OKC Mayor Race 2014

[Urban Pioneer]

Ok Doug... lol. We'll have to disagree. That's ok.

It's my observation though that this is a blog, not a newspaper. There is (or I think should be) an etiquitte with long time posters who have a credible track record.

Criticism is frowned upon in this OKC community. If I had a state job or any sort of trade requiring the support of a broader network, I'd assure you that my posting would be muted.

I mean, people have to eat. lol

Eitherway, Shadid deserves unabashed criticism imhop. Back on topic.

[David]

You are so full of yourself, guru. Maybe one day you will have the courage to unmask your identity ... but my guess is that you will not have the courage to do so.

I invite you again ... do so now? Why not? You know who I am, as does everyone here, and why should they not know who you are, as well. Can you give a good reason?

As far as my vote is concerned, I'm having a difficult time with that, as I was discussing with my wife this afternoon. My vote is very much undecided ... I can see point and counterpoint all over the map ... but I can assure you that it will not be influenced one way or another, by you.

I look forward to your coming out of the closet, guru! Make it so.

This is astonishingly inappropriate, Doug, I'm sitting here floored by where you just took this thread. If you don't care to be anonymous on this forum that's entirely your business, but do not insist that others do the same.

[BrettM2]

It seems astonishingly odd that Doug has made this a personal issue and seems to have a problem that others have already made up their minds. There are a few here that have made up their minds for Shadid and others for Cornett. That's their business. Even if you feel like it is based on incomplete, or even wrong, information, it is their decision. While soonerguru is passionate in his arguments, calling for him to post his personal information on a very public message board reeks of drama.

I have no dog in this fight. I lived in Edmond before moving out of state this summer. So while I have a preference for mayor, I'm not getting fired up. I just don't understand why, all of a sudden, deciding that you will vote for the incumbent several months before the election is suddenly a bad choice.

[OSUFan]

I guess I fail to see why it is inappropriate to have your mind made up at this point (either way). One guy has been Mayor for a long time and the other a councilman for a couple years now. All that is going to be said in the comings months will be campaign generalities. We have body's of work of both of these guys to base our decisions on. I find that much more logically to base my vote on than campaign speeches.

I'm also not sure what Soonerguru did to ruffle feathers (other than being opposed to Mr. Shadid). Calling someone a liar is a pretty serious statement but he backed it up. In all honesty, you will find a lot of people who have worked with Shadid on various issues who have come away less than impressed with the councilman's honesty. That is not a news flash.

[OSUFan]

Also, it is offensive to some that Councilman Shadid wants to re-debate Maps 3. Lots of money was spent and lots of people worked their tails off on both sides of the issue to make their case. The public was well informed on the campaign and cast their vote. It passed. Shadid didn't vote. So now since he didn't cast his vote he feels the need to re debate an issue that was debated to death.

The big question to me is why did Shadid not vote?

[Midtowner]

It seems astonishingly odd that Doug has made this a personal issue and seems to have a problem that others have already made up their minds. There are a few here that have made up their minds for Shadid and others for Cornett. That's their business. Even if you feel like it is based on incomplete, or even wrong, information, it is their decision. While soonerguru is passionate in his arguments, calling for him to post his personal information on a very public message board reeks of drama.

I have no dog in this fight. I lived in Edmond before moving out of state this summer. So while I have a preference for mayor, I'm not getting fired up. I just don't understand why, all of a sudden, deciding that you will vote for the incumbent several months before the election is suddenly a bad choice.

I decided before Shadid even announced. I don't care if the Messiah came down from Heaven and announced his candidacy. Don't fix what ain't broke. I can't think of a single conceivable way picking Shadid to be mayor, especially taking into account what the mayor's role in our government is (something which God knows most of his supporters have no clue about), could lead to better municipal governance. As I started saying early on in the thread, his argumentative and skeptical approach to office works great for him as a councilman. As a mayor, particularly one who has already alienated all but the dingbats like Greiner on the shoe, how is he going to preside over meetings? How is he going to lead? Build coalitions? Push an agenda which actually has a prayer of passing? He's not.

