Ward 2 Runoff On The Campaign Issues Only, Please

[Midtowner]

[B][COLOR="Red"]To be consistent, seems if you are against the Momentum group and what they are pushing, you would have run screaming away from their candidate picks in the other races too? Am I the only one that sees this? Anyone want to clarify?

In Ward 6, we had the choice between Meg Salyer, who the Chamber supports, a 21-year-old kid (no offense intended, but Ms. Holstein has a lot of learning to do before she can run an effective campaign, let alone hold public office in a major city) and one of the religious loonies. Not a tough choice.

In Ward 8, we had Patrick Ryan, again the Chamber guy, and another religious lunatic. Easy choice.

In Ward 5, there were plenty of reasons to vote against Walters, and naturally, Greenwell had Chamber support.

In nearly every other case, it would be easy to select the Chamber's guy or gal because their opponents were either religious loons, extremely inexperienced folks getting their advice from Steve Hunt, or because they were like Walters--extreme and incendiary. I'm quite confident that even without Momentum's involvement, it's likely that all of those races, excepting perhaps Ward 5 would have turned out exactly the same.

[Urban Pioneer]

Shadid takes off the gloves. Here is the latest mailer ... I don't know whether it's been sent or not. Click on a card for a larger view.

??? I forgot all about this.

[Urban Pioneer]

I mean, really, we wouldn't have broken into the Watergate if they hadn't signed-off on the deal at the White House. Or some such thing.

So, Swinton thought it was normal business practice to buy an elected official a $4,000 item for his office? Just as long as "Central Services signed-off on it." ?????

I agree, Midtowner, that's exactly what it sounds like.

The real question is, why would any state office need a $4,000 ice machine? I mean, did they have a wet bar or something?

[Doug Loudenback]

The real question is, why would any state office need a $4,000 ice machine? I mean, did they have a wet bar or something?

I beg to differ. The REAL question is, WHY did Swinton carry the water to his bank, which then went through its internal processing and pop out a "Sure, no problem," answer to the ice machine ... all without a twang of concern about the propriety of doing so? As for the necessity of the ice machine, heck, shouldn't every state office need an ice machine for a wet bar?

[Spartan]

That is actually concerning that they NEED a wetbar in state office buildings. I had always assumed that area of Lincoln Blvd was just lined with open bars...

[king183]

I don't know about those ethics mailers, guys. I don't think the voters are going to react in the same way you are to them. That is, I think they are going to be turned off by them. You guys may think it's devastating, but those kind of allegations, especially at the last minute, have a VERY HIGH probability of backfiring.

A similar mail piece was sent out in the Norman mayoral race a couple years ago. It was tested among a very small group of people who thought it would destroy the candidate at which it was aimed. When it went city-wide, it backfired big time.

People despised the fact that such a negative attack with little evidence was circulated at the last minute, not allowing the candidate time to respond.

So, we'll see. Maybe it will work. But be very cautious because there's a good chance that piece turned off a lot of undecided or leaning voters for Shadid.

[Urban Pioneer]

Ed Shadid putting out a single flier based on actual facts seems like an appropriate reaction for someone being persecuted by a character assasination campaign.

Not that your wrong about people potentially being turned off by negativity, but hopefully people will base their choice on merit and published goals/objectives, rather than "feelings." Granted, what you think has truth to it, but after weeks of mischaraterizations by a 3rd party, ideally run-off voters are smart enough to piece together what has actually happened over the past few weeks.

[soonerguru]

At least Shadid's mailer was based on publicly reported facts. Also, the facts are disturbing and go to the heart of Shadid's brilliant campaign strategy. Namely, with Swinton you have known facts that lead one to believe that if he is not in fact outright sleazy, he is at least representative of a type of backroom governing we need to move beyond as a city.

Conversely, Swinton just straight up lies about Shadid. I disagree with the point that this will backfire. I think it provides more heft to Shadid's argument.

Finally, Shadid is the only candidate in the race who has actually publicly enumerated what he will do for his ward. Swinton's "jobs" message is about as vague as possible.

[king183]

Ed Shadid putting out a single flier based on actual facts seems like an appropriate reaction for someone being persecuted by a character assasination campaign.

