**** the Tulsa mayoral election

[badger]

It's not till Nov. 12. I'm getting calls daily from both campaigns and they even snuck in a call about the streets package that's also going to be on the ballot.

On one side, we have Dewey Bartlett, the Republican incumbent (anyone who thought the races were non-partisan, lol). He is Dewey Bartlett Jr., mind you, because his daddy of the same name was also mayor.

When his campaign calls (the caller ID shows up at "Dewey Bartlett"), the kid on the line reminds you that Tulsa's rebounding economy results in more jobs and lower crime, which are both technically true. They end the call by asking if they can count on your support. Maybe if I said "no" they'd stop calling?

On the other side, you have Kathy Taylor, Bartlett's predecessor at mayor and a Democrat. She's wealthy and goes by her maiden name blah blah.

When her campaign calls (the caller ID last night said "Tahlequah"???), they employ push polling. The answer is always the worst one (homicide rate is higher than last year and there have been fewer police officers) and it's always on the same two topics --- MURDER. NO POLICE.

If I decide to vote, I'll probably go Kathy, but the way they continuously call, I'm really leaning towards leaving both boxes blank and just voting on the other stuff.

Eff both candidates and their repeated calls.

[Tulsa_Fireman]

I would recommend Tulsa citizens seriously consider the 3rd penny extension. TONS of capital expenditures come from 3rd penny, the whole point and purpose of it. Without 3rd penny, many capital expenditures that don't qualify for ad valorem dollars will have to be deducted straight from the general fund or funded through bond issue. And sadly, Tulsa has a number of bonds already issued as funding mechanisms for other capital projects and to rely on such funding for repeating capital expenditures such as equipment (read: fire trucks) would put a serious pinch on our bond rating.

To each his own and vote as you see fit, but the 3rd penny extension is a good idea.

[cleller]

Having worked on the Tulsa PD under both, I'd pick Dewey. He was sort of a disappointment, but not as meddlesome and PC as Taylor. Taylor was a slightly antagonistic, change-for-change itself, politically correct type, but she wasn't horrible. She is also the goddaughter of Tulsa World founding family, the Lorton's. Thus, her main campaign tactic is citing World articles attacking Bartlett.

One thing that is being misrepresented is the amount of officers on the dept. Under Dewey, an "overtime shift" program really took off. They discovered that it was less expensive to pay officers OT to cover a few shifts around town as the need arose than to create permanent positions. New positions means big money to train, equip, and insure those officers.

Its purely giving people what they want, savings.

Bartlett's dad was Governor of Oklahoma in the late 60s, but I didn't think he was a Tulsa Mayor. Bartlett is certainly the only one I'd trust to hold a knife if my back were turned. Taylor? No way.

[badger]

The Tulsa World was bought by Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway media wing earlier this year, so there's no longer that tie, I guess.

Got another ****ing call late last night, just before toddler baj bath. We were having fun testing the bouncability of the mattress when "Pryor, OK" shows up on called ID.

They ask for my husband. I say he's unavailable. They say they're from the Taylor campaign.

Me: That's cool.

(silence)

[KantoSooner]

I know it works, but the ads from both sides have been annoyingly negative. Apparently both candidates rejoice in firing cops, are clueless about money and are personally dedicated to the destruction of Tulsa and the banning of pecan pie.

I hope it ends, soon.

[badger]

I am so tempted to not vote at all and just leave everything blank. I am also tempted to vote early so that I can tell them I already voted and the calls will end.

They're after my husband right now, because he's registered as an independent.

[badger]

Tee hee silly push poll callers, asking who I am going to vote for, when I am going to vote and where I am going to vote from. The call said it was from McAlester, so I hope that the campaigns aren't employing prisoners for their dirty work.

My predictions:

1- Both incumbent mayor and auditor retain offices.
2- Voters will soundly and roundly turn DOWN pay raises for the much disliked city council (although they aren't as hated as they were a few years ago when a bunch of them got voted out).

That leaves our tax propositions. I'd like to think that people want to improve their streets and fund public safety, but Tulsa voters lately have seemed to vote down any tax increase they possibly can, whether they're Democrats or Republicans.

Thus, I also predict a closer, but still a NO on both prop 2 and 3, due to the anti-tax mentality that has griped Tulsa lately.

[okie52]

I don't have a dog in this fight but for some reason I want Bartlett to win.

[Mjcpr]

These aren't tax increases. I suppose you could argue the bonds are but taking the mil rate up to the level they discussed is what was supposed to happen when the full package (heh) was discussed in the first streets program, this is just a continuation of that. If people want the streets fixed, they're going to have to spend the money to do it. I predict both of those will pass, the Council raises will fail by a huge margin....I don't know about the Mayor's race but the poll in Sunday's paper had Bartlett will in front.

