OKC Mayor Race 2014

[Steve]

abcdefg

[CaptDave]

abcdefg

hijklmnop?

[Laramie]

Some folks are not for progress.

Let's live up to the fact that there aren't any perfect candidates for mayor. If it wasn't for MAPS I, Oklahoma City would be the world's largest cemetery.



Can some tell me what is Shadid's platform? He seems to be the only one trying to unravel what we approved as voters in 2009. Mayor Cornett deserves another term...

The Oklahoma City Convention Center will be needed; let's build it while we have voted to fund it; the money will be there. Construction costs are rising and it's more economical to build it now.

"Oklahoma City looks oh-so pretty... ... as I get my kicks on Route 66." --Nat King Cole.

[Midtowner]

The economic development spurred by the hotel and its workers. The number seems a bit exaggerated.

So are the projected costs put out by Shadid's campaign.

[mkjeeves]

Y'all keep going back and back and pretty soon, you're gonna have to find yourself in the far, far, right, holding hands pew-side and singing to God be the Glory, for the things He has done.

I'm pretty sure I remember way-back-when hearing the story of when Mick, Jesus, FSM, Al Gore and the Sooners sat around a campfire planning the future of the NBA in Oklahoma City. Yeah, lets give that credit to Mick and give credit for the internet to Al Gore. It all makes perfect sense in your world.

[BDK]

I received an email this week about Cornett's "get out the vote" effort beginning in earnest this weekend. I'm going to try to make it. Hope to see/meet some of you guys there.

[OSUFan]

I'm pretty sure I remember way-back-when hearing the story of when Mick, Jesus, FSM, Al Gore and the Sooners sat around a campfire planning the future of the NBA in Oklahoma City. Yeah, lets give that credit to Mick and give credit for the internet to Al Gore. It all makes perfect sense in your world.

Your blatant attempts to completely ignore every single post that refutes your point is getting to such an absurd point is probably time for people to start ignoring you. You keep arguing some point that people repeatedly say they aren't making. Not one person has said Mayor Cornett is the sole reason the Thunder are here. People continue to reap tons and tons a praise on the citizens and the visionaries of the original MAPS. You just choose to ignore all of it because you want to chase this bogeyman of people giving sole credit to Cornett (which I've yet to see). Because in your world view Cornett has never done anything positive for our city.

End of the day Cornett was a major part of the Thunder ending up in OKC. I promise you David Stern and Clay Bennett feel the same way. To try to minimize his involvement shows a complete lack of awareness on how this all went down. That lack of awareness is what is fueling the Shadid campaign right now. It's like the city did not exist before Shadid was a council person. There have been plenty of politicians who I never want to see reelected and disagree with on almost everything. I can still give them credit for the positive things they've done. Heck, I think Shadid's crusade for improvements to our bus system are admirable and well worthwhile (I just disagree with it coming at the expense of other stuff).

And before you quote Bett's post for the 10th time. There is nothing wrong with thanking Mayor Cornett for the Thunder. He deserves it. Just as Clay Bennet and the citizens do for voting on the various taxes. Thanking one person doesn't mean he was solely responsible. If I thank my mom for me being born that doesn't mean my dad had nothing to do with it. It also doesn't mean my grandparents had nothing to do with it even though without them my parents wouldn't be there without them.

[bradh]

I wish wherever mkjeeves lives was de-annexed so we wouldn't have to listen to this anymore.

[betts]

A lot of people read these posts who don't post. It's quite clear what the biases of the people who post here are. Ultimately, since there are more readers than posters, what they think is the important thing. Let them decide whose arguments are reasonable and whose are not. Refusing to acknowledge Mick Cornett's large role in the Thunder being here is just as absurd and unreasonable as refusing to acknowledge his predecessors and the taxpayers' role. I'm willing to acknowledge them all and I'll leave it at that.

[jerrywall]

There once was a candidate Ed
Into folly his sheeple he led
If he gets his way
The whole city will pay
Because our progress it soon will be dead.

[betts]

There once was a candidate Ed
Into folly his sheeple he led
If he gets his way
The whole city will pay
Because our progress it soon will be dead.

You'd better copyright that!

[kevinpate]

THAT WAS GOOD!

