I hope lots of you saved the Shadid flyer from his campaign that I posted here at OKCTalk. He's done a 180 on finishing MAPS. I have always liked Ed, but I'm concerned. Mick's got a lot of flaws frankly for a leader, but since it's basically a ceremonial job, I'll be voting for him again simply for how he presents himself to the rest of the country as a spokesman for our city.

Can you repost it?

Can you repost it?

Here's the link to the post. http://www.okctalk.com/transportation/20121-modern-streetcar-commuter-transit-project-maps-3-progresses-176.html#post668364
Direct link to the flyer http://i.imgur.com/10wScU6.jpg

So glad to see Mick Cornett running again. I will definitely be voting for him. I may not agree with everything he has done, but he has done a lot for the city and has always been a great promoter.

All I can think about is the hypocrisy in the million or so that is about to be burned by Shadid that could be spent on better bus stops.

Perhaps "do as I say and not as I do" is operant here.

"We're supposed to have non-partisan city elections. Cornett has largely stayed true to this. "
Wasn't Mick the first to violate the gentleman's agreement to leave political affiliation out of city races? Notice he mentoned "faith based community" in his announcement, playing the religion card right off the bat. Shadid may be a contrarian to some, but he's defiantely not a chamber tool.

When was the last time you drove through OKC?

Are you talking to me? I drive through the city all the time. Have you ever reported a pothole? Was it repaired? SW to SE 29th is terrible in both directions; May Avenue at NW 63rd for Northbound traffic; May Avenue in front of the Homeland service station for Southbound traffic; and what about the sink hole under I-40 on May Avenue? I could go on and on, but you get my drift.

Yes, I was directing my question to you. Keep in mind OKC is one of the largest cities in terms of area in the US and for every street you just listed there is another that is currently being repaired/reconstructed. No city has the manpower to attack every downtrodden thoroughfare at the exact same time.


Are you talking to me? I drive through the city all the time. Have you ever reported a pothole? Was it repaired? SW to SE 29th is terrible in both directions; May Avenue at NW 63rd for Northbound traffic; May Avenue in front of the Homeland service station for Southbound traffic; and what about the sink hole under I-40 on May Avenue? I could go on and on, but you get my drift.

"We're supposed to have non-partisan city elections. Cornett has largely stayed true to this. "
Wasn't Mick the first to violate the gentleman's agreement to leave political affiliation out of city races? Notice he mentoned "faith based community" in his announcement, playing the religion card right off the bat. Shadid may be a contrarian to some, but he's defiantely not a chamber tool.

It doesn't matter if you're a tool of an institution or of your personal ideology. Inflexibility and unwillingness to compromise or respect another person's point of view is a disastrous set of attributes for a mayor. I would also rather have a mayor with whom I disagree than one who may agree with me today and change his mind tomorrow.

"We're supposed to have non-partisan city elections. Cornett has largely stayed true to this. "
Wasn't Mick the first to violate the gentleman's agreement to leave political affiliation out of city races? Notice he mentoned "faith based community" in his announcement, playing the religion card right off the bat. Shadid may be a contrarian to some, but he's defiantely not a chamber tool.

What is wrong with being someone that works with the Chamber. The Chamber ran all the maps campaigns didn't they. with out the the Chamber we have none of this. I would support Mayor cornett on that alone.

Well what is Shadid a "tool" of? As a voter and a person who supported his candidacy, I don't feel like he has kept his word to us on his support of MAPS initiatives. Also, he seems to be trying to shuttle the only citizen-supported transit initiative. I'm not sure what the guy is for at this point besides "public deliberation." Great, let's deliberate, then make a decision and move forward. We shouldn't have to have a "revote" on things we've already voted for. It's patronizing.

What is wrong with being someone that works with the Chamber. The Chamber ran all the maps campaigns didn't they. with out the the Chamber we have none of this. I would support Mayor cornett on that alone.

This is what we'll get if Shadid is elected: people carving up the city into different camps. I don't always agree with the Chamber. Heck, I'm a progressive Democrat, and their anti-union stuff gets very tiring. But I also recognize that the business community is an extremely valuable and important asset in moving this city forward. Our chamber is far more visionary than many others; they have bought in completely that we need to invest in our city's quality of life; they supported the "Creative Class" discussions; they support inclusive opportunity for GLBT citizens. They support many progressive things.

If we start carving up people into subgroups we will not sustain the positive momentum that has brought our city this far.

Forgive my ignorance: If Cornett wins, can Ed Shadid retain his seat on the City Council or does he have to vacate it to run for Mayor? I know that is the rule for someone is the Oklahoma house running for Congress.

Yes, he can simultaneously run for mayor and retain his seat. His seat isn't up for reelection until 2015.

