several points behind Stitt.
When your sole message is “vote for me because I’m not Stitt” you’re not going to unseat an incumbent regardless of how bad the incumbent or how much money third parties are pouring into the race. Joy never gave voters a reason to vote for her other than “I’m not him”. That gets you rolled by 14 points. A better candidate (or maybe just a better campaign) would have at least made this a competitive race.The voters of Oklahoma deserve what they get when they keep re-electing guys like Stitt. Gross.
Joy obviously wasn’t smart enough to realize in this instance that wasn’t the case. She ran ten versions of the same campaign commercial over and over. Never once addressed the economic issues facing Oklahomans. In the battle of incompetence she was the clear winner….by 14 points. Wonder how the tribes feel today about that $30M they spent on Joy?Sometimes “I’m not him” is all someone should need to say when they’re standing next to someone who is clearly incompetent.
Or voters weren’t smart enough to gauge Stitt’s fitness of office when tasked with deciding between the party that they typically support and an unfit candidate.Joy obviously wasn’t smart enough to realize in this instance that wasn’t the case. She ran ten versions of the same campaign commercial over and over. Never once addressed the economic issues facing Oklahomans. In the battle of incompetence she was the clear winner….by 14 points. Wonder how the tribes feel today about that $30M they spent on Joy?
Are you saying that the Dems only show up for weed?... that explains a lot of things both out there and on here..I will give it to the Republicans - the turnout effort was very successful. Perhaps having recreational Marijuana on the ballot could have evened it out a bit but it was a whopping margin.
What about the character flaw of changing parties because youve been term limited in your current position and want to be governor right now...As someone who dislikes Stitt, I nevertheless found many ads and flyers distasteful. Most corrupt governor in history? Really? With guys like Walters and Hall in our history? It was over the top and off putting.
Still have to be smart enough to give voters a reason to vote for you. Seldom going to win an election based on “just vote against the other guy”. Hell….her polling the last few weeks had to show she was behind double digits. Yet she never came out with any reason why Oklahomans should vote FOR her. Just kept running the same ole “Stitt is corrupt” ads which weren’t working. Driving up your opponents negatives only works to a specific point. Definition of an unfit candidate and why she lost by 14.Or voters weren’t smart enough to gauge Stitt’s fitness of office when tasked with deciding between the party that they typically support and an unfit candidate.
Tell all of this to Joe Biden and Donald Trump.Still have to be smart enough to give voters a reason to vote for you. Seldom going to win an election based on “just vote against the other guy”. Hell….her polling the last few weeks had to show she was behind double digits. Yet she never came out with any reason why Oklahomans should vote FOR her. Just kept running the same ole “Stitt is corrupt” ads which weren’t working. Driving up your opponents negatives only works to a specific point. Definition of an unfit candidate and why she lost by 14.
I don't consider that a character flaw at all.What about the character flaw of changing parties because youve been term limited in your current position and want to be governor right now...
Blasphemy!I don't consider that a character flaw at all.
As a matter of fact I think we should have open primaries or even nonpartisan elections like City of Tulsa. That drives moderation which I think we sorely need right now. I am a committed Independent and think our 2 party system sucks, so good for Joy giving me a chance to vote for her. Kudos.
Exactly.Blasphemy!
Blasphemy here, and in your post about the USMNT soccer roster!
I don’t actually consider Joy unfit. Just needling you a bit for the constant use of the word in this thread. For all of Trumps faults (and there are many) he brought a tremendous amount of people to the polls in 2016. One can argue he brought even more in 2020 . The thing about Biden is you know where he stood on the issues when he ran in 2020 due to the amount of time he’s been in politics. People felt very comfortable voting for him. People don’t know Joy or where she stands on practically anything other than believing Stitt is corrupt. Not trying to connect to voters was her greatest failure imo. The small business people I know dislike the unknown and viewed Stitt as the safe albeit distasteful option. The $20M in pro Joy ads by a shadow group also contributed to some of that distrust.Tell all of this to Joe Biden and Donald Trump.
They both won (mostly) on "at least I'm not the other guy" platforms.
Also, it's kind of a farce to call her an unfit candidate and NOT call Stitt one. Your ability to be elected (especially in a state which leans a certain direction) is not related to your fitness for office. Just ask this guy:
This is the entire reason that I say the country has a problem with the poor judgment that our voters tend to show when selecting their representatives. Only a small proportion of voters actually think critically about the person they're electing. How many people do you think got into a voting booth in Oklahoma and said to themselves "well, I've heard that he's crooked, but at least he has an R by his name".....
