Runoff: Why is the Oklahoman trying to smear Shadid?

[soonerguru]

Every reference to him brings up his union endorsements -- which he did not seek? They're trying to sell this insider banker Swinton as a progressive in a progressive district, when he's basically a stooge of the Chamber.

Why is the Oklahoman trying to paint Shadid as a MAPS opponent, when in fact Swinton is the only remaining candidate who has discussed "putting off" projects, like the "trolley," as he stupidly calls it.

I've met Shadid and he's a much better, more progressive fit for the Ward than banker good ol' boy Swinton.

This should be an interesting race. It will be very interesting to see if the Oklahoman continues to try to smear Shadid in both its news coverage as well as on its editorial page.

[Thunder]

Why should you follow The Oklahoman? Not very many people are following that crap anymore. Don't give them any attention.

[Spartan]

People who vote in local elections read the op-ed page.

I think both would be a good choice, and I'm actually not as concerned about Shadid as other urbanists on this board might be. I think Swinton would be the likeliest to leave MAPS alone, though. Shadid has the right ideas though, and I think he could develop into a strong local leader.

[Kerry]

You guys need to go back and listen to the KTOK interview with Shadid before he started getting professional coaching advice from the unions. He wants to kill MAPS and divert the funds to police and fire. Why do you think he was endorsed by both unions?

[Larry OKC]

Why should you follow The Oklahoman? Not very many people are following that crap anymore. Don't give them any attention.

But then we wouldn't have had the Ford tax, the MAPS 3 tax.... :-)

[soonerguru]

You guys need to go back and listen to the KTOK interview with Shadid before he started getting professional coaching advice from the unions. He wants to kill MAPS and divert the funds to police and fire. Why do you think he was endorsed by both unions?

This is total BS.

[Kerry]

What union are you in soonerguru?

[soonerguru]

What union are you in soonerguru?

Not a member and I never have been.

[Spartan]

I'm saying there's good cause to reconsider Shadid. I think he just has a Pete White view of transit.

[soonerguru]

I'm saying there's good cause to reconsider Shadid. I think he just has a Pete White view of transit.

I'm all ears. This is not what I'm hearing from transit types.

[Spartan]

I don't really know, I'm trying to figure it out myself right now. His attack on the streetcar, I believe, is that he wanted the money to be spent on more buses for the needy neighborhoods or something like that. Well, that's going to be a non-starter on the City Council, and it will go nowhere. He's going to need to jump aboard the streetcar gravy train if he wants to improve transit in any way in OKC, and I think further down the road he could be a good advocate for a major overhaul of the bus system, and I can name a lot of things off the top of my head that could stand to be reformed there...

[Kerry]

Shadid said in his KTOK interview that he prefered the bus system over streetcars and if I remember correcrtly, said if it was up to him none of the MAPS items would be built until every street in OKC was safe. If he was for MAPS III why did the unions put their support behind him when every other candidate they backed was anti-MAPS III? The Unions are so anti-MAPS III they supported Baptist Tea Party types - that is how much they hate MAPS. If Shadid was pro-MAPS he should have rejected their endorsement.

[Spartan]

I somewhat agree. But there are some realities in City Hall (one of the first being that OKC "streets" are as safe as they're ever going to be without a major environmental shift) that I know Shadid recognizes. He's a respectable guy, I'm just not sure he wasn't just posturing to populist voters. I'd be interested in hearing a newer statement from him to see if he chooses his words any differently now that he sees that MAPS is indeed what the city really wants.

[Urban Pioneer]

I listened to that interview as I was awaiting my time slot, and was alarmed at his transit comments as well. He apparently listened to my interview and called me. We went over at length what the project is, what we are doing, and why were doing it the way were doing it.

He completely changed his mind and is endorsing it as intended. Apparently, the Pete White rhetoric is what he was basing his earlier comments on.

I sent a long email to Swinton telling him who we are and asked for a meeting to educate him. No response. I had to corner him at the ULI debate. He says he'll want to know more if he gets elected.

Just saying, that's what happened.

[Kerry]

U.P. the next time you talk to Shadid ask him about his attempt to get the Green Party endorsement when he ran for District 85. I don't think you can trust him. The guy is a union leftist and will probably say anything to get elected. The fact he said one thing in the interview and then said the opposite when talking in person is an indication of that. If someone likes the Green Party and unionism then fine, vote for Shadid; but if their primary interest is keeping MAPS III on track they need to find a different person to support.

http://www.greenpartywatch.org/2010/...y-endorsement/

[Urban Pioneer]

I don't know about other Shadid issues. Only transit. But I take both Swinton and him at face value when they say something. Why shouldn't I? If either of them is elected, we will hold them to their word on our project.

[soonerguru]

"Union leftist?" That's a strange description for a surgeon. Which union does he belong to, the Physicians & Surgeons Local?

[soonerguru]

Why would anyone reject an endorsement unless it's from a criminal enterprise? They weren't endorsing him because he's against MAPS, they endorsed him because he was running against the chamber's candidate, Swinton.

[Steve]

I don't know about other Shadid issues. Only transit. But I take both Swinton and him at face value when they say something. Why shouldn't I? If either of them is elected, we will hold them to their word on our project.

When I hear a politician say something my first instinct is to assume they are lying and to look and see if there is evidence to indicate what they are saying is true or false (20 years experience)

[Urban Pioneer]

Whose lying? What are they lying about?

[okclee]

Here is how I would like to see this runoff go down;

They both start from equal distances in terms of miles from downtown and only using public transit they race to be the first to city hall. Much like the amazing race reality show. The first one there is awarded winner of the council seat.

[Kerry]

Here is how I would like to see this runoff go down;

They both start from equal distances in terms of miles from downtown and only using public transit they race to be the first to city hall. Much like the amazing race reality show. The first one there is awarded winner of the council seat.

LOL!!! For that to really work though we need a third candidate that is allowed to use a simulated streetcar. My guess is both Swinton and Shadid would also want to use the simulated streetcar.

[Spartan]

Why would anyone reject an endorsement unless it's from a criminal enterprise?

The police/fire unions aren't very far from deserving that designation IMO.

But anyway, as for Shadid, here's what he wrote on his campaign website:

"MAPS3 is a bond with the voters. It must be implemented in its entirety with transparency and with the maximum public deliberation. Mr. Swinton risks the legitimacy of future referendums by essentially eliminating the rail component. We do not get to pick and choose which projects we (or our unknown financial sponsors) want to move forward."

Doesn't sound very anti-rail to me.

[elysiumdream7]

Everyone does realize Charlie Swinton asked the police and fire for their endorsement??? Shadid and Swinton both spoke to about 70 police officers asking for their endorsement and they interviewed with the firefighters. Both the police and firefighters took votes and endorsed Shadid unanimously.

[Kerry]

The police/fire unions aren't very far from deserving that designation IMO.

But anyway, as for Shadid, here's what he wrote on his campaign website:

"MAPS3 is a bond with the voters. It must be implemented in its entirety with transparency and with the maximum public deliberation. Mr. Swinton risks the legitimacy of future referendums by essentially eliminating the rail component. We do not get to pick and choose which projects we (or our unknown financial sponsors) want to move forward."

Doesn't sound very anti-rail to me.

That wasn't what he said before. I guess you have to decide which version of Shadid you want to believe (Shadid 1.0 or Shadid 2.0). Just keep in mind the Shadid 2.0 is back by a labor union that was attracted to him by positions taken by Shadid 1.0.

In reality, you might have to pick from the lessor of two evils. If I had to choose I would pick the opposite of the union support.