City Council Races Starting to Take Shape

[ljbab728]

Does anyone know if there is anyplace on line to go to that would give unbiased accounts of the views on the issues by the candidates?

[LandRunOkie]

It looks as though the mainstream media has decided to "overlook" the elections today. Don't overlook your right to vote today!

[Larry OKC]

the Oklahoman had a good piece in Monday's paper with each of the OKC Council candidates, their views etc. The printed version was evenly balanced as to candidates pictures space alloted etc
http://newsok.com/council-seats-are-...rticle/3761116

http://newsok.com/oklahoma-city-coun...rticle/3760964

And in Tuedays paper (haven't finished it yet), they had front page "Vote Today" tease (3A) reminding folks to vote in the various metro area races.

[Midtowner]

Does anyone know if there is anyplace on line to go to that would give unbiased accounts of the views on the issues by the candidates?

The only one I pay any attention to is Ward 1. Greiner is a BSer or a whackjob. Either way, I never trust a politician who talks more about God than their views on issues which matter, so for me, it's between the incumbent and Sims. Sims has a lot of passion. Marrs has been there long enough and in his time in office, we haven't seen a lot of things addressed in Ward 1 which need addressing. I feel nothing bad about Marrs, but it seems he has become more "Team OKC" rather than representing Ward 1's best interests. I think downtown is in all of our best interests, which is why I was active in the Maps III campaign, but let's give our neighborhoods some TLC before we start to experience suburban decay, which I think is going to come on pretty quick in a lot of Ward 1's aging homes.

[LandRunOkie]

I see the articles now in News >> Politics. I was looking for it in News >> Local & State. I try to avoid the Politics section at all costs. "Mainstream media" also includes the TV stations ...

[Larry OKC]

LandRunOkie...I understand (I had trouble finding it on NewsOK myself), if they would only organize it like they do the paper...not sure what the TV stations are doing...seems they give you after-the-fact reporting/results and not what leads up it it (unless there is some major controversy...like MAPS 3)...but then again, i would think there would be plenty to talk about in Mr. Kelley's race. Probably will be a story or two tonight on the 10 o'clock news after the polls close.

[ljbab728]

The only one I pay any attention to is Ward 1. Greiner is a BSer or a whackjob. Either way, I never trust a politician who talks more about God than their views on issues which matter, so for me, it's between the incumbent and Sims. Sims has a lot of passion. Marrs has been there long enough and in his time in office, we haven't seen a lot of things addressed in Ward 1 which need addressing. I feel nothing bad about Marrs, but it seems he has become more "Team OKC" rather than representing Ward 1's best interests. I think downtown is in all of our best interests, which is why I was active in the Maps III campaign, but let's give our neighborhoods some TLC before we start to experience suburban decay, which I think is going to come on pretty quick in a lot of Ward 1's aging homes.

Somewhat of a surprise in Ward 1. Runoffs are coming.

OKC council races headed to runoff | News OK

[LandRunOkie]

A little disappointing results in Ward 1 but it is good to see incumbents drawing resistance, given their uncooperative attitude.

[rezman]

Ha, how does it not? If you "believe" that god spoke to you to run for city council then how do you think he will base his decisions? He will probably be the type that will vote against allowing the gay pride parade. Sorry, people like him probably aren't best for a city council.

So the fact that he is a Christian makes him unfit to hold a position on the city council? And you base this on the assumption that will "probably" vote against the gay parade.

[DoctorTaco]

My guess is that Sims and Marrs split the non-fundamentalist vote in Ward 1, and that Greiner was only able to squeak into the front because of Sims playing spoiler. My hypotheses will be tested in the runoff election, though. If I'm right Marrs should win in a landslide, barring new developments.

Edit: And I'll add I was a bit surprised that Sims didn't do better. I felt like she had a good message and good branding.

[onthestrip]

So the fact that he is a Christian makes him unfit to hold a position on the city council? And you base this on the assumption that will "probably" vote against the gay parade.