If you have Shadid as mayor, while his intent may be as pure as the driven snow, he will be reduced to holding angry and divisive press conferences where he further alienates our business community. He'll be unable to get any sort of coalition built around any future public works programs and he'll leave our city worse off than when he found it. Why should we even consider a different direction whent he mayor we have is performing so well?

[Pete]

I had a bit of a revelation on my visit to town a couple of weeks ago...

I am continually struck by the pride people have in the City; how excited they are about what has happened and what is to come. It's universal, even among those in the suburbs.

In many ways, Boosterism is perhaps OKC's greatest and most unique asset.

And at the same time it represents a huge obstacle.


Criticism -- even the constructive variety -- is roundly frowned upon in OKC. Criticism is NOT the same thing as negativity! Often, a critical eye comes from those who want better for the community.

But there doesn't seem any room for this type of discussion, at least not through the traditional channels.

That's not a good thing. Yes, we've come a long way but we are still lightyears behind a lot of other communities. Improvements on what we've had and done in the past does not equate to excellence in any comparative sense.

I love Oklahoma City as much as anyone and yet it hurts me deeply to see the low standards the masses are too often willing to accept. Particularly if those standards are being put forth by someone with good intentions and who is perceived as being "nice".


Frankly, I don't give a flip how nice someone is when it comes to making key decisions about the community. Being RESPECTFUL is important, but *nice* is just nice and too often that is seen as good enough in OKC.


This is where OKCTalk can play and has played an important role.

About 95% of what is posted here is excitement over all the great changes but there is also room and need to challenge the status quo.

Many of us live, have lived or have traveled extensively elsewhere. We see great examples of how things could be and ask out loud why we don't demand the same for the city we all love.


Boosterism is great but we have the potential to build not just something better but something GREAT. And that requires that a segment of the activist community put forth constructive and respectful criticism as a service to Oklahoma City without being made some sort of community pariah.

Simply put, better is not always good enough and we need more, active, intelligent voices advancing this message.


(BTW, in no means are these comments meant as an endorsement of Ed Shadid or Mayor Cornett.)

[OSUFan]

I think the people of OKC are fine with criticism. What some of us have a problem is criticism for criticism sake without solutions. Shadid thinks the MAPs process is broken. Okay, I'm all ears, how does he want to fix it? The bus system is broken, okay what is his solution? Being a full-time critic is okay for some nobody like me behind a keyboard but if you want to be Mayor (or a councilman) at some point you have to be able to be more than critical. You have to be able to find a solution to the problems. I haven't seen that out of Shadid yet.

I think his campaign is a perfect example. It is a very devise campaign. Who know, maybe it will get him elected. If it does he then, as mayor, is going to have to work with a whole segments of our city he has been demonizing. He can rail against "special interest" and the business community but he needs those people at the table if he wants to be a successful mayor.

At the end of the day, OKC has been doing pretty well lately. IMO, Shadid needs to be more than a critic to convince me that a change in leadership is needed. Maybe, I just have a blind spot but I've yet to see anything out of Mr. Shadid that makes me think he is the guy OKC needs at this moment. Other than he likes to talk about diversity, what can his supporters point to that says that is why we are for him? I'm asking that as honest question because I want to have an open mind. Why is he the guy OKC should change leadership for. What does he bring to the table we are currently missing?

[BoulderSooner]

my question is what is it about Shadid that has caused several of his biggest supports to flip a 180 and now oppose him?

[zookeeper]

Excellent post, Pete. It doesn't even have to be criticism, but what some stretch into criticism. I made the mistake of pointing out in a post that one of the great things about OKC is living just 3 hours and an easy drive from one of the great metropolitan areas in DFW. That was taken as criticism of Oklahoma City by a couple of people.

You hit on good points. This analogy doesn't hold up exactly, but one thing I took from the biography on Steve Jobs by Walter Isaacson was that Jobs never allowed himself or his staff to believe they had arrived. He was always critical, as you said very different from negative, about products and the company. He felt that was THE key to getting better. The same holds true of just about anything, including a city.

[Urban Pioneer]

There is a significant difference between constructive criticism and criticism for criticism's sake. I despise blind boosterism. But quite frankly, I'll take the majority of people blindly towing the rope in a positive direction over ego driven cynicism.