I like the idea of Shadid on the council more than as the mayor, to this point his best molments have been acting as a check against everyone happily agreeing with something we could do better but I do not see that having much more weight from the mayor's chair and he seems like he would be a downgrade on interaction with the media (even more so on non-local). In any case with Cornert running again, it is likely all the new candidates have an uphill battle.

All I can think about is the hypocrisy in the million or so that is about to be burned by Shadid that could be spent on better bus stops.

This comment troubles me. Are you not in favor of better bus stops? Has he not already spent enough of his personal money to bring in national urban planning experts to elevate the discussion?

When you hand pick the experts you bring in with your personal money, it's not surprising that they endorse your POV. What I've noticed about all the experts, regardless of POV, is that what they don't bring along with them is an understanding of Oklahoma City and its residents, it's history, what MAPS has meant to the city and how the citizens view that plebiscite. They don't understand how unique it is for a decidedly partisan electorate to act in nonpartisan fashion and tax themselves for quality of life improvements, and what a source of pride they are. They don't understand transit here and people's attitudes towards transit, as we are decidedly not like Portland or Seattle, and that has to be an important part of the process of improving transit here in Oklahoma City. It too will require nonpartisanship and a decided change in attitude. Unless a leader can build bridges, not break them, he will be unsuccessful in effecting change.

I have not heard Shadid or any of "his" experts push one particular view over another. They are simply asking questions that haven't been asked, which is upsetting to many. Clearly, none of the questions and concerns with the streetcar are settled as shown by the response at the last public forum. People are interested and want to explore all of the options before making a decision. This is a good thing.

Jarrett may understand now. It's nice if he's educated himself. But I went to the first meeting here and he was clueless about MAPS, and had a very decided anti-streetcar POV. That's fine, since Ed paid him and I'm still not sure Ed understands MAPS or has a deep understanding of what Oklahoma City was like pre-MAPS.

It's not the Portland system I'm talking about, but rather, Portland's attitude towards mass transit. Although I do remember being told that folks in Portland would let buses pass by if a streetcar was due. The way you sell mass transit in a red state that loves its automobiles may require techniques that are different from the Pacific NW. It is definitely going to require political acumen and the ability to make it a nonpartisan issue.

I have not heard Shadid or any of "his" experts push one particular view over another. They are simply asking questions that haven't been asked, which is upsetting to many. Clearly, none of the questions and concerns with the streetcar are settled as shown by the response at the last public forum. People are interested and want to explore all of the options before making a decision. This is a good thing.

The decision was made by we the voters in 2009. Public forums are usually attended by a very small percentage of the population, typically those with decided opinions. I thought there was a small vocal minority at the last meeting who had issues with the process, and many of those were with the format.

I have not heard Shadid or any of "his" experts push one particular view over another. They are simply asking questions that haven't been asked, which is upsetting to many. Clearly, none of the questions and concerns with the streetcar are settled as shown by the response at the last public forum. People are interested and want to explore all of the options before making a decision. This is a good thing.

False. Shadid has asked questions that WERE asked, and already answered. He also asked questions based on false premises like the exaggerated threats of federal lawsuits he made (he suggested OKC would be sued if the streetcar was built, citing an example that did not relate to the streetcar). He also has completely misrepresented how the streetcar project was unveiled to the public, insisting that federal money was guaranteed by the city when all of the available news stories that existed prior to the MAPS vote make it clear that we were building the streetcar WITHOUT federal funding, and that if we were to get it, great, that would be a bonus, but was not expected or required for completion. Obviously, the city will pursue federal funding when and if it's available but we don't need it to get this done, unlike projects in other cities (another area where Jarrett seemed confused).

Although this is all widely available in the public record, Shadid stated this to hundreds of people at his transit "forum," in which he provided the streetcar subcommittee no voice to respond to his bizarre and inaccurate suppositions. So, is it a matter that people don't like questions? No. It's that people tend to bristle when you make stuff up out of whole cloth.

He also has repeated the whopper that "stakeholders" were not consulted, which is outrageously false. Citizens, business owners, public officials, etc. were brought in for many meetings during the early days of the streetcar planning. These were widely publicized meetings open to the public. Also, business owners were consulted privately and invited to attend these meetings. Shadid was not at those meetings (he didn't vote for MAPS and wasn't yet on Council so maybe he was not interested), but that's not the fault of the city or the subcommittee.

You could say his "experts" pushed no particular view, but you would be incorrect. His speaker at the transit "forum" (cough, cough) literally hates streetcars. So to suggest they weren't pushing "one particular view" doesn't really add up, particularly since no other speakers, such as the myriad transit experts from across the country who are strong advocates of streetcars (not to mention the locally appointed experts who have volunteered their time and energy to build the streetcar) were handed a microphone and allowed to respond. Ask yourself if this fits Shadid's mantra of "maximum public deliberation."