Him being a Christian doesnt make him unfit, the fact that he throws his Christianity in your face has me worried. His quote for the paper about his campaign was, “I think without the Bible the world doesn't make much sense to me.” Id prefer someones quote for their profile in the Oklahoman to, I dont know, maybe address actual issues and not show off how Christian you are. I want people to vote on facts, current issues, constituent concerns, etc, not based on the bible. Save that for your home and church, dont bring it into city politics

[rezman]

Save that for your home and church, dont bring it into city politics

I started to ask if it's the fact that he publicly professed his faith. I understand what you are saying, and in that light, gay agendas and issues should be left out of city, and all politics as well.

[RickOKC]

Midtowner and onthestrip, I agree with your point that a person shouldn't broadcast their faith in order to garner religious votes. And I don't know Greiner from Adam (never seen him, never talked to him, never heard of him prior to this election); so, it's possible that he's a total fake and only mentioning his faith in order to gain a loyal following. But what evidence do you have to accuse him of such? Why do you suggest that his references to God and Christianity are politically motivated? Is it not possible that he's just really that devoted?

If you don't agree with his devotion to Christianity, that is fine. If you think such references are out of place in politics regardless of motive, you are entitled to think so. But I'm genuinely asking what evidence you have to question his motives for mentioning his Christianity. Because, if he is playing Christian to win an election, I'll join you in denouncing that. But IF you simply don't like that fact that he is a vocal Christian in the public square, such aversion is as bigoted as that of which you have accused him.

[onthestrip]

Midtowner and onthestrip, I agree with your point that a person shouldn't broadcast their faith in order to garner religious votes. And I don't know Greiner from Adam (never seen him, never talked to him, never heard of him prior to this election); so, it's possible that he's a total fake and only mentioning his faith in order to gain a loyal following. But what evidence do you have to accuse him of such? Why do you suggest that his references to God and Christianity are politically motivated? Is it not possible that he's just really that devoted?

If you don't agree with his devotion to Christianity, that is fine. If you think such references are out of place in politics regardless of motive, you are entitled to think so. But I'm genuinely asking what evidence you have to question his motives for mentioning his Christianity. Because, if he is playing Christian to win an election, I'll join you in denouncing that. But IF you simply don't like that fact that he is a vocal Christian in the public square, such aversion is as bigoted as that of which you have accused him.

Im not accusing him of pandering to the christian voters to gain votes. I believe he is sincere, and thats what makes me worried. It doesnt make me bigoted. And I havent accused him of being bigoted. I just accuse him of thinking to much with his bible and religion and not thinking in terms of city or its citizens.

Might he be fair and reasonable in his decisions? Maybe. But Ive seen too many other politicians recite the same kind of stuff he has and they turn out to resemble something closer to Sally Kern. When the Oklahoman ask you for a quote for their only profile of city council candidates, essentially a sentence or two summing up what you are running for, and he says, “I think without the Bible the world doesn't make much sense to me.”... thats just strikes me as a little alarming.

OKC in the past has had a conservative christian coucil member that voted against routine stuff like approving the gay pride parade...that kind of thinking doesnt belong in city politics. If he wants to be a social conservative or a debt hating tea party type then run for state office, but stay out of city politics.

Sure, I might labeling him too soon without knowing too much about him but Ive seen this kind of religiosity before and I dont like it. In fact we are seeing it everyday at the state capitol.

[rezman]

[QUOTE=onthestrip;62501OKC in the past has had a conservative christian coucil member that voted against routine stuff like approving the gay pride parade...that kind of thinking doesnt belong in city politics. If he wants to be a social conservative or a debt hating tea party type then run for state office, but stay out of city politics.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, this city sure doesn't need a councilman that will vote against the gay parade. ...

It's the city council person's job to vote for or against issues pertaining to the city. You say you don't like Mr. Greiner because of his public declaration that he is a Christian, but it is very obvious from your own words that you do not care for him because he IS a Christian. You want him to make a statement concerning the issues, and all your worried about is the gay parade?. If that's all you have to worry about, man you've got it made.