[badger]

Yes, I *know* they aren't technically tax increases but in fact taxes will go down regardless of whether this passes or not. However, I really suspect that Tulsa's voters will choose once again to vote to keep their money even if it's a well known fact that Tulsa's roads need all the funding then can get.

I am gonna say 70+ percent vote "NO" the city councilor raises (and others mistake it for the fix-the-streets proposal and vote "yes," otherwise it'll be higher). What say you, fellow Tulsan?

[ouwasp]

Sick of seeing the commercials...told my wife we should be thankful we don't live in a battleground state or we'd have to endure this crap x 10 during prez election yrs.

Here's the fishy thing... why are they spending so much $$ to get elected to a position that doesn't pay all that much, comparatively speaking? Power

I am very good friends with a Tulsa cop. They are sick with the idea of "KT" becoming mayor again. Myself, KT lost all credibility when she bailed when the money was tight. Now that things are somewhat stable she wants to be mayor again. That's almost insulting.

[Mjcpr]

Here's the fishy thing... why are they spending so much $$ to get elected to a position that doesn't pay all that much, comparatively speaking? Power

I am very good friends with a Tulsa cop. They are sick with the idea of "KT" becoming mayor again. Myself, KT lost all credibility when she bailed when the money was tight. Now that things are somewhat stable she wants to be mayor again. That's almost insulting.

This is true of most elected positions.

Their union has endorsed her.

[badger]

Early returns favor yes on all three props, Bartlett in landslide and slight edge to auditor challenger

Not surprised on Bartlett, very surprised on the early yes lean

[badger]

I wonder what made Tulsans vote for these proposals, yet turn down so many before this one?

Oh wait... lower voter turnout. I should've known. They do this on presidential ballot or a statewide election midterm midtacular and council raises gets voted down and likely the other two would have been close.

[Mjcpr]

I wonder what made Tulsans vote for these proposals, yet turn down so many before this one?

Oh wait... lower voter turnout. I should've known. They do this on presidential ballot or a statewide election midterm midtacular and council raises gets voted down and likely the other two would have been close.

The so called "3rd penny" has been approved since 1980 and it needs to be to fund police cars, fire equipment, operating capital for the City, etc. That should really be permanent because if for some reason it ever gets voted down, capital will have to come from operating money which couldn't be done without large numbers of layoffs. The additional piece, is just a continuation of the Fix Our Streets initiative which was practically begged for for much needed street issues as was the bond package. The ones voted down before had other things in it like low water dams that people didn't so much want.

I have no idea why they voted for Councilor raises. I would have bet good money that had no chance of passing.

[badger]

I really think the councilor raises came down to low voter turnout. It was right after Veterans Day, it was really really cold and windy out and voters were likely exhausted from non-stop Kathy Taylor ads on TV, radio, Internet (including right here, thanks a lot google ads) and mailings. Oh, and phone calls too.

Once again, **** the Tulsa mayoral election for bombarding Tulsans since S'March with this crap. I can live with the election outcome, but **** it anyway for having to put up with everything before Tuesday

[Mjcpr]

I really think the councilor raises came down to low voter turnout. It was right after Veterans Day, it was really really cold and windy out and voters were likely exhausted from non-stop Kathy Taylor ads on TV, radio, Internet (including right here, thanks a lot google ads) and mailings. Oh, and phone calls too.

Once again, **** the Tulsa mayoral election for bombarding Tulsans since S'March with this crap. I can live with the election outcome, but **** it anyway for having to put up with everything before Tuesday

This was a better turnout than most Mayoral elections here.


Tuesday's turnout was 36.1 percent of registered voters. That was greater than any of the city's three previous general elections going back to 2002 and far higher than the 29.3 percent who turned out for the June 11 primary.

[badger]

Still lower than the time I had to actually wait in a line for the presidential elections of 08 and 12, I'm sure :)

[Mjcpr]

Still lower than the time I had to actually wait in a line for the presidential elections of 08 and 12, I'm sure :)

I would hope a Presidential election would have a higher turnout than a municipal election, yes.

[sooner_born_1960]

I would hope a Presidential election would have a higher turnout than a municipal election, yes.
While it never happens, I would hope the opposite. Local elections are the only ones that really make any difference to the average Joe.

[badger]

While it never happens, I would hope the opposite. Local elections are the only ones that really make any difference to the average Joe.

Can you imagine if OU alumni got to vote for the starting quarterback? The turnout would be huge!

Alas, this is a boring city election

[Mjcpr]

While it never happens, I would hope the opposite. Local elections are the only ones that really make any difference to the average Joe.

Tell that to everyone bitching about Obamacare then.