These things have been very disappointing to me as someone who not only admired Ed Shadid a great deal, and personally liked him, but pitched in and worked hard for his campaign.

I have not heard Shadid or any of "his" experts push one particular view over another. They are simply asking questions that haven't been asked, which is upsetting to many. Clearly, none of the questions and concerns with the streetcar are settled as shown by the response at the last public forum. People are interested and want to explore all of the options before making a decision. This is a good thing.

Decision? The MAPS3 decision was made in 2009. All that is left to decide now is how the best complete the projects on the MAPS3 ballot. That process has been open - especially Ed's favorite target, the streetcar. There have been tons of meetings about the streetcar project throughout the planning process beginning with the Fixed Guideway Study, Let's Talk Transit, Alternatives Analysis, and MAPS3 Streetcar subcommittee - all open to the public. (I may have forgotten some.)

From everything I have heard about the "transit forum", it was mainly a canine and equine event for a single point of view. It was nothing more than a prequel to some later actions - all very disappointing.

Finally, what would Dr Shadid do better in the office than Mayor Cornett? Mayor Cornett has done an excellent job and any opponent will have a difficult time convincing people OKC would be better served by someone else.

I am very happy to see Cornett run again.

OKC is on a great roll and we do not need a change in leadership.

The thing that is befuddling to me is that Shadid is presenting a classic false choice when he frames the issue as a decision between buses and the streetcar. Guess what? We can have both! The fact is that the streetcar is only one component of a multimodal transit system. Everyone that I've ever talked to involved with the streetcar project are huge supporters of improving our bus system. They believe as do I that one way to do this is to present another mode of transit to get more public buy in. The next step would obviously be to plug in the data from the bus study and get to work on implementing it.

It makes zero sense to present this false choice: 1) it's misleading to those who desire better bus service to frame the discussion in this manner, and 2) it is foolish to divide people in OKC who support an improved public transportation system. As betts points out, this is a car city, built for the car, and it's going to take considerable political skill to get broader support for improved transit funding. Why cause division among transit supporters? How does that help us reach our goals? And finally, 3) the voters of OKC voted for a transit initiative! Yay! How would you earn their trust and / or votes for future transit initiatives when you pull the rug out from under them on a project they've already voted for? Huh? This doesn't make sense.

Oklahoma City Mayor Cornett to seek fourth term, says 'work's not done' | NewsOK.com (http://m.newsok.com/oklahoma-city-mayor-cornett-to-seek-fourth-term-says-works-not-done/article/3869237)

Glad Cornett is running again, hard to argue that he's done anything other than a great job. He's got my vote.

Yes, he can simultaneously run for mayor and retain his seat. His seat isn't up for reelection until 2015.
Great, I really like Mr. Shadid however it's a bit early to sit in the big chair.

To a young leader: Don't try to be Batman in your Robin Season!

http://www.okctalk.com/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Urban Pioneer http://www.okctalk.com/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.okctalk.com/general-civic-issues/34251-okc-mayor-race-2014-a-post673927.html#post673927)
All I can think about is the hypocrisy in the million or so that is about to be burned by Shadid that could be spent on better bus stops.





This comment troubles me. Are you not in favor of better bus stops? Has he not already spent enough of his personal money to bring in national urban planning experts to elevate the discussion?


THAT... was a joke. Obviously lost on you my friend. lol

Unfortunately text is one of the worst mediums for conveying jokes. It loses voice tone, cadence and body language. Which is often the majority of how intent and sometimes content is implied in normal speech. People tend to read as literal and also tend to take things more personal if view are different.

You may be right, but I can't see that statement in any other way. An incredible amount of money is about to be "wasted" on both sides.

Shadid needs to serve a full term, build some bridges, learn some discipline, make some accomplishments, and regain some trust with people.

It may be entirely possible that this "exercise" in Democracy may be a very good and healthy thing for this city. However, if he does win, I fear "Tulsa town" type divisiveness after personally observing the last few years of his reckless antics.

Yea, it seems like there is a good chance this is going be more money spent all around and him loosing in a landslide. The mayor got 87% of the votes at one point and at lowest has gotten 58%, I wonder how many outside of Shadid's ward have heard of him. I agree on him needing more time, ideally a mayor is elected to get things done and there have been a few times he has either come out of nowhere on a subject or clearly wanted to do the opposite of what was voted on by citizens before he was in office, so I have a hard time putting a lot of trust in him following through at this point. There are uses for politicians that are either watchdogs or purposely outside core political club but they also tend to be fairly ineffective leading executive branches (Carter is the poster boy for this).