In truth though, the 'cured' challenger can't kill the progress okc is making. He might maul it, bruise it, maybe even leave it a bit scarred, but kill it? Nah. Even when people fall for excessive hype, they tend to catch on once it turns out the city doesn't become all lollypops and rainbows and dancing unicorns grazing beside bus stops that attract Vogue photographers 24/7/365 and cause jaded superstars to fly in and weep at the magnificence of the structures whilst well paid pilicia guard each street corner and teach songs to the happy children as they flit about walking their butterflies.

[Edgar]

Many questions have yet to be answered, says convention-center expert | Red Dirt Report
Did anyone attend? The good doctor even provided refreshments. Bet Mick never provides refreshments.

[jerrywall]

Wow, what a well balanced, thought out, fact based, accurate, and unbiased piece that was.

*cough*

So did the ding dongs get free ho hos?

[kevinpate]

nm. juvenile, even for me on a slow morning.

[OSUFan]

Quick question from the peanut gallery. Why are we debating if the convention center is a good or bad idea? This was all down (with Sanders involvement) leading up to the vote. I thought the issue at hand was whether we were lied to, not whether the center is a good or bad idea. Shadid insisting on debating convention center economics doesn't seem inline with why he says he wants the vote of the people overturned.

So is he against he project or is he agaisnt the way the project was sold to voters? To some that might be splitting hairs. To me there is a big difference.

[Dubya61]

So, can we do a reset, for just a moment?
What does Mick propose for his next term, should voters give it to him?
What does Ed propose for his first term, should voters give it to him?
Have either of them put out anything definitive?

[soonerguru]

Your blatant attempts to completely ignore every single post that refutes your point is getting to such an absurd point is probably time for people to start ignoring you. You keep arguing some point that people repeatedly say they aren't making. Not one person has said Mayor Cornett is the sole reason the Thunder are here. People continue to reap tons and tons a praise on the citizens and the visionaries of the original MAPS. You just choose to ignore all of it because you want to chase this bogeyman of people giving sole credit to Cornett (which I've yet to see). Because in your world view Cornett has never done anything positive for our city.

End of the day Cornett was a major part of the Thunder ending up in OKC. I promise you David Stern and Clay Bennett feel the same way. To try to minimize his involvement shows a complete lack of awareness on how this all went down. That lack of awareness is what is fueling the Shadid campaign right now. It's like the city did not exist before Shadid was a council person. There have been plenty of politicians who I never want to see reelected and disagree with on almost everything. I can still give them credit for the positive things they've done. Heck, I think Shadid's crusade for improvements to our bus system are admirable and well worthwhile (I just disagree with it coming at the expense of other stuff).

And before you quote Bett's post for the 10th time. There is nothing wrong with thanking Mayor Cornett for the Thunder. He deserves it. Just as Clay Bennet and the citizens do for voting on the various taxes. Thanking one person doesn't mean he was solely responsible. If I thank my mom for me being born that doesn't mean my dad had nothing to do with it. It also doesn't mean my grandparents had nothing to do with it even though without them my parents wouldn't be there without them.

Oh it's far worse than that. When mkjeeves first started posting on this thread he acted like he was "undecided," and even suggested he would "hold his nose" and vote for Cornett. He has misrepresented himself from the start. He's a Shadid campaign lackey masquerading as in independent thinker.

[mkjeeves]

Oh it's far worse than that. When mkjeeves first started posting on this thread he acted like he was "undecided," and even suggested he would "hold his nose" and vote for Cornett. He has misrepresented himself from the start. He's a Shadid campaign lackey masquerading as in independent thinker.

More likely I'll stay home, for the first time ever, unless there are other issues on the ballot I'm concerned with. Was still planning on voting for Cornett but there's still time to change my mind. Meanwhile, you remain a bag of hot air and little else, malodorous at that.

[OSUFan]

mkjeeves, honest question. Why are you planning on staying home? Seems weird to me someone who seems to agree with most of Shadid's positions would not vote for him.

[mkjeeves]

No need to *repeat myself regardless of what liars have to say. (soonerguru)
You can look it up.


* as per yourself and kp.

[Bellaboo]

Many questions have yet to be answered, says convention-center expert | Red Dirt Report
Did anyone attend? The good doctor even provided refreshments. Bet Mick never provides refreshments.

And we've got another one !

And why would someone want to attend something the good doctor puts on ? You know he is dishonest which gives way to him having very little substance.

[betts]

Many questions have yet to be answered, says convention-center expert | Red Dirt Report
Did anyone attend? The good doctor even provided refreshments. Bet Mick never provides refreshments.