Not that your wrong about people potentially being turned off by negativity, but hopefully people will base their choice on merit and published goals/objectives, rather than "feelings." Granted, what you think has truth to it, but after weeks of mischaraterizations by a 3rd party, ideally run-off voters are smart enough to piece together what has actually happened over the past few weeks.

I'm not excusing Swinton and Momentum for their attacks. I think those also turned off voters and helped Shadid. But I also think one of Shadid's biggest strengths was not engaging in these types of negative attacks. Indeed, you can see that from many of the comments made in this thread. Now that strength is either gone or greatly diminished, whether what he is saying is true, factual, or not.

Voters aren't going to think, "Oh, this is justified because of the character assassination by Swinton." They're simply going to think, "This race has become ridiculous and I don't want to hear any more about it. In fact, I may stay home on Tuesday."

You must think about this in terms of an undecided or "weak" leaning voter who doesn't follow this as closely as we do. I think Shadid's mailer will probably do three things: 1) Strengthen support among those who already strongly support him, 2) Turn off many undecided voters, many of whom will now stay home on Tuesday, and 3) turn some people to Swinton.

The trick is determining the magnitude of each component. In the end, I think it hurts Shadid. But given the fact that Swinton and supporters have engaged in negative attacks as well, I'm not sure how greatly it hurts.

[king183]

At least Shadid's mailer was based on publicly reported facts. Also, the facts are disturbing and go to the heart of Shadid's brilliant campaign strategy. Namely, with Swinton you have known facts that lead one to believe that if he is not in fact outright sleazy, he is at least representative of a type of backroom governing we need to move beyond as a city.

Conversely, Swinton just straight up lies about Shadid. I disagree with the point that this will backfire. I think it provides more heft to Shadid's argument.

Finally, Shadid is the only candidate in the race who has actually publicly enumerated what he will do for his ward. Swinton's "jobs" message is about as vague as possible.

This is actually exactly what Shadid needs to hope for. That is, he needs to hope that his portrayal of Swinton as a "sleazy lobbyist" and backroom dealer has really hit the voter. If it has, then this mail piece will help reinforce that message.

I'm just not sure that message has set in, especially with the person who will vote on Tuesday, but also doesn't pay close attention to the race. I would love to see the polling on this race.

[Larry OKC]

Thanks for the responses to my question. It was seeming like some of the same folks that were automatically voting against someone in the other races just because they were tea party or fire union backed sent them immediately into the other camp, decidedly chose a different approach when it came to a similar issue and Momentum. Please don't take any of this as an attack on your views or candidates you have/are supporting. Really just a curiousity on my part and how people come to their decision I guess.

Larry, I would take "beholden to special Chamber interests" any day of the week over the Brian Walters Show. Also, consider the long history of Meg Salyer and Pat Ryan on the council. Those guys are veterans of the council. Especially Meg, is not about to be a pawn for some bigger interests. Furthermore, they won their election by a landslide, nearly 80-20 in one case I believe. That gives them political capital to do whatever they want. I'm also not sure Pat Ryan is going to go for another term after this one, he's been on for so long..I'd expect him to retire the next time his seat comes up.

Long history? Salyer was elected to the Council in 2008 (don't think she has served a full term, didn't she replace another woman on the Council, who resigned to avoid conflict of interest when her son graduated the Fire Academy and was hired by the City...sorry I can't recall her name right now). That isn't to say she doesn't have government/community experience, just that she was a newbie when it comes to the Council. Why do you think "Especially Meg" won't be a pawn? I don't know enough about her but what I have seen, seems she is in Cornett's pocket.

Ryan has been there longer but not by that much. He became a Councilman in 2005, so 6 years now?

I'll admit to laughing at those mailers when Brian Walters was the target. That makes me guilty. I also didn't mind them going after the Tea Party folks, because their presence on the council could have been devastating to the city. So, you could say I'm being hypocritical, and you may be right, but what really hacks me off is their double barreled assault on Shadid is out of bounds, because the guy is going to be a great council member for his ward and an outstanding neighborhood advocate, like his predecessor.

LOL. Ok then, it is fine if they do it against a candidate you are against, but it is "out of bounds" on one you support. I appreciate the honesty. Again, not a criticism.

I confess to eventually having similar thoughts crossing my mind, after the primary election.

...a growing awareness of Momentum as a malevolent evil organization crept over me ... an organization without scruples or any ethical foundation whose donors escaped identification spending a ****load of money to elect a slate of city council members.