At least there is the benefit in OKC's Council/Manager system that there is not a lot more any individual can do as mayor than as a council member, though it could look worse in the press if the mayor is a constant decenter verses a council person is a constant decenter. In Tulsa's 'Strong' Mayor system a mayor against a council can be a lot more of an obstruction.

Yea, it seems like there is a good chance this is going be more money spent all around and him loosing in a landslide. The mayor got 87% of the votes at one point and at lowest has gotten 58%, I wonder how many outside of Shadid's ward have even heard of him. I agree on him needing more time, ideally a mayor is elected to get things done and there have been a few times he has either come out of nowhere on a subject or clearly wanted to do the opposite of what was voted on before he was in office, so I have a hard time putting a lot of trust in him following through at this point. There are uses for politicians that are either watchdogs or purposely outside core political club but they also tend to be fairly ineffective leading executive branches (Carter is the poster boy for this). At least there is the benefit in OKC's Council/Manager system is there is not a lot more any individual can do as mayor than as a council member, though it could look worse in the press if the mayor is a constant decenter verses a council person is a constant decenter.

Talking to his supporters, Ed really believes he can win. Perhaps he's just running to elevate certain issues. It will definitely be an uphill battle for him given OKC citizens' positive view of the direction of our city. Virtually every political race -- absent crazy scandals -- is determined by the mood of the electorate. People can visibly see the positive change in OKC, and while they may have issues in certain areas, one would have to be blindfolded and waking up from a ten-year coma not to recognize how much OKC has improved and continues to do so.

So Ed is trying to say, "Yeah, things may be good, but with me they could be better." This is a difficult and far too nuanced case to make, particularly given all of the bridges he has burned in his very short career. Maybe he will run on a platform of banning automobiles and converting all city power to solar or something to give his campaign an edge. Perhaps a pro-pot-legalization message would win lots of votes.

But there is really not a compelling argument one can make that Mayor Cornett should be fired. He has been very competent and he has been the steward of a cycle of nearly unprecedented growth in OKC -- capped with the celebrated arrival of a championship contending NBA darling.

Firing Cornett right now for Shadid is about as ridiculous on paper as OU firing Bob Stoops and replacing him with some wacky offensive coordinator from Utah.

Lol

People in Oklahoma and Oklahoma City for that matter have a "Don't fix it if it not broke." attitude when it comes to politics. I don't see Mick being defeated. You can guarantee he has the backing of the business community and the power brokers of this city. Anyone one who tries to run against him is going to fail miserably. Those who seek change would probably be better off to sit this one out and wait until Mick decides to retire.

Mick does it right. He walks the middle of the road and stays out of the politics that are outside of his pay grade.

I do think it will be interesting to see who runs for office. Last time it was rather entertaining because you had four or five guys that had no earthly idea what the city council actually does. They kept talking about issues that have nothing to do with the city council.

Ah yes.. the Fairview Baptist candidates never failed to leave an impression...

"We're supposed to have non-partisan city elections. Cornett has largely stayed true to this. "
Wasn't Mick the first to violate the gentleman's agreement to leave political affiliation out of city races? Notice he mentoned "faith based community" in his announcement, playing the religion card right off the bat. Shadid may be a contrarian to some, but he's defiantely not a chamber tool.

He's a devil's advocate. That's all good and fine, but when that's all you are, you stand in the way of progress, and don't help momentum....in fact, you kill it.

I have not heard Shadid or any of "his" experts push one particular view over another. They are simply asking questions that haven't been asked, which is upsetting to many. Clearly, none of the questions and concerns with the streetcar are settled as shown by the response at the last public forum. People are interested and want to explore all of the options before making a decision. This is a good thing.

So, far, that's all Shadid has done is ask questions. That's all good and fine, but he needs to work on finding solutions and implementing them.

The thing that is befuddling to me is that Shadid is presenting a classic false choice when he frames the issue as a decision between buses and the streetcar. Guess what? We can have both! The fact is that the streetcar is only one component of a multimodal transit system. Everyone that I've ever talked to involved with the streetcar project are huge supporters of improving our bus system. They believe as do I that one way to do this is to present another mode of transit to get more public buy in. The next step would obviously be to plug in the data from the bus study and get to work on implementing it.

It makes zero sense to present this false choice: 1) it's misleading to those who desire better bus service to frame the discussion in this manner, and 2) it is foolish to divide people in OKC who support an improved public transportation system. As betts points out, this is a car city, built for the car, and it's going to take considerable political skill to get broader support for improved transit funding. Why cause division among transit supporters? How does that help us reach our goals? And finally, 3) the voters of OKC voted for a transit initiative! Yay! How would you earn their trust and / or votes for future transit initiatives when you pull the rug out from under them on a project they've already voted for? Huh? This doesn't make sense.

