Oklahoma Opportunity

[AquaMan]

If I am the "king of condescension", you guys are the "crown princes of rationalization".

She lost because she was a "she" and a Democrat who was linked to Obama. The most I will give you is that Dewey seemed more conservative and in Tulsa that is as big a C word as Christ. In reality, Kathy is pretty conservative and definitely more business oriented than mr.B. The more high profile Republicans knew that and supported her. The uninformed, hysterical TPers and lock step conservatives did not. I'll never forget that Veterans Day parade that made us look like a National Lampoon setting.

To see folks who I suspect (and some I know) regularly vote C and R then moan about our lack of progress on these issues just leaves me cold.

[DTowner]

If I am the "king of condescension", you guys are the "crown princes of rationalism".

She lost because she was a "she" and a Democrat who was linked to Obama. The most I will give you is that Dewey seemed more conservative and in Tulsa that is as big a C word as Christ. In reality, Kathy is pretty conservative and definitely more business oriented than mr.B. The more high profile Republicans knew that and supported her. The uninformed, hysterical TPers and lock step conservatives did not. I'll never forget that Veterans Day parade that made us look like a National Lampoon setting.

To see folks who I suspect (and some I know) regularly vote C and R then moan about our lack of progress on these issues just leaves me cold.

That doesn't square with the fact "she" had aleady won the job once with a "D" behind her name.  She lost because the meme "she quit" struck a cord with many (and had the political advantage of being mostly true) and her "back to basics" campaign theme struck many as at odds with her record.  It also did not help that spending $4.5 million of (mostly) her own money smacked of someone trying to buy the office.   

[Conan71]

If I am the "king of condescension", you guys are the "crown princes of rationalism".

She lost because she was a "she" and a Democrat who was linked to Obama. The most I will give you is that Dewey seemed more conservative and in Tulsa that is as big a C word as Christ. In reality, Kathy is pretty conservative and definitely more business oriented than mr.B. The more high profile Republicans knew that and supported her. The uninformed, hysterical TPers and lock step conservatives did not. I'll never forget that Veterans Day parade that made us look like a National Lampoon setting.

To see folks who I suspect (and some I know) regularly vote C and R then moan about our lack of progress on these issues just leaves me cold.

That still doesn't square with her victory over LaFortune, though.  She was a carpet-bagging big donor to Democrats in national, state, and local office, and that was a front-and-center issue lodged against her in her first run for mayor.

[Gaspar]

If I am the "king of condescension", you guys are the "crown princes of rationalism".

She lost because she was a "she" and a Democrat who was linked to Obama. The most I will give you is that Dewey seemed more conservative and in Tulsa that is as big a C word as Christ. In reality, Kathy is pretty conservative and definitely more business oriented than mr.B. The more high profile Republicans knew that and supported her. The uninformed, hysterical TPers and lock step conservatives did not. I'll never forget that Veterans Day parade that made us look like a National Lampoon setting.

To see folks who I suspect (and some I know) regularly vote C and R then moan about our lack of progress on these issues just leaves me cold.

Don't buy it.  Lots of us voted for her before.  She was quite popular.

Carter suggests you wear a sweater.

[Gaspar]

That doesn't square with the fact "she" had aleady won the job once with a "D" behind her name.  She lost because the meme "she quit" struck a cord with many (and had the political advantage of being mostly true) and her "back to basics" campaign theme struck many as at odds with her record.  It also did not help that spending $4.5 million of (mostly) her own money smacked of someone trying to buy the office.   

Good point.  I never really thought about it that way, but to some I'm sure it did seem that she was coming back to tulsa to buy a royal social status. Even though most know here as a very hard worker.

[Gaspar]

Some good points here.  It seems that her biggest problem was not a track record problem, or a politics problem.  Her biggest handicap was her image.  The PR behind her campaign only served to hurt her.

Dewey basically didn't even run a campaign. He just let her over-message herself until the end.

I'm willing to bet that Bartlett knew that kid was watching his house and knew who he worked for.  All he had to do was call up the uniforms and say "ok, pick him up today" and tap in the final nail.

Never Interfere With an Enemy While He's in the Process of Destroying Himself -Napoleon

[DTowner]

Some good points here.  It seems that her biggest problem was not a track record problem, or a politics problem.  Her biggest handicap was her image.  The PR behind her campaign only served to hurt her.