While your worried about that, isn't it ironic that over in ward 7, two time DUI recipient and incumbant Skip Kelly ran against 6 other candidates and still received 31% of the vote.

[RickOKC]

Any part of a person's perspective (including their faith) should be welcomed in the public sphere (barring harm or indecency), including when a person is running for or governing in political office. That's the beauty of our democratically elected leadership. If you don't like a person's perspective, you can exercise your right to vote against that person and to encourage others to do the same. But to suggest that those perspectives have no place in "city politics" presents a misguided view of civic leadership. A person running for office can lead any way they choose, and we can either vote them up or vote them down.

Believe it or not, I share your disdain for some in political office who do more harm than good (for even the causes they espouse) by an ignorantly presented worldview. However, we must be logically consistent. How can a man who defends the right for an outspokenly gay pride parade to exist so quickly reject a man for being an outspokenly Christian city council member? I never accused you of being bigoted (I precluded my comment with a big IF). However, you are logically inconsistent.

[ljbab728]

I'm thinking that a major reason for Greiner's success is that he went out personally knocking on hundreds of doors in his ward. Which such a small turnout, it doesn't take much of that with personal contact to affect the results if your opponents don't do the same. Perhaps the other two did also, but I hadn't heard about that if they did.

[LandRunOkie]

Yeah for some reason I can't see Marrs walking door to door. Regardless of religion, walkability advocates have to be heartened by a candidate who actually does some walking.

[kevinpate]

Having pounded a bit of sidewalk, pavment, dirt road and even fields in my younger days, I appreciate it when a candidate has folk who will do the same for the person they support. But to really get my attention, the candidate will show up on my porch. Even better if the candidate is actually engaging and not a here ya go, lots of hands to shake today total d-canoe packaged up by someone else as their personal politico play toy.

[Larry OKC]

...OKC in the past has had a conservative christian coucil member that voted against routine stuff like approving the gay pride parade...that kind of thinking doesnt belong in city politics. If he wants to be a social conservative or a debt hating tea party type then run for state office, but stay out of city politics.

Sure, I might labeling him too soon without knowing too much about him but Ive seen this kind of religiosity before and I dont like it. In fact we are seeing it everyday at the state capitol.

True. The most recent former Mayor (Humphreys) thought the same way...

[Midtowner]

My guess is that Sims and Marrs split the non-fundamentalist vote in Ward 1, and that Greiner was only able to squeak into the front because of Sims playing spoiler. My hypotheses will be tested in the runoff election, though. If I'm right Marrs should win in a landslide, barring new developments.

Edit: And I'll add I was a bit surprised that Sims didn't do better. I felt like she had a good message and good branding.

I think you're stating the obvious.

Greiner will get about 25% or so, which represents the Ward 1 wackadoo vote.

[Dubya61]

I see commercials on local TV with Mayor Cornett endorsing Gary Marrs, saying that he's been behind OKC's growth and emergence (or words resembling that).

[Midtowner]

Midtowner and onthestrip, I agree with your point that a person shouldn't broadcast their faith in order to garner religious votes. And I don't know Greiner from Adam (never seen him, never talked to him, never heard of him prior to this election); so, it's possible that he's a total fake and only mentioning his faith in order to gain a loyal following. But what evidence do you have to accuse him of such? Why do you suggest that his references to God and Christianity are politically motivated? Is it not possible that he's just really that devoted?

If you don't agree with his devotion to Christianity, that is fine. If you think such references are out of place in politics regardless of motive, you are entitled to think so. But I'm genuinely asking what evidence you have to question his motives for mentioning his Christianity. Because, if he is playing Christian to win an election, I'll join you in denouncing that. But IF you simply don't like that fact that he is a vocal Christian in the public square, such aversion is as bigoted as that of which you have accused him.

