prediction time...who will be the next Governor?

[Tulsasooner78]

Math is tough..,

OKCounty :  51.7% + 7%. = 58.7% republican in 2016 election

Tulsa County.:  58.4% + 6% =64.4% republican in 2016 election

[Tulsasooner78]

OKC represents ballpark 65-70% of OK County population

[TulsaGoldenHurriCAN]

OK county gave the right wing 170,000+ votes in 2016.  The independent was Gary Johnson, more red than Trump.  If you look at the red percentage versus blue, in OK county, it is 65% red.  Tulsa on the other hand is 55% red.  10% more purple than OKC.  Details, bro...details...

Do you not know what Libertarianism is? In short, socially liberal and typically fiscally conservative. Gary Johnson was governor of New Mexico on a fiscally-conservative socially-liberal platform and worked to legalize cannabis, a very "liberal" social policy. He is fiscally to the right of nearly every politician especially Mr. "Spend-Trillions-we-don't-have" Trump. Johnson actually cut spending as promised as NM governor. But socially he is more aligned with liberals (pro-choice, anti-drug war).

And if "red" = Republican (which means uninhibited government spending, endless wars and religious-based laws limiting personal freedoms), Johnson is in no way "more red than Trump".

[heironymouspasparagus]

Do you not know what Libertarianism is? In short, socially liberal and typically fiscally conservative. Gary Johnson was governor of New Mexico on a fiscally-conservative socially-liberal platform and worked to legalize cannabis, a very "liberal" social policy. He is fiscally to the right of nearly every politician especially Mr. "Spend-Trillions-we-don't-have" Trump. Johnson actually cut spending as promised as NM governor. But socially he is more aligned with liberals (pro-choice, anti-drug war).

And if "red" = Republican (which means uninhibited government spending, endless wars and religious-based laws limiting personal freedoms), Johnson is in no way "more red than Trump".

Broad brushes are tough to "touch up" aren't they - Libertarians are much more right wing that "liberal".  Legal cannabis is not a liberal social policy, it is a good fiscal policy for pretty much everyone except big pharma.  Crime costs go way down (prisons), drug prices go way down, cops aren't tied up with petty BS - reducing those costs, it actually helps people with fewer adverse outcomes than opioids, and leads to smaller government - not a great thing in so many areas!   These are all very fiscally and socially conservative points - that I agree and endorse wholeheartedly, except for the too small government philosophy of both Repubes and Libertarians.  


And yes, I do know what Libertarianism is;  Libertarianism is a system of beliefs for people who think adolescence is the epitome of human achievement.

[Conan71]

Broad brushes are tough to "touch up" aren't they - Libertarians are much more right wing that "liberal".  Legal cannabis is not a liberal social policy, it is a good fiscal policy for pretty much everyone except big pharma.  Crime costs go way down (prisons), drug prices go way down, cops aren't tied up with petty BS - reducing those costs, it actually helps people with fewer adverse outcomes than opioids, and leads to smaller government - not a great thing in so many areas!   These are all very fiscally and socially conservative points - that I agree and endorse wholeheartedly, except for the too small government philosophy of both Repubes and Libertarians.  


And yes, I do know what Libertarianism is;  Libertarianism is a system of beliefs for people who think adolescence is the epitome of human achievement.

You must be dizzy from all that spinning.

[heironymouspasparagus]

You must be dizzy from all that spinning.

Lol...you are funny!


Actually, do you really believe Libertarians are not more 'con' than 'lib' ??

And reply #44 is still true and valid.

(You do remember that I have mentioned in the past that I don't have to 'write' very much of anything - I just copy/paste from Fake Fox News, et al, change the orientation, and voila' - the truth comes through.)

[TulsaGoldenHurriCAN]

Broad brushes are tough to "touch up" aren't they - Libertarians are much more right wing that "liberal".  Legal cannabis is not a liberal social policy, it is a good fiscal policy for pretty much everyone except big pharma.  Crime costs go way down (prisons), drug prices go way down, cops aren't tied up with petty BS - reducing those costs, it actually helps people with fewer adverse outcomes than opioids, and leads to smaller government - not a great thing in so many areas!   These are all very fiscally and socially conservative points - that I agree and endorse wholeheartedly, except for the too small government philosophy of both Repubes and Libertarians.  

Libertarians are mostly pro-states rights as opposed to big centralized government. Legalizing weed is the fiscally conservative option, but is very "liberal" in the truest sense of the word and not conservative/traditional. Republicans aren't about saving money when it comes to "morality". They're about enforcing their personal beliefs on others through the force of law.