Dewey basically didn't even run a campaign. He just let her over-message herself until the end.

I'm willing to bet that Bartlett knew that kid was watching his house and knew who he worked for.  All he had to do was call up the uniforms and say "ok, pick him up today" and tap in the final nail.

Never Interfere With an Enemy While He's in the Process of Destroying Himself -Napoleon

Taylor ran a media campaign, Bartlett ran a grassroots campaign.  She had the money and spent it on ads and consultants.  He did not have the money so he and his supporters knocked on doors.  All other things being equal, in Tulsa local elections, grassroots beats money almost every time (i.e. Bridensten v. Sullivan, etc.).

[AquaMan]

Had to change your royal labels. Crown Princes of Rationalization.

Look, you guys are stuck on details. Details I take issue with. Like comparing the first election against a different opponent in a different time to the latest election. Or some bogus issue about the intern. The money she spent was more than balanced off by bringing in B-Stein, Inhofe et al. Your points at first glance appear all logical and well thought out but they're guesses as to why she lost and no better than mine. Just guesses. But regardless, that's not the point. Obsession with arguable details is clouding your vision.

Once again we elected a guy who not only misrepresented himself as being in favor of the same issues this forum was established to encourage, but had no particular record in moving us towards them. He doesn't believe in mass transit, sustainability, growing the downtown or forms based zoning. If you really believe he supports river development, get a picture of him standing in the Arkansas like LaFortune did and circulate it in South Tulsa with the label, "the river development Mayor". Not going to happen. He won't allow that picture! 

We then spend pages moaning that we just can't move forward in this town like other cities have.

[Gaspar]

Had to change your royal labels. Crown Princes of Rationalization.

Look, you guys are stuck on details. Details I take issue with. Like comparing the first election against a different opponent in a different time to the latest election. Or some bogus issue about the intern. The money she spent was more than balanced off by bringing in B-Stein, Inhofe et al. Your points at first glance appear all logical and well thought out but they're guesses as to why she lost and no better than mine. Just guesses. But regardless, that's not the point. Obsession with arguable details is clouding your vision.

Once again we elected a guy who not only misrepresented himself as being in favor of the same issues this forum was established to encourage, but had no particular record in moving us towards them. He doesn't believe in mass transit, sustainability, growing the downtown or forms based zoning. If you really believe he supports river development, get a picture of him standing in the Arkansas like LaFortune did and circulate it in South Tulsa with the label, "the river development Mayor". Not going to happen. He won't allow that picture!  

We then spend pages moaning that we just can't move forward in this town like other cities have.

City seems to be doing pretty well.  Downtown seems to be growing pretty fast. Things like Gathering Place and others seem to be moving along.  Lots of big new developments all over town.  Looks like we are moving in the right direction. Must be in spite of him.  As for the state, you can say the same thing. Must be in spite of her.

Or

Perhaps communities move forward based on what people want. Government only has the power to hinder, not the power to produce.  The best politicians are those who know when to just step out of the way.

[AquaMan]

But ...Bartlett didn't.

From reading your remarks about zoning on another thread,  your view doesn't surprise me. For instance, you think the changes in zoning should follow the activity. Strange in other places but normal here (thats a great idea if it works!). Artist makes good points, but frankly, the curtains have been pulled back and the audience shreiks in horror!! Yet we knew it all along. Blake would have been a good candidate for Tulsa.

The old adage that if you didn't vote you can't complain is good. If you voted for a guy who doesn't support the issues you hold dear, then don't complain is also good advice.

[TheArtist]

 Downtown seems to be growing pretty fast. Things like Gathering Place and others seem to be moving along.  Lots of big new developments all over town.

Or

Perhaps communities move forward based on what people want. Government only has the power to hinder, not the power to produce.  The best politicians are those who know when to just step out of the way.

Downtown is doing better, but I would not say it is growing fast.  I really hope it begins to take off though for it has a lot of potential and gosh knows I have been sinking a lot of my time, sweat and money into trying to do what paltry little I can, and can use all the growth down there we can muster lol.  The Gathering Place is definitely a bright spot for Tulsa.  We are so fortunate to be getting a park of this size and caliber. Don't know about "Lots of big new developments all over town."  Only decent sized one I know of is the casino expansion/hotel.  We certainly don't have the "cranes in the air" that other cities have.  Things are looking up, and even the national economy is starting to finally give glimmers of real hope.  The things I want for Tulsa will happen.  It's just a matter of when, how much struggle, and regret (for not having done it sooner) will pass before they do. 