Its such a shame. When your elected to office, its a gift. Use it responsibly.

[warreng88]

my question is what is it about Shadid that has caused several of his biggest supports to flip a 180 and now oppose him?

I didn't know this had happened? Can you tell me who and when?

[betts]

Also, it is offensive to some that Councilman Shadid wants to re-debate Maps 3. Lots of money was spent and lots of people worked their tails off on both sides of the issue to make their case. The public was well informed on the campaign and cast their vote. It passed. Shadid didn't vote. So now since he didn't cast his vote he feels the need to re debate an issue that was debated to death.

The big question to me is why did Shadid not vote?

I don't know. But, I've always said to myself (especially when I'm busy on Election Day, the weather's bad, etc): "If you don't vote, you've voluntarily given up the right to complain about the outcome." That's the way I feel. Councilman Shadid chose not to vote for or against MAPS3. Since he hadn't voted in any previous elections either, I doubt there was a legitimate excuse for not being able to go to the polls. Thus, my thinking is that he needs to accept the will of those who did vote. He can exercise his right to vote in subsequent elections if he chooses, and thus exercise his right to help with citizen decision-making.

[BoulderSooner]

Attachment 4338 Phil is an OKC reporter.

garbage .. it was a single item vote .. period ..

[betts]

Thanks Ed. Does he seriously think this will get him elected or help improve the bus system? Or anything? Rifts in city council generally lead to stalemate, not progress. Does he really care about progress or is his personal agenda of paramount importance to him?

[s00nr1]

Haha Meg Salyer fights back....

[zookeeper]

So, simple question, is Ed right about this? Or is it a case of, "Well he's right, but we don't want anything to upset anybody." This is an honest question, too.

[BoulderSooner]

So, simple question, is Ed right about this? Or is it a case of, "Well he's right, but we don't want anything to upset anybody." This is an honest question, too.

is he right that that maps 3 vote was illegal? no he is not

[BoulderSooner]

Haha Meg Salyer fights back....

as she should .. good for her and great comments by Larry McAtee (which is the norm)

[soonerguru]

as she should .. good for her and great comments by Larry McAtee (which is the norm)

I really appreciate Larry McAtee as a councilman.

[LakeEffect]

So, simple question, is Ed right about this? Or is it a case of, "Well he's right, but we don't want anything to upset anybody." This is an honest question, too.

David Slane hasn't posted his letter to Council/Mayor about the unconstitutionality, so it's tough to say what their legal basis is for such a claim. The general consensus is that it's not logrolling, because it was simply for "capital improvements". The City passed a Resolution stating that they'd do certain things with the money, but that wasn't on the ballot, therefor the ballot is a single-item vote.

If people really cared, why didn't they challenge the tax as soon as it was being collected in April 2010, or when it was on the ballot?

[PhiAlpha]

I think I'm actually growing to hate, literally hate, Ed Shadid not only as a mayoral candidate, but as a person the longer this drags on.

He should move to Tulsa where this type of crap is more considered acceptable.

[adaniel]

This is crap. I was sitting on the fence for this, but I just signed up to volunteer for Mick's campaign, and I may just throw in some cash as well. This guy cannot get anywhere close to the mayor's seat. The fact that he is even in this race stirring up stuff like this in of itself is damaging to the city.

[PhiAlpha]

This is crap. I was sitting on the fence for this, but I just signed up to volunteer for Mick's campaign, and I may just throw in some cash as well. This guy cannot get anywhere close to the mayor's seat. The fact that he is even in this race stirring up stuff like this in of itself is damaging to the city.

I'm signing up right now as well.

[Patrick]

The whole idea that Ed Shadid wants to derail MAPS 3 after it was overwhelmingly favored by a majority of the electorate is astonishing. I mean, it's one thing to be against something within the citygovernment, but once something has been approved by a vote of the public, it should no longer be an issue of whether you're going to go forward with the issue. A majority of the public has spoken, and to do anything contrary to that is very very very scary. Makes me not trust Ed Shadid one bit. If we can't trust him with a majority vote of the people, what can we trust him with? The guy is unstable, pure and simple.