EXACTLY!

I confronted him about this very thing at his campaign HQ last week and it was clear he was playing Mr Politician on the issue-- trying to find a way to say he opposes the streetcar without saying he opposed the streetcar. It was a disappointing interaction.

When I pressed him on the issue, he said his opposition to the streetcar was based on the fact that we don't have a dedicated funding source for it and shouldn't proceed until one is found. I then asked if he opposed beginning work on the Central Park and he said no. I guess the inconsistency was lost on him.

It may be entirely possible that this "exercise" in Democracy may be a very good and healthy thing for this city. However, if he does win, I fear "Tulsa town" type divisiveness after personally observing the last few years of his reckless antics.

I'm also a bit concerned about what happens if he loses. I still think we need to hear his voice on the council and I would hate to see any greater divide occur between Dr. Shadid, Mayor Cornett and others.

Whenever I explain my preference for liking the streetcar first as opposed to the bus system first is that the streetcar is the more "sexy" of the two. We could improve the bus system first, but it still wouldn't change the stigma of the system. I don't know anybody who rides the bus (except for a few people on this board) and I think the misconception is that it is only for people who aren't able or can't afford to drive a car. The streetcar would make it to where people of all walks of life would ride it as opposed to the people who do it for necessity. Ehen you get that, people are more used to it, the bus system improvements would be better and more people would ride as an option, not a necessity. JMHO.

When I pressed him on the issue, he said his opposition to the streetcar was based on the fact that we don't have a dedicated funding source for it and shouldn't proceed until one is found. I then asked if he opposed beginning work on the Central Park and he said no. I guess the inconsistency was lost on him.

So my challenge to him would be to find a solution for funding for the streetcar system. The citizens of OKC already voted for a streetcar, so simply not implementing the street car is not an option. We're paying Mr. Shadid to come up with a plan on how to pay for the streetcar. There are options out there. As a last resort he could consider pressing for a 1/8 cent dedicated sales tax to cover funding for it. It works for the zoo. That's my problem with Shadid. He's obviously against the streetcar. That would be okay, but the citizens of OKC have already voted for it. So, at this point, being against the street car is simply not an option.

I'm also a bit concerned about what happens if he loses. I still think we need to hear his voice on the council and I would hate to see any greater divide occur between Dr. Shadid, Mayor Cornett and others.

But, Shadid's voice at present is only working to hold us back. Maybe he needs to go back to being solely a doctor.

I hope everyone is prepared for how terribly negative this campaign is going to be. Cornett is a popular guy and Shadid is going to have to attack him relentlessly to bring down his approval and favorability ratings. You can already see some of it beginning to simmer in Shadid's Twitter post in which he mocked Cornett's video and hashtagged it with "game on." For Shadid, this poses a problem since most OKC residents have no idea who he is. If they view him as too negative, it will kill his candidacy before it ever has a chance to breathe.

I don't see Shadid going negative, and I think (hope) he'll go positive for two reasons: 1) Cornett is a successful and popular mayor, and attacks on him could easily backfire; and 2) If Shadid loses after a negative campaign, he'll still be a council member, but with less political capital.

We will see if Shadid is about himself or about the people of OKC. An overly negative and divisive campaign is a sign he is more about being in power and being right than being for the progress of OKC. Since he has no successes to get credit for, he probably only can be negative about the other candidate. Name ONE thing he has championed and got implemented....either a success or failure in the public's eye. Then name ONE that the public believes is a SUCCESS.

Like most radical right, it is more about what he is against than what he is for.

I don't see Shadid going negative, and I think (hope) he'll go positive for two reasons: 1) Cornett is a successful and popular mayor, and attacks on him could easily backfire; and 2) If Shadid loses after a negative campaign, he'll still be a council member, but with less political capital.

I think he has already started the negativity. The divide and conquer strategy is clear is this first salvo. It will likely only get worse from here.