[heironymouspasparagus]

I couldn't locate the backup data or methodology employed for the graphic you posted. I would assume it is based on something, but there is no data, so lets look at existing present & historical data to answer your questions above.

Statistically our current population growth is 1.7% from 2010-2012 according to the census, and that would indicate that our job growth is keeping up quite well.  Using your example, Austin only had a 0.7% population increase in that same time, and only maintained a slightly lower unemployment rate at 4.8% instead of Tulsa's 4.9%.

We do have 16.6%, as of 2012, living under the poverty level, but that is typical of more rural/agricultural states, and lower incomes in such areas are counterbalanced with a far lower cost of living. More Oklahomans own their own home at 67.5% than the national average of 65.5% and such equity is extremely important when it comes to financial security and retirement.

Median income in our state is $44,891 with a mean income of $60,788 according to the same census data cited above.  When you look at families, the dynamic changes, with median family income of $56,068, these numbers have grown from a $40,709 median in 2000.  It would seem that our job growth, economic growth, as well and individual and family income growth have grown at a very healthy pace. 

I see all of this as very good news and indication that economically the people and businesses in our state are making good decisions and enjoying the economic freedom necessary for growth. We also seem to have state and local governments willing to step out of the way, or at least restrict interference with private sector forces. 

Median household income at $44,891 is doing great...  Wow!   Per capita income is $24,000 in Oklahoma.  That means, with 2,000 hours as a typical full time job, that the average in this state doesn't even get 40 hours a week at minimum wage!  That is NOT great by any definition except the RWRE Fox Cabal.  That is pathetic!  And with only 2.53 persons average per household - geez.... 

But it goes to satisfy the conditions desired and expressed by an old saying from decades ago;  to Democrats, low wages are the problem.  To Republicans, low wages are the answer.

Yep, Oklahoma is doing a great job of stepping out of the way of the private sector so they can run roughshod over their workers - keeping them at below subsistence wages.  Yeah...that's great.  Plus the added benefit of the state cutting funding for education by 30%....it just don't get any better than that!!


I ask again, where is the benefit in the next call center or Macy's DC or the next big fast food thing, if it is gonna bring in a bunch more minimum wage jobs?  Answer; there is none.

[guido911]

I ask again, where is the benefit in the next call center or Macy's DC or the next big fast food thing, if it is gonna bring in a bunch more minimum wage jobs?  Answer; there is none.

And I ask you, what are you doing about the problem? Are you hiring? Are you paying more than minimum wage? Or are you complaining about someone else not doing so?

[Townsend]

And I ask you, what are you doing about the problem? Are you hiring? Are you paying more than minimum wage? Or are you complaining about someone else not doing so?

Many of us don't believe you have to be a company/land owner to state opinions. 

Do you believe you need to be a company/land owner to state opinions?

[Conan71]

Median household income at $44,891 is doing great...  Wow!   Per capita income is $24,000 in Oklahoma.  That means, with 2,000 hours as a typical full time job, that the average in this state doesn't even get 40 hours a week at minimum wage!  That is NOT great by any definition except the RWRE Fox Cabal.  That is pathetic!  And with only 2.53 persons average per household - geez.... 

But it goes to satisfy the conditions desired and expressed by an old saying from decades ago;  to Democrats, low wages are the problem.  To Republicans, low wages are the answer.

Yep, Oklahoma is doing a great job of stepping out of the way of the private sector so they can run roughshod over their workers - keeping them at below subsistence wages.  Yeah...that's great.  Plus the added benefit of the state cutting funding for education by 30%....it just don't get any better than that!!


I ask again, where is the benefit in the next call center or Macy's DC or the next big fast food thing, if it is gonna bring in a bunch more minimum wage jobs?  Answer; there is none.

Federal minimum wage is $7.25.  $24,000 per year equals $12.00 an hour at 2000 hours.  I hope your cipherin' when you are engineering things is more accurate.