And yes, I do know what Libertarianism is;  Libertarianism is a system of beliefs for people who think adolescence is the epitome of human achievement.

That doesn't even make sense and it is not true. When you do blind political tests, most people align with Libertarian principles more than with either party. Libertarian is basically what the US system was for the first 50-100 or so years. Not perfect by any means and sort of madness at times, but more personal freedom and very few taxes. The new reality of the world requires far more laws and government control over certain industries. Libertarianism nowadays is more about opposing and limiting the escalation of government power as much as possible because when it's not "your guy" in the white house, they sure have a lot of power to do a lot of bad. It's also about opposing ridiculous "sin" laws like the war against drugs and outdated liquor laws.

Libertarianism is very idealistic and not realistic in it's "truest" form, but so is liberalism (which is a far cry from John Locke's Classical Liberalism). Libertarianism in the US is based on the core values that the US was founded on. It will never be achieved just like the ambitions stated in the Declaration of Independence. No one thinks the US will ever become anything remotely close to true Libertarian, but spending trillions we don't have while being in debt $22 trillion, not to mention the trillions more in unfunded liabilities, is not sustainable. Neither party is working to fix that and hardly even acknowledge it. There is plenty of waste in the federal government that could be cut out. Either we do it soon by choice or are forced to default and crash in the future.

The real problems are we need to actually tax the elite in the US (who use loopholes, lawyers/accountant and corporate welfare to pay almost zero tax). We need that extra revenue to fund critical shortfalls like Social Security, infrastructure and health care while also cutting costs to non essentials like the wars, subsidies and excessive defense spending. Both parties work against enough of those items so that the problems don't get solved. No one will tax the elite and no one cuts the ridiculously high defense spending or stops the endless wars.

[Oil Capital]

And reply #44 is still true and valid.

No.  No it is not.  Almost nothing in your reply #44 is true.

[heironymouspasparagus]

No.  No it is not.  Almost nothing in your reply #44 is true.

Here is the quote as refresher;

"OK county gave the right wing 170,000+ votes in 2016.  The independent was Gary Johnson, more red than Trump.  If you look at the red percentage versus blue, in OK county, it is 65% red.  Tulsa on the other hand is 55% red.  10% more purple than OKC.  Details, bro...details...

Cleveland County is skewed by the college types running around there.  It is 55% red, more like Tulsa than OKC.  Haven't looked, but Stillwater may also have that kind of purpling."


Specifics - exactly which part do you think is wrong?   You can do better than that - you are giving a breadburner reply, with nothing to show any different.   And yeah, the post is true.   Trump and Johnson got about 170,000 votes.  +/_ a tiny bit.

[Oil Capital]

Here is the quote as refresher;

"OK county gave the right wing 170,000+ votes in 2016.  The independent was Gary Johnson, more red than Trump.  If you look at the red percentage versus blue, in OK county, it is 65% red.  Tulsa on the other hand is 55% red.  10% more purple than OKC.  Details, bro...details...

Cleveland County is skewed by the college types running around there.  It is 55% red, more like Tulsa than OKC.  Haven't looked, but Stillwater may also have that kind of purpling."


Specifics - exactly which part do you think is wrong?   You can do better than that - you are giving a breadburner reply, with nothing to show any different.   And yeah, the post is true.   Trump and Johnson got about 170,000 votes.  +/_ a tiny bit.

Well, to start, lumping Trump and Gary Johnson together as the "right wing" is disingenuous, at best.  Especially in the 2016 election; a good bunch of those Gary Johnson votes are the equivalent of "none-of-the-above."

The one thing you got right was your addition of the Trump and Johnson votes, but as mentioned above, it doesn't show what you want it to (and without context, it tells us nothing). Your math went seriously downhill after that.

In Oklahoma County, Trump got 51.7%  and Johnson got 7.1%. That adds up to 58.8%, not the 65% you claimed.

In Tulsa County, Trump get 58.4% and Johnson got 6.1%.  That adds up to 64.5%, not the 55% you claimed.  That would make Tulsa County 5.7% less purple than Oklahoma County, not the 10% more purple you claimed.

By the way, you got Cleveland County wrong too.  It went 57.1% Trump, 7.4% Johnson = 64.5%. Indeed, more like Tulsa County than Oklahoma County, but not quite in the way you represented.