Below is Ed's comment on the NewsOK.com story about Mayor Cornett's candidacy announcement Oklahoma City Mayor Cornett to seek fourth term, says 'work's not done' | News OK (http://newsok.com/oklahoma-city-mayor-cornett-to-seek-fourth-term-says-works-not-done/article/3869237)


Ed Shadid commented on NewsOK.com.
17 minutes ago ·
Poll-driven chameleon-like marketing by anonymous big money is not going to work this time; not with the Mayor’s 13-year track record. Just as occurred in my city council race, and the more recent Ward 1 city council race, anonymous independent expenditure organizations are spending large amounts of money engaging in at least two major live polls (which would cost in the $50,000-$70,000 range) and other expensive support activity for the Mayor’s campaign. The seemingly coordinated strategy of the Independent Expenditure and the Mayor is easily predictable: take the Mayor’s weaknesses and portray them as strengths. The Mayor’s record on public safety, neighborhood advocacy (especially when pitted against special interests), and street and sidewalk investments is abysmal and yet, those issues dominate his messaging. The Mayor tells the same joke at national meeting after national meeting making fun of those neighborhood advocates who question the allocation of resources in OKC (Mick says some variation of “Many people in the suburbs do not like the emphasis on downtown, but I tell them you may not like it but your children and grandchildren will like it and you know what, they are angry because they know I am right”) and now wants us to know how much he enjoys getting out and meeting neighbors. The Mayor does not speak with the City Council with any regularity much less neighborhoods. Adding police officers? We have the same number of officers today as we had 20 years ago with 200,000 more people. The Mayor’s relationship with the good men and women of our police and fire forces is nothing less than toxic. Want to understand the situation? Walk up to any member of the OKC Police and Fire force, any random member, and ask them their opinion of Mick Cornett, his working relationship with them, his understanding of the police manpower study and the future needs of this city in terms of public safety and who they would prefer as Mayor. Those who are not already aware will understand how preposterous it is for the Mayor to portray himself as a public safety advocate. Spending large amounts on streets? Developer after developer was able to get their streets widened and sidewalks built in areas where virtually no one lives in the range of $200 million while the streets in neighborhood after neighborhood have to wait as long as 20 more years to get their potholes filled. The misallocation of resources in the ’07 Bond promoted by the Mayor makes concerns about MAPS3 projects pale in comparison.
Notice how Roy Williams tries to turn a perceived weakness of the Mayor into a strength (“The fact that he is interested and wants to stay in that role, I think that bodes well for OKC”). The Mayor is tired. 13 straight years is a long time on the horseshoe. He spent enormous sums of money and almost every other week for two years during his last term getting a MBA in New York City (because OKC apparently does not have adequate MBA programs). Reports of the mayor actively searching for a mayoral replacement because he did not know if he would finish this last term led to uncertainty among some members of the city council. According to sources he had to be repeatedly lobbied by the Chamber to convince him to run. He offers no opinions much less solutions to the most controversial subjects in front of the council; in fact, he generally maintains complete silence. The Mayor was apparently looking for an exit strategy (one does not need an MBA from NYU to be Mayor of OKC although it might be useful for a board seat at Chesapeake), did not find one, was lobbied by those concerned that our campaign is going to be successful and is now running to stay on the horseshoe for years 14-17.
There are much better ways to lead the city and make decisions. There is much which needs to be done. I look forward to seeing everyone at the Downtown Farmer’s Market on August 15th from 6-8pm as I outline how we can make more inclusive, fiscally responsible decisions which will prepare our city for the 21st century.

We will see if Shadid is about himself or about the people of OKC. An overly negative and divisive campaign is a sign he is more about being in power and being right than being for the progress of OKC. Since he has no successes to get credit for, he probably only can be negative about the other candidate. Name ONE thing he has championed and got implemented....either a success or failure in the public's eye. Then name ONE that the public believes is a SUCCESS.

Like most radical right, it is more about what he is against than what he is for.

To be fair, Councilman Shadid did champion the LGBT equality resolution adopted by the City Council and I am/was in complete agreement with him about needing to revise the plans for the OKC Boulevard. But otherwise I think you and others are correct he is more known for opposing nearly everything and not being for (and providing solutions for) much of anything. I think he suffers from analysis paralysis and that is not a good attribute for a leader.

Really? You are going to attack your opponent via newspaper comments? That's what 16 year old trolls do on the internet.

Not desperate at all, I see.

In a 2-minute video, Cornett said he was “proud of what we've accomplished” and looked ahead to strengthening neighborhoods, creating more high-quality jobs and improving streets, “where we're investing more than ever before.”

When will you start improving streets? The city is way behind in this work as it is.

I'm sorry, but are you on bath salts??

OKC's roads are paved with the finest cut of pork

While I may have missed the very initial ads from his last campaign, it semmed like he took it negative fairly quickly and it got worse as time went on. By the end wasn't he even accusing at like a third of the council of being in big donors pockets, he probably would have raged against more if the entire council was voted on at the same time.

I think he has already started the negativity. The divide and conquer strategy is clear is this first salvo. It will likely only get worse from here.