My issue is that when he says things like "the world wouldn't make much sense to me without the Bible," that reveals he's a pretty dogmatic thinker. In other words, he believes in things/principles just 'cuz and without any supporting facts. It also tells me that he's very easily misled. If you can be led to believe that the Earth is 6,000 years old and that humans and dinosaurs co-existed, you can be led to believe anything. Ordinarily, I don't really care what someone's religious beliefs are.

If they represent me, however, I prefer that they be able to at minimum employ some basic critical thinking skills, and above all, be able to employ some well-placed skepticism. There's nothing wrong with being Christian, having faith in God and living in a principled and faithful manner. There's quite a bit wrong with someone who rejects objective reality in favor of dogma, then wants to be placed into a position of power and authority where they will be presented often with facts and be required to make a decision in their ward's best interests. We need a leader who can look at the facts and make decisions without having to appeal to his dogma to do so. I thought Sims was that person and I guess I'll stick with Marrs over Greiner.

[LordGerald]

My issue is that when he says things like "the world wouldn't make much sense to me without the Bible," that reveals he's a pretty dogmatic thinker. In other words, he believes in things/principles just 'cuz and without any supporting facts. It also tells me that he's very easily misled. If you can be led to believe that the Earth is 6,000 years old and that humans and dinosaurs co-existed, you can be led to believe anything. Ordinarily, I don't really care what someone's religious beliefs are.

If they represent me, however, I prefer that they be able to at minimum employ some basic critical thinking skills, and above all, be able to employ some well-placed skepticism. There's nothing wrong with being Christian, having faith in God and living in a principled and faithful manner. There's quite a bit wrong with someone who rejects objective reality in favor of dogma, then wants to be placed into a position of power and authority where they will be presented often with facts and be required to make a decision in their ward's best interests. We need a leader who can look at the facts and make decisions without having to appeal to his dogma to do so. I thought Sims was that person and I guess I'll stick with Marrs over Greiner.

Agreed. The Oklahoma City Charter is not in the Bible, so would that make sense to him?

[RickOKC]

My issue is that when he says things like "the world wouldn't make much sense to me without the Bible," that reveals he's a pretty dogmatic thinker. In other words, he believes in things/principles just 'cuz and without any supporting facts. It also tells me that he's very easily misled. If you can be led to believe that the Earth is 6,000 years old and that humans and dinosaurs co-existed, you can be led to believe anything. Ordinarily, I don't really care what someone's religious beliefs are.

If they represent me, however, I prefer that they be able to at minimum employ some basic critical thinking skills, and above all, be able to employ some well-placed skepticism. There's nothing wrong with being Christian, having faith in God and living in a principled and faithful manner. There's quite a bit wrong with someone who rejects objective reality in favor of dogma, then wants to be placed into a position of power and authority where they will be presented often with facts and be required to make a decision in their ward's best interests. We need a leader who can look at the facts and make decisions without having to appeal to his dogma to do so. I thought Sims was that person and I guess I'll stick with Marrs over Greiner.

The problem with your point is that it is self-contradictory. You cannot both say that it's okay for a council member to be a Christian as long as they possess critical thinking skills and then suggest that a person who is a Christian is not exercising critical thinking skills. I'm not defending Greiner himself; as I mentioned earlier, I honestly don't know the man and have not investigated this particular council race. A discussion of religion doesn't belong on this thread, but to respond to what you have said as it pertains to the issue...

To suggest that devotion to Christian beliefs requires a person to adhere to dogma over critical thinking only reveals your bias against Christian beliefs. Some of the most brilliant, critically-thinking people on the planet are devoted Christians. Some of history's greatest public officials were devoted Christians.

It is possible for any person to myopically skew every issue according to their predetermined mindset, and a person devoted to Christianity is no more prone to such an approach than anyone else is. I have encountered biased Christians, Buddhists, atheists, agnostics... Therefore, rather than present that your mindset is one of pure, unbiased devotion to critical thinking, just admit that you also have a dogma that you have chosen over logical critical thinking (a bias against Christian beliefs). It's okay for you to be biased; just admit your bias as clearly as Mr. Greiner has.