The answer is... most of them.
It’s two Republicans and it’s Alaska. Not sure how many people outside of that state really careI'm surprised that the Democratic(& Republican for that matter.) talking heads, and politicians aren't focusing on Alaska and Murkowski being 1.5 pts behind a little bit more, with 72% of the vote counted.
That's almost as important as the four states they have focusing on.
Considering her sometimes cross party voting, the Democrats should care. It would be the same story if Manchin or Sinema were losing to a far left candidate. Tshibaka is pretty far right, if she wins the Democrats lose a vote here or there. That seems pretty significant to non Alaskans.It’s two Republicans and it’s Alaska. Not sure how many people outside of that state really care
I’ll give ya that. Alaska politics might as well be a foreign country as far as my understanding of the dynamics up there.Considering her sometimes cross party voting, the Democrats should care. It would be the same story if Manchin or Sinema were losing to a far left candidate. Tshibaka is pretty far right, if she wins the Democrats lose a vote here or there. That seems pretty significant to non Alaskans.
Yep. On the whole.How you know that Evangelical Christians are full of crap when they talk about their values. They disproportionately voted for a man known to encourage his baby mamas to have abortions over an actual preacher.
An actual preacher who appears to support no or limited restrictions on abortions ? Not sure what you don’t understand about that choice for them ?How you know that Evangelical Christians are full of crap when they talk about their values. They disproportionately voted for a man known to encourage his baby mamas to have abortions over an actual preacher.
Mutant Ninja Turtles?Blasphemy!
Blasphemy here, and in your post about the USMNT soccer roster!
I'm old enough to remember when the same thing could be said for Democrats... Walters, Hall, Synar, Jones.. and 70 counties worth of commisioners..How many people do you think got into a voting booth in Oklahoma and said to themselves "well, I've heard that he's crooked, but at least he has an R by his name".....
The answer is... most of them.
So...I'm old enough to remember when the same thing could be said for Democrats... Walters, Hall, Synar, Jones.. and 70 counties worth of commisioners..
Walker didn't claim that he changed his mind on the issue.... he claimed that his baby mamas were lying....An actual preacher who appears to support no or limited restrictions on abortions ? Not sure what you don’t understand about that choice for them ?
Biden used to actively oppose gay marriage yet the LBGT community not only support but campaign for him. Opinions do change and people do at times support what they see as the lesser of two evils.
You’re acting like people not necessarily placing their religious views on politicians as a reason to support or not support them is a bad thing? I realize it’s still done but any extent we can get away from this should be a good thing….correct ?The fact that he has baby mamas at all would have been enough to disqualify a candidate in a long ago time when people's religious views actually mattered in their evaluation of candidates.
If so many didn't publicly profess that their political views were shaped by their moral compass, and if the politicians they voted for didn't use their "conservative Christian values" as a talking point... then I would care about the issue. It's not only Hypocrisy.... it's Hypocrisy in favor of a legitimately (and self admitted) dumb candidate, just because he's "not the other guy"You’re acting like people not necessarily placing their religious views on politicians as a reason to support or not support them is a bad thing? I realize it’s still done but any extent we can get away from this should be a good thing….correct ?
We just saw an entire guberturial campaign here based on vote for me because “I’m not the other guy”. PA just elected a Senator because he’s “not the other guy”. We have an elderly cognitive limited President because he’s “he’s not the other guy”. Guess it does work out for the best at times . Hell….I will vote for a guy who I believe doesn’t know where he is at times in 2024 over Trump. Suppose I’m one of those hypocrites now.If so many didn't publicly profess that their political views were shaped by their moral compass, and if the politicians they voted for didn't use their "conservative Christian values" as a talking point... then I would care about the issue. It's not only Hypocrisy.... it's Hypocrisy in favor of a legitimately (and self admitted) dumb candidate, just because he's "not the other guy"
Corruption and politics go hand in hand... doesnt matter R, D, I, L, or name your alphabet soup... very few come out of office poorer than when they took office.. and very few have poorer friends and associated as a result..So...
There will be corruption in both parties in the future, carries about the same relevance.