Below is Ed's comment on the NewsOK.com story about Mayor Cornett's candidacy announcement Oklahoma City Mayor Cornett to seek fourth term, says 'work's not done' | News OK (http://newsok.com/oklahoma-city-mayor-cornett-to-seek-fourth-term-says-works-not-done/article/3869237)


Ed Shadid commented on NewsOK.com.
17 minutes ago ·
Poll-driven chameleon-like marketing by anonymous big money is not going to work this time; not with the Mayor’s 13-year track record. Just as occurred in my city council race, and the more recent Ward 1 city council race, anonymous independent expenditure organizations are spending large amounts of money engaging in at least two major live polls (which would cost in the $50,000-$70,000 range) and other expensive support activity for the Mayor’s campaign. The seemingly coordinated strategy of the Independent Expenditure and the Mayor is easily predictable: take the Mayor’s weaknesses and portray them as strengths. The Mayor’s record on public safety, neighborhood advocacy (especially when pitted against special interests), and street and sidewalk investments is abysmal and yet, those issues dominate his messaging. The Mayor tells the same joke at national meeting after national meeting making fun of those neighborhood advocates who question the allocation of resources in OKC (Mick says some variation of “Many people in the suburbs do not like the emphasis on downtown, but I tell them you may not like it but your children and grandchildren will like it and you know what, they are angry because they know I am right”) and now wants us to know how much he enjoys getting out and meeting neighbors. The Mayor does not speak with the City Council with any regularity much less neighborhoods. Adding police officers? We have the same number of officers today as we had 20 years ago with 200,000 more people. The Mayor’s relationship with the good men and women of our police and fire forces is nothing less than toxic. Want to understand the situation? Walk up to any member of the OKC Police and Fire force, any random member, and ask them their opinion of Mick Cornett, his working relationship with them, his understanding of the police manpower study and the future needs of this city in terms of public safety and who they would prefer as Mayor. Those who are not already aware will understand how preposterous it is for the Mayor to portray himself as a public safety advocate. Spending large amounts on streets? Developer after developer was able to get their streets widened and sidewalks built in areas where virtually no one lives in the range of $200 million while the streets in neighborhood after neighborhood have to wait as long as 20 more years to get their potholes filled. The misallocation of resources in the ’07 Bond promoted by the Mayor makes concerns about MAPS3 projects pale in comparison.
Notice how Roy Williams tries to turn a perceived weakness of the Mayor into a strength (“The fact that he is interested and wants to stay in that role, I think that bodes well for OKC”). The Mayor is tired. 13 straight years is a long time on the horseshoe. He spent enormous sums of money and almost every other week for two years during his last term getting a MBA in New York City (because OKC apparently does not have adequate MBA programs). Reports of the mayor actively searching for a mayoral replacement because he did not know if he would finish this last term led to uncertainty among some members of the city council. According to sources he had to be repeatedly lobbied by the Chamber to convince him to run. He offers no opinions much less solutions to the most controversial subjects in front of the council; in fact, he generally maintains complete silence. The Mayor was apparently looking for an exit strategy (one does not need an MBA from NYU to be Mayor of OKC although it might be useful for a board seat at Chesapeake), did not find one, was lobbied by those concerned that our campaign is going to be successful and is now running to stay on the horseshoe for years 14-17.
There are much better ways to lead the city and make decisions. There is much which needs to be done. I look forward to seeing everyone at the Downtown Farmer’s Market on August 15th from 6-8pm as I outline how we can make more inclusive, fiscally responsible decisions which will prepare our city for the 21st century.

This is not an effective campaign strategy. Notice how Cornett lays out a positive
vision in a nice video montage, Shadid is ranting and raving in the comment section of NewsOK. This does nothing to amplify HIS vision of the city and only reinforces the stereotype of an angry, undisciplined iconoclast. This will not win him new voters and will likely cause him to lose support from people who may have supported him.

The bizarre subtext in this "introduction" to the voters is that Shadid is basically saying: if you're angry at Cornett like me, come to my party. This will only appeal to very angry people.
'

Maybe Shadid needs a hug? :D

I don't see Shadid going negative, and I think (hope) he'll go positive for two reasons: 1) Cornett is a successful and popular mayor, and attacks on him could easily backfire; and 2) If Shadid loses after a negative campaign, he'll still be a council member, but with less political capital.

Shadid will definitely go negative; some argue he already has.

If you're familiar with his past campaigns, especially his little-remembered campaigns as the Independent "Green Party" candidate for State House, you know he goes hard negative as a primary tactic. There's also an odd tinge of conspiracy theory sprinkled throughout his material. It doesn't reach tinfoil hat level, but it is weird.

This race is going to get ugly. Just wait.

Angry people work hard to make other people angry. They pick easy targets and play to stereotypes. They divide peoples to gain strength themselves. They are against everything and for nothing. Is this what we want to portray as our city? Think about how he would play in the national press. Definitely a step backwards for Oklahoma.