For what purpose? Did they raise and spend more than $400,000 just because they are good guys who are only concerned about good Oklahoma City government? But if they are good guys why would their campaign tactics be so downright nasty ... including the push-pull survey done in the Ward 2 runoff? Conclusion: A good chance exists that they aren't such good guys and that some other motive than mere good government was involved. Really truly good guys don't do such really truly bad things.

So, yes, the thoughts you raise did cross my mind. I don't know enough about Greenwell to know whether that should be a concern about him (i.e., being beholden to those who got him elected so as to affect his votes as a council member), but I can't see Salyer and/or Ryan as being in anyone's pocket. But, Swinton? About him, I have no such confidence.

And, lest we forget, this is but the maiden voyage of super-PACs in Oklahoma City politics. Only two years from now another 4 city council positions will be up for grabs.

One last remark, about the Oklahoman's editorial you mentioned. Not only did it call both parties "good candidates," it correctly noted that Shadid (as well as, it thought, Swinton) is pro-MAPS, unlike Swinton's ads to the contrary. Certainly the tone of the Oklahoma's perspective is different than it was in the primary. That's a step or two, at least.

Again. Thank you for your response. Your position evolved as the story developed. Fair enough. Why don't you have any concern's over Salyer now, knowing more about Momentum?


Just as I found it ammusing that some Council persons were indignant when it came to the promises made during the MAPS 3 campaign and the Use Tax question. Why were they silent about it during the campaign? To claim afterwards, the Council never took a vote on it, seems weak. While technically true, the City Manger said he went to each Council person and got at least the majority support before ever presenting it to the union. Makes since to have Council support/backing otherwise his negotiations are an exercise in futility if the Council is going to vote it down.

I wasn't all that surprised by the whole Momentum thing and the way they went after people. They did the same sort of things during the MAPS 3 campaign (especially with their MAPS Facts website that was filled with many instances of spin, half-truths and in some cases, out right lies. But that wasn't isolated to just that site. It crept into other aspects of the campaign as well.

I was supportive of most, if not all of the announced projects in MAPS 3 but had to vote against it because of the vagueness of the Ballot/Ordinance language (and quite possibly illegal/unconstitutional). Add to that the negative tactics the Chamber used in getting it to pass. Going back to the Use Tax promise, at least one Council person suggested the Chamber pay for the positions since they made the promise. Their response? Sorry, not our job...it was our job to get the measure to pass. Apparently with no regard to some of the same "ethics" issues mentioned in Shadid's mailer. That taint spreads to the Mayor (he was the figurehead of the Campaign, forget his exact title) and even the former Mayors that were co-treasurers of the Campaign.

As other have mentioned here, that negative campaigning turns people off. But it seems to be used again and again on local, state and national levels. So someone, somewhere thinks it works and is effective for their cause. But is it "negative" to point out the reported facts or a candidates voting record, or past affiliations? Voters often have a short memory (some here have acknowledged it themselves) so I don't think it is completely out of line to bring up the Fisher connection. I do agree however that many of the affiliations raised in this race have little to no bearing on matters that come before the Council.

I am voting for Shadid.

[Doug Loudenback]

Again. Thank you for your response. Your position evolved as the story developed. Fair enough. Why don't you have any concern's over Salyer now, knowing more about Momentum?

Universal harmonics.

But, seriously, it's basically just a gut feeling.

Interesting post.

[Larry OKC]

Doug, understand the gut feeling thing as I am that way when it comes to another matter.

[soonerguru]

Doug, understand the gut feeling thing as I am that way when it comes to another matter.

Which matter makes your gut go off, just out of curiosity?

[Doug Loudenback]

I'm curious about that, too, Larry! Just one thing?

Here are Dr. Shadid's last 2 mailers ...









I've seen both candidates in TV commercials yesterday and today. I hope that Ward 2 will have a heavy turnout tomorrow!