Gee, we already knew those plutocrats were bad. But now I should be embarrassed to be bourgeois? I guess if you're not poor, you're in trouble, it being easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than a middle class person to get into heaven? And, I'm using whether someone provides refreshments as a reason to vote for them for mayor? This has suddenly become a very simple race.

Silliness aside, I think there are questions that remain to be answered.

1. Do we have a current convention center that is of an appropriate size and quality for a city of our size? Personally, although I'm not dying for a new convention center, I have to admit that the answer is probably no. The Cox Center is poorly organized, looks shabby and that's on the interior. The exterior is ghastly and the superblock it's on is in a horrible location for a superblock. It will be 50 years old soon. So, I don't mind building a $250 million convention center. A different location would be nice. So, based on my answer, even if I didn't think that it's a mistake to basically spit in the eye of people who took the trouble to vote for MAPS 3 by trying to stop it, I think a new convention center is probably a worthwhile expenditure. I might go for it just to see the Cox Convention Center torn down, personally.

2. Do we have to have a convention center hotel? This I don't know. I'm fine with getting more information on this subject. I'm going to read the consultant's report when I get a bit of free time and decide what I think of their data. That's pretty much what the city council has done. They listened to the consultant, looked at his slides and handout and said "thank you". Did anyone say we're getting a convention center hotel come hell or high water? Not publicly. Did anyone say we're using MAPS dollars for a convention center hotel? Not that I've noticed. Did anyone say $200 million? Ed Shadid. Anyone else? Not on the record anywhere. Did anyone say $50 million? Not anywhere that I've read. So, it seems like any convention center hotel anxiety is premature. Let's educate ourselves so we can have an educated opinion if the subject comes up.

3. If the city decides we have to have a convention center hotel, who will pay for it? This too is an important question. But, until the question of whether we're going to have a hotel is answered, what value is discussing who will pay what? This is definitely putting the cart before the horse.

4. What if the convention center needs a phase II? Hmmmm. Is there any way to pay for a phase II with MAPS 3 funds? Nope. So, I guess the voters will have to decide. What a concept! Ask the people. If they say no, the Chamber will have to hold a few bake sales I guess.

5. Should a convention center be self-supporting? I don't know. Is anything else we've built with MAPS self-supporting? Is anything a city builds self-supporting? It's kind of tricky, as you have to factor in salaries of people employed to build the structure, salaries of people who run the structure, potential sales taxes and hotel taxes generated, not to mention all those pesky intangibles like civic pride, interest generated in visiting the city, how many new conventions might be interested in coming, what the economy is doing, what the economy will be doing in the future. It's tough.

6. Does any of the above justify stopping MAPS collections prematurely? To me, question #1 is the only relevant one here, since nowhere has anyone said we're getting a hotel and/or it's being paid for with MAPS dollars. Personally, my answer is a resounding no, for all the reasons I've outlined previously. But trying to lump a hotel with the question of stopping MAPS is again using fear-mongering to politick. Ed is hoping the low information voters won't think this through and will believe all his hype.

[mkjeeves]

Gee, we already knew those plutocrats were bad. But now I should be embarrassed to be bourgeois? I guess if you're not poor, you're in trouble, it being easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than a middle class person to get into heaven? And, I'm using whether someone provides refreshments as a reason to vote for them for mayor? This has suddenly become a very simple race.

Silliness aside, I think there are questions that remain to be answered.

1. Do we have a current convention center that is of an appropriate size and quality for a city of our size? Personally, although I'm not dying for a new convention center, I have to admit that the answer is probably no. The Cox Center is poorly organized, looks shabby and that's on the interior. The exterior is ghastly and the superblock it's on is in a horrible location for a superblock. It will be 50 years old soon. So, I don't mind building a $250 million convention center. A different location would be nice. So, based on my answer, even if I didn't think that it's a mistake to basically spit in the eye of people who took the trouble to vote for MAPS 3 by trying to stop it, I think a new convention center is probably a worthwhile expenditure. I might go for it just to see the Cox Convention Center torn down, personally.

2. Do we have to have a convention center hotel? This I don't know. I'm fine with getting more information on this subject. I'm going to read the consultant's report when I get a bit of free time and decide what I think of their data. That's pretty much what the city council has done. They listened to the consultant, looked at his slides and handout and said "thank you". Did anyone say we're getting a convention center hotel come hell or high water? Not publicly. Did anyone say we're using MAPS dollars for a convention center hotel? Not that I've noticed. Did anyone say $200 million? Ed Shadid. Anyone else? Not on the record anywhere. Did anyone say $50 million? Not anywhere that I've read. So, it seems like any convention center hotel anxiety is premature. Let's educate ourselves so we can have an educated opinion if the subject comes up.