Shadid will definitely go negative; some argue he already has.

If you're familiar with his past campaigns, especially his little-remembered campaigns as the Independent "Green Party" candidate for State House, you know he goes hard negative as a primary tactic. There's also an odd tinge of conspiracy theory sprinkled throughout his material. It doesn't reach tinfoil hat level, but it is weird.

This race is going to get ugly. Just wait.

Unfortunately, I think you're right. Shadid has the money, personally, to air the negative attacks as often as he wants. I think much will depend on how much he really believes he can win.

The one criticism I do hear over and over from people who watch the council is that Mick is so quiet and rarely gets involved as you would think a leader does. However, the power lies in the office of the City Manager and as long as Mayor Cornett does well in promoting Oklahoma City and presents himself and our city well, he's got my vote. That may not be my typical criteria for electing a public official, but in this election - it is.

Shadid is using online comment sections? The dregs of the internet?

This guy is a clown. He's trying to look "cool" by mocking Cornett on twitter and using cute hash tags. OKC doesn't need that kind of unprofessionalism.

Angry people work hard to make other people angry. They pick easy targets and play to stereotypes. They divide peoples to gain strength themselves. They are against everything and for nothing. Is this what we want to portray as our city? Think about how he would play in the national press. Definitely a step backwards for Oklahoma.

Perhaps Shadid needs to work on his math skills: there aren't enough angry voters for him to win. And national press? We wouldn't get any!

He needs to stop listening to one person. There is one person I'm putting a ton of blame on. I feel horrible that I didn't see this person's impact as being as severe as it is. I'm floored, ashamed, and washing my hands of them.

This is going to be such an embarrassment for the city.

Ralph Nader?

I think you're probably talking about the ant-streetcar guy, but he and Nader are big buddies and talk often. I can see Nader pushing him too.

He spent enormous sums of money and almost every other week for two years during his last term getting a MBA in New York City (because OKC apparently does not have adequate MBA programs).

I cannot refute every point of Shadid's, although I sees some apparent inaccuracies, but this is one subject I know something about because my son starts his MBA program in several weeks, and NYU was one of the schools to which he applied. Every MBA program is different, and some have different strengths and weaknesses. So, one chooses schools to apply to based on their areas of expertise. NYU's Executive MBA program(the every-other weekend course I'm assuming the mayor was enrolled in) ranks in the top 10 of executive MBA programs, and in some rankings is in the top 5. In Oklahoma I believe only OU offers the executive MBA and their courses are evening rather than weekend courses. It may be that their schedule did not fit with the mayor's free time. OU's part time MBA program is not even ranked in the top 100 executive MBA programs, per the Financial Times. I don't think it's unreasonable to choose a top ten program if one is going to spend time and money getting a degree. In addition, while Dr. Shadid attended OU College of Medicine, he did his residency and fellowship in New York and San Francisco. We have an orthopedic residency here in Oklahoma City that he could have attended. I wonder why he chose not to?

As far as the mayor spending enormous sums of money, as long as he's not spending the city's money, I don't really think that's anyone's business. No one has criticized Dr. Shadid for buying a floor of the Founder's Tower in which to live. I can guarantee you that apartment cost far more than Mayor Cornett's MBA. In addition, MBA programs are phenomenally generous with scholarships and I suspect Mayor Cornett's credentials garnered him a hefty scholarship. My son is going to the University of Chicago on a free ride and his only claim to fame is that he was in the military (which is providing some but not most of that free ride). Perhaps Dr. Shadid knows the financial details of the tuition the mayor paid, but I wouldn't be shocked to find that he made those comments without documentation.

When in the spotlight that a mayoral candidate attracts, too many inaccurate statements cause people to be unsure of what they can believe.

He needs to stop listening to one person. There is one person I'm putting a ton of blame on. I feel horrible that I didn't see this person's impact as being as severe as it is. I'm floored, ashamed, and washing my hands of them.

This is going to be such an embarrassment for the city.

Welcome back Sid! :)

He needs to stop listening to one person. There is one person I'm putting a ton of blame on. I feel horrible that I didn't see this person's impact as being as severe as it is. I'm floored, ashamed, and washing my hands of them.

This is going to be such an embarrassment for the city.

I THINK I know which person you're talking about, but I actually don't think Ed listens to that person much either. In my experience, he usually seeks confirmation, not advice, and in the occasional case when he does seek advice, he ignores it.

It's ridiculous to criticize an elected official for seeking a higher degree. I for one am thrilled the mayor advanced his education at a prestigious university. I'm even more thrilled that, as our mayor, he got to learn more about our nation's greatest city! This is awesome that our mayor now has that perspective!