[soonerguru]

I had the good fortune of volunteering to hit several doors for Dr. Shadid. The neighborhood I was given was allegedly one Swinton performed well in during the initial election. The results of my walk indicate to me that the undecided vote is breaking very strong for Shadid. This race is probably impossible to poll, but let's just say there's this aura of victory for Shadid that is quite palpable. My conversations with canvassers in other areas also indicate a strong and noticeable movement to Shadid. I've also heard numerous examples of people voting for Swinton the first go around who now are voting for Shadid -- primarily because they didn't know Shadid well, or they actually liked Swinton until his gutterball campaign made them turn against him. It gets down to this: whose voters are more excited and motivated to vote? On that count, the indications are clear that Shadid has the edge.

And I'll say one more time: this is the best-run campaign on the local level I've seen in years -- if ever. It helps that Ed is such a bright, likable guy, but his campaign and messaging have been razor sharp. On the other hand, Swinton has also helped Shadid by having no real message and losing control of whatever message he may have had to an outside group of mindless goons.

I also can personally attest to the fact that Shadid has dozens and dozens of volunteers. Meanwhile, the Swinton campaign has had to resort to paying people to put out their door hangers, if that gives you any indication of enthusiasm.

[rcjunkie]

A recent comercial stated that Dr. Shadid has never voted in any City or School Elections, do we know for sure this is true, if so, this should be a serious consideration when casting your vote.

[MikeOKC]

A recent comercial stated that Dr. Shadid has never voted in any City or School Elections, do we know for sure this is true, if so, this should be a serious consideration when casting your vote.

He admitted to this on the KTOK interview. But, he took ownership of his past record, didn't try to justify it, said it was a mistake and has moved on.

[mcca7596]

He admitted to this on the KTOK interview. But, he took ownership of his past record, didn't try to justify it, said it was a mistake and has moved on.

Not an attempt at justification per se, but he did say in that interview that he felt disenfranchised as a voter.

[Larry OKC]

Swinton's voting record is better but has gaps (some of the same elections Shadid didn't vote in). Thought it add that apparently Swinton has Cornett's endorsement yet according to the voting records, Swinton hasn't voted in the last to mayoral elections!

Doug, will answer via PM (previously answered Soonerguru by PM)

[Mikemarsh51]

Midtowner, your right, most likely would have won anyway. But now, they are beholden to the chamber. Nobody spends that kind of money without something in return. And yes we spent money. We wanted our candidates to win and to pay attention to public safety. What do you suppose the momentum committee wants?

[soonerguru]

Man, the blogrolls are churning for Ed! I've never seen anything like this before. I hope it's enough to deliver the votes he needs to get over the top! He's getting support from blogs across the spectrum. Facebook is also burning up for Ed. Will this deliver votes? There are a lot of people out there pretty freaked out about Momentum. The Chamber will have some damage control to do after this.

[Larry OKC]

CORRECTED POST (fixing the typos)

Swinton's voting record is better but has gaps (some of the same elections Shadid didn't vote in). Thought it odd that apparently Swinton has Cornett's endorsement yet according to the voting records, Swinton hasn't voted in the last two mayoral elections!

Doug, will answer via PM (previously answered Soonerguru by PM)

[rcjunkie]

Midtowner, your right, most likely would have won anyway. But now, they are beholden to the chamber. Nobody spends that kind of money without something in return. And yes we spent money. We wanted our candidates to win and to pay attention to public safety. What do you suppose the momentum committee wants?

They want progressive, forward thinking people, people that don't try to hold this Great City hostage just because they feel short changed.

[betts]

[/B]
They want progressive, forward thinking people, people that don't try to hold this Great City hostage just because they feel short changed.

That's a little histrionic, don't you think? And not very defensible. Who is trying to hold whom hostage over what? And who feels short-changed? I don't think either candidate has ever been short-changed in their very comfortable lives. From what I can see, both of their platforms are positive. Neither one has any plans to do anything I as a citizen of the city am concerned about. And even if they did, there's only one of them in a council of nine. Brian Walters, for all that I never heard him say anything I considered reasonable (and granted, I'm sure he has, I just don't attend or watch every city council meeting), had no significant impact on the council because there was only one of him. My concern, with the first election, was more that we would end up with three Brian Walters than that we would have just one. One doesn't really worry me. So, I'm having trouble seeing how the outcome of this election is going to keep the city from moving forward, no matter which of the two is elected.

I would prefer to see Shadid win. I think he's got some new ideas that could be good for the city to hear. I'm not even sure how many of them would be implemented, but I like the idea of them being proposed. But I don't really see anything negative happening regardless of who wins.