POLL: 85% say NO

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by twizzler

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

quote:Originally posted by twizzler

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

Their ad campaign is primarily PR and tapping into the Fox pool of aginner's. They have dominated The Beacon, Idiot Radio, UT, this Forum, Northside events etc.

I saw the Fox23 "decoding the truth in advertising" segment. Grizz is right. They didn't bother to expose the no arguments. No wonder their troops continue to vote no. All 12 of them.

There are also not great numbers of people included in "The Beacon, Idiot Radio, UT, this Forum, Northside events etc." camps either. So if this is voted down, as it seems it will be, there will be a majority of 'no' votes coming from outside of those influences. Which speaks more to how poorly the tax (not the projects) was set up than to anything else.

As usual you draw conclusions that match your pre-conceived stance. It also could reflect how poorly informed the populace is and prefers to be, how poorly educated in the operations of government they are, and how poorly they are served by tragically partisan media. It all leads to an easily manipulated electorate.

You know as well as I do that the Fox23 poll should not have even been called a poll. The sarcastic remark about "all 12 of them" refers to the fact that they have very little viewership, and the "poll" was most likely not even representative of that viewership, much less a sampling of the community. For instance, I often watch their news. After seeing their "poll" that is embarrassing to admit.

I suppose then, according to your argument, manipulation could work both ways?

I'm sorry, I just don't hold such a low view of the majority of City of Tulsa and Tulsa County residents.

As I have said before, when local voters are given equitably distributed tax plans to vote on (i.e. Vision 2025, 4-to-Fix), they pass in all areas of town. When they are given single project plans, they tend to fail. The leaders should know this by now.

Let me ask you a hypothetical question. I ask this genuinely and not to try to persuade you or say 'gotcha'.

Say right before the plan for the River Tax you were showed the plan as it is now. You were told that polls had been done and the chances of that plan passing were slim. But the polls also showed that if 2/3 of the $288M in public funds was spent on river projects and 1/3 was spent on parks and beautification projects throughout Tulsa County, the vote would most likely pass. Which route would you have chosen?

You said that it would be likely a large amount of people who would vote no would be from outside of the influences of local media and this forum. I believe that is primo evidence that they would be rather uninformed. Remember, the real poll showed that nearly 30% believed this plan had islands with housing on them! Sounds pretty unenlightened, uninformed to me but if you think Tulsans deserve a "higher" view it comes from the goodness of your heart.

As far as your hypothetical, I assume you mean if I had the decision as to how the plan would be put together based on polling results? If so, I wouldn't hesitate to hire another polling outfit. If the results were the same, I darned sure wouldn't gerri-rig it to include projects that should come from somewhere else. Like what they did by offering swimming pools to Northsiders. Pandering is a politicians thing.  This plan needed to stay focussed on the river.

I probably would embark on efforts to show the public how they all stand to benefit. They did the same thing. You assume no other parts of the county will receive value....I don't agree.

[Conan71]

Waterboy, there is value to all the county when the river is developed.  However, in the public perception of someone who lives in Collinsville or Owasso, it's not a "comprehensive" benefit plan like 2025 was where there were community centers, YMCA's, pools, etc. for, and in the center of each community.

Should this fail, I hope the city will pick up the ball and run with it- assuming this doesn't wind up being a surprising defeat in the city of Tulsa precincts.  Perhaps come up with a simultaneous election day for Sand Springs and Jenks and run it back through- especially if it passed in Tulsa and it was surrounding communities which wound up killing it.  Then we wind up reaping tax dollars from the 'burbs who voted against it when they come to the river to eat, shop, and drink.

I guess we will know the true numbers by the 10pm news.

[waterboy]

Yeah, its the perception thing alright. And I don't mean that sarcastically, I agree with you. Putting together another plan will be just as controversial I think but probably easier to do city by city. But its also alot of people who don't read, don't bother to stay informed and stay home to watch TV while others decide their fate.

[RecycleMichael]

How is FoxTV not embarrassed by the inaccuracy of their polls?

What does it say about their results when clearly this race is going to be decided by just a percentage point or two and their poll say 85 to 15?

I really like watching local Fox news and their people seem to do a good job, but this taints everything hard news they try to do.

[TulsaJayhawk]

The wife and I are laughing our heads off at the Fox 23 poll tonight:  How did you vote on the river tax vote?

As of 9:47, the results were 87% No, 13% Yes.

Very accurate representation.  Yes sirree!

[Srogue]

I love the attitude of some of the arrogant egoists: If you are against the tax you must be stupid and uneducated.  Brilliant, now get out there and start work on Hillary's campaign, as I am sure you are a supporter, with that wonderful way of thinking, and keep up the astute observations!

Oh, and sorry the tax failed. []

[sgrizzle]

quote:Originally posted by Srogue

I love the attitude of some of the arrogant egoists: If you are against the tax you must be stupid and uneducated.  Brilliant, now get out there and start work on Hillary's campaign, as I am sure you are a supporter, with that wonderful way of thinking, and keep up the astute observations!

Oh, and sorry the tax failed. []

I don't think anyone is saying that. (on here anyway) However, it is obvious that Fox23 mainly hits certain demographics by the fact their poll was so far off of the actual results. Now I don't know for sure if it is the idiot demographic, or just the demographic of people not willing to stay up until 10pm for news.

[tim huntzinger]

I think FOX23 just found out a whole bunch about their audience.

[swake]

quote:Originally posted by Srogue

I love the attitude of some of the arrogant egoists: If you are against the tax you must be stupid and uneducated.  Brilliant, now get out there and start work on Hillary's campaign, as I am sure you are a supporter, with that wonderful way of thinking, and keep up the astute observations!

Oh, and sorry the tax failed. []

To have voted no means that in most cases you were stupid in flushing away over $700 million in private money and you were uneducated in the facts of the vote.

[tim huntzinger]

Swake, that is the stupidest thing you have ever said.  Please stop.

[swake]

quote:Originally posted by tim huntzinger

Swake, that is the stupidest thing you have ever said.  Please stop.

Please go hound Drudge over Oral some more.

[tim huntzinger]

NYUCK NYUCK I been bugging HuffPo over Nasal for some time, too . . .

[RecycleMichael]

quote:Originally posted by tim huntzinger

...that is the stupidest thing you have ever said.  Please stop.

I reserve the right to say even more stupid things. That is one of the reasons I post here.

If brains were taxed, I would get a rebate.

[shadows]

In the recent river vote is seem that the polls showed around 80% of the voters were in the NO column,  The fox 23 poll taken after the election closed showed some 80% voted no.  The finial count seems to have shown a 5% difference between the yes and no votes.  

Is there problem with the count or a misunderstanding as to the amount of votes that needed to be cast for the final count?

[Wrinkle]

Perhaps only 40% of the votes were stuffed when it needed to be 45%.