[heironymouspasparagus]

Well, to start, lumping Trump and Gary Johnson together as the "right wing" is disingenuous, at best.  Especially in the 2016 election; a good bunch of those Gary Johnson votes are the equivalent of "none-of-the-above."

The one thing you got right was your addition of the Trump and Johnson votes, but as mentioned above, it doesn't show what you want it to (and without context, it tells us nothing). Your math went seriously downhill after that.

In Oklahoma County, Trump got 51.7%  and Johnson got 7.1%. That adds up to 58.8%, not the 65% you claimed.

In Tulsa County, Trump get 58.4% and Johnson got 6.1%.  That adds up to 64.5%, not the 55% you claimed.  That would make Tulsa County 5.7% less purple than Oklahoma County, not the 10% more purple you claimed.

By the way, you got Cleveland County wrong too.  It went 57.1% Trump, 7.4% Johnson = 64.5%. Indeed, more like Tulsa County than Oklahoma County, but not quite in the way you represented.

Trump as representing the Hijacked Republican Party and Johnson are much more alike than different.


Other than that, you are right - I got fumble-fingery all over the place and messed it up big time, starting with using TulsaSooner's numbers (reply 42) without checking at my link - you are right...58.8%.   My bad.  Sorry about that!  It was downhill from there.  You are right.  (I was having a tough time believing Tulsa was more purple than OKC area, but the wrong calculations blinded me to the reality!  We are still worse than OKC on that...!  Sadly.)

[Conan71]

Trump as representing the Hijacked Republican Party and Johnson are much more alike than different.

I find very few similarities between their politics or personal life.  Johnson has actually balanced a budget and brought fiscal sense to a government leadership role.  He's also a raving social liberal.  Ostensibly, Trump was a NY lib at one point.  I'm sure he still is but it's not talked about to keep the fundies happy.  What do they care anyhow?  They think his boorish nature and treatment of women is perfectly okay as long as he's got an (R) after his name.  Along those lines, there don't appear to be any lecherous rumors about Johnson.

[Hoss]

I find very few similarities between their politics or personal life.  Johnson has actually balanced a budget and brought fiscal sense to a government leadership role.  He's also a raving social liberal.  Ostensibly, Trump was a NY lib at one point.  I'm sure he still is but it's not talked about to keep the fundies happy.  What do they care anyhow?  They think his boorish nature and treatment of women is perfectly okay as long as he's got an (R) after his name.  Along those lines, there don't appear to be any lecherous rumors about Johnson.

However this video makes me laugh every time...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1pzoJVnPblI

That aside, my concern was that he had problems knowing where certain countries were, who leaders were.  But then again, the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave probably knows 10 times less than Gov Johnson.  I would have voted for him, and thinking back on it, I probably should have.

[Tulsasooner78]

Trump as representing the Hijacked Republican Party and Johnson are much more alike than different.


Other than that, you are right - I got fumble-fingery all over the place and messed it up big time, starting with using TulsaSooner's numbers (reply 42) without checking at my link - you are right...58.8%.   My bad.  Sorry about that!  It was downhill from there.  You are right.  (I was having a tough time believing Tulsa was more purple than OKC area, but the wrong calculations blinded me to the reality!  We are still worse than OKC on that...!  Sadly.)

My numbers were correct from the beginning.   The issue is you are the typical  Tulsan who believes that if you repeat something false enough it becomes the truth.... I.e., Tulsa is the Paris of the Midwest, the liberal center of the state, the cultural heart of Oklahoma and etc.

[heironymouspasparagus]

My numbers were correct from the beginning.   The issue is you are the typical  Tulsan who believes that if you repeat something false enough it becomes the truth.... I.e., Tulsa is the Paris of the Midwest, the liberal center of the state, the cultural heart of Oklahoma and etc.

Lol...  your numbers on OK county were the ones that were wrong... and got me started down the primrose path.


Projection alert - you haven't ever seen me call Tulsa the Paris of the midwest or liberal center of anything ever!  It is extremist right wing to the core.  In the same vein as most of the rest of the state, including big swaths of OKC.   Just because they didn't go as strongly right as Tulsa this time does not make them progressive.  Still the area that gave us Sally Kern.

As for cultural, well it isn't a cultural heart comparatively speaking (to the rest of the world), but compared to OKC and everywhere else in OK, it holds it's own and has nothing to be ashamed of relative to any other place in the state.   And "quality of life" is still better here than OKC....it's a much nicer area to live in.