3. If the city decides we have to have a convention center hotel, who will pay for it? This too is an important question. But, until the question of whether we're going to have a hotel is answered, what value is discussing who will pay what? This is definitely putting the cart before the horse.

4. What if the convention center needs a phase II? Hmmmm. Is there any way to pay for a phase II with MAPS 3 funds? Nope. So, I guess the voters will have to decide. What a concept! Ask the people. If they say no, the Chamber will have to hold a few bake sales I guess.

5. Does any of the above justify stopping MAPS collections prematurely? To me, question #1 is the only one here, since nowhere has anyone said we're getting a hotel and/or it's being paid for with MAPS dollars. Personally, my answer is a resounding no, for all the reasons I've outlined previously. But trying to lump a hotel with the question of stopping MAPS is again using fear-mongering to politick. Ed is hoping the low information voters won't think this through and will believe all his hype.

It's probably good you didn't attend the event last night. Best to stay uninformed to be able to post that with a straight face. The video will probably be out soon. You will never admit you agree with most of it even though a bunch of what you just said was said.

[Edgar]

Gee, we already knew those plutocrats were bad. But now I should be embarrassed to be bourgeois? I guess if you're not poor, you're in trouble, it being easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than a middle class person to get into heaven? And, I'm using whether someone provides refreshments as a reason to vote for them for mayor? This has suddenly become a very simple race.

Silliness aside, I think there are questions that remain to be answered.

1. Do we have a current convention center that is of an appropriate size and quality for a city of our size? Personally, although I'm not dying for a new convention center, I have to admit that the answer is probably no. The Cox Center is poorly organized, looks shabby and that's on the interior. The exterior is ghastly and the superblock it's on is in a horrible location for a superblock. It will be 50 years old soon. So, I don't mind building a $250 million convention center. A different location would be nice. So, based on my answer, even if I didn't think that it's a mistake to basically spit in the eye of people who took the trouble to vote for MAPS 3 by trying to stop it, I think a new convention center is probably a worthwhile expenditure. I might go for it just to see the Cox Convention Center torn down, personally.

2. Do we have to have a convention center hotel? This I don't know. I'm fine with getting more information on this subject. I'm going to read the consultant's report when I get a bit of free time and decide what I think of their data. That's pretty much what the city council has done. They listened to the consultant, looked at his slides and handout and said "thank you". Did anyone say we're getting a convention center hotel come hell or high water? Not publicly. Did anyone say we're using MAPS dollars for a convention center hotel? Not that I've noticed. Did anyone say $200 million? Ed Shadid. Anyone else? Not on the record anywhere. Did anyone say $50 million? Not anywhere that I've read. So, it seems like any convention center hotel anxiety is premature. Let's educate ourselves so we can have an educated opinion if the subject comes up.

3. If the city decides we have to have a convention center hotel, who will pay for it? This too is an important question. But, until the question of whether we're going to have a hotel is answered, what value is discussing who will pay what? This is definitely putting the cart before the horse.

4. What if the convention center needs a phase II? Hmmmm. Is there any way to pay for a phase II with MAPS 3 funds? Nope. So, I guess the voters will have to decide. What a concept! Ask the people. If they say no, the Chamber will have to hold a few bake sales I guess.

5. Should a convention center be self-supporting? I don't know. Is anything else we've built with MAPS self-supporting? Is anything a city builds self-supporting? It's kind of tricky, as you have to factor in salaries of people employed to build the structure, salaries of people who run the structure, potential sales taxes and hotel taxes generated, not to mention all those pesky intangibles like civic pride, interest generated in visiting the city, how many new conventions might be interested in coming, what the economy is doing, what the economy will be doing in the future. It's tough.

6. Does any of the above justify stopping MAPS collections prematurely? To me, question #1 is the only relevant one here, since nowhere has anyone said we're getting a hotel and/or it's being paid for with MAPS dollars. Personally, my answer is a resounding no, for all the reasons I've outlined previously. But trying to lump a hotel with the question of stopping MAPS is again using fear-mongering to politick. Ed is hoping the low information voters won't think this through and will believe all his hype.

Cornett would probably charge for refreshments.