Okie good sense shines thru!

[Okla-homey]

Yay!

Poll finds few state voters for Obama

By RANDY KREHBIEL World Staff Writer
8/3/2008
Last Modified: 8/3/2008 3:51 AM

Oklahomans may not be excited about this year's presidential campaign, but most of them know who they're going to vote for.

And it's not Barack Obama.

The latest Oklahoma Poll, a statewide survey of 750 likely voters conducted July 19-23, found little support — and some outright hostility — for the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee.

Republican John McCain, meanwhile, attracted broad, if sometimes tepid, support to lead Obama by 32 percentage points, 56 percent to 24 percent.

Seventy-one percent said they are firm in their decisions.

"Oklahomans have their minds made up and they aren't going to change come hell or high water, no matter what," said poll consultant Al Soltow, vice president for research at the University of Tulsa.

A trend, noted in national polls, of a substantial core of dedicated supporters for Obama is not evident in the Oklahoma Poll.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/artic...1_spancl643304

[Flagstaffsooner]

"What you talkin' about Willis?"

[sooner n houston]

But but don't them dumb okies know ... Change and things like that!

[StoopTroup]

No OkieBamaBillies?

[King Crimson]

1. if McCain can't win OK, he's in trouble.
2. Obama as of July 7 (when Henry and Boren invited him to come, IIRC) has not even been in the state, nor spent any real campaign money here.
3. one of HRC's largest margins of victory in the primary was in OK; so, i'm not sure there's anything generalizable as "proof" of anything in this TW stat--except that this is a state McCain should win. though a coalition of Oklahomas and North Dakotas is not going to be enough to win the big prize.

[StoopTroup]

750 voters? lol.

Statisticians crack me up.

[Okla-homey]

750 voters? lol.

Statisticians crack me up.

ST,
You know our people. Do you really think the results aren't representative? I think we both know the World too. Do you think if there was a way to have conducted this poll to make it a positive thing for BHO, they would not have done it?

In the end, based on the way the electoral system works, a vote for BHO in Oklahoma is sheer futility. That's why BHO hasn't come here and hasn't spent a dime here.

I think JSM will win OH, PA and MI and that will be enough. By a hair.

[achiro]

I'm pretty sure most of the Oklahoma Obama supporters post on this site.

[Whet]

I'm pretty sure all of the Oklahoma Obama supporters post on this site.

fixed!

[tommieharris91]

fixed!

According to that pole, it's true!

[SoonerInKCMO]

ST,
In the end, based on the way the electoral system works, a vote for BHO in Oklahoma is sheer futility. That's why BHO hasn't come here and hasn't spent a dime here.

Which is why the electoral college needs to be trashed.

[Whet]

Which is why the electoral college needs to be trashed.

yes, I want the inner city voters of NYC, Chicago, Detroit, LA, and SF determining the next president! NOT

[Whet]

New magazine for the MSM "journalists"!

[King Crimson]

yah know Homey, i find the tenor of this thread a little odd. given that you've made it clear that the people don't deserve truth--or at least only the relativism, official dissimulations and palatable pablum appropriate to their station in society. yet, here, you want to imply some "essential" wisdom born-from-the-horny-handed lay person of Oklahoma....who's "common sense" is also a "good sense".

yet, in your view, aren't these people also the small people without access to real political knowledge, by hopeful design (for their own protection, and to shield the Republic from their irrationality? the tyranny of the masses?). that's what you say before. they are the dupes of manufactured ideology (to protect res publica) yet you want to praise them here? odd.

in the other thread and if you continue to follow the Kristol/Strauss line where before you more or less assented that "populism" is unsafe but politically useful if information (truth) is handled correctly....you are eventually arguing for a kind of vanguard party idea...where truth is not subject to the light of publicity or critical, populist reason. it's a very anti-Enlightenment idea you are working there.

[Okla-homey]

yah know Homey, i find the tenor of this thread a little odd. given that you've made it clear that the people don't deserve truth--or at least only the relativism, official dissimulations and palatable pablum appropriate to their station in society. yet, here, you want to imply some "essential" wisdom born-from-the-horny-handed lay person of Oklahoma....who's "common sense" is also a "good sense".

yet, in your view, aren't these people also the small people without access to real knowledge (for their own protection, and the shield the Republic from their irrationality? the tyranny of the masses?). that's what you say before. they are the dupes of manufactured ideology (to protect res publica) yet you want to praise them here? odd.

in the other thread and if you continue to follow the Kristol/Strauss line where before you more or less assented that "populism" is unsafe but politically useful if information (truth) is handled correctly....you are eventually arguing for a kind of vanguard party idea...where truth is not subject to the light of publicity or critical, populist reason. it's a very anti-Enlightenment idea you are working there.

You're drilling too deep my friend. In this case, the innate good sense of our people has made it possible for them to spot a fraud. Granted, in this case, he's an amiable, intelligent, affable, well-spoken fraud, but a fraud nevertheless. Maybe in ten or fifteen years after BHO's had a chance to make a record of service in the Senate, or run for and won a Governor's mansion, he could deserve another look. But from a state legislature to the White House in a span of four years? That's just crazy talk.

Thus, here in Oklahoma, all this equates to the fact people who wish to help BHO get elected, won't be able to do it with their vote. That's also due to the great wisdom of the Founders of the republic who knew it was dangerous to elect the chief executive based entirely on the results of the popular vote. Dems should "get" that part. Afterall, that is precisely the principle on which their "superdelegate" nomination scheme is based.

[SoonerStormchaser]

I like tater tots and JSM!

[Okla-homey]

Which is why the electoral college needs to be trashed.

Cool. just get 2/3ds of the House and Senate to agree, then get 3/4's of the states to ratify that amendment and you're in business. But don't hold your breath getting any of the little or lightly populated states to agree -- which is kinda the kiss of death because you need a bunch of them to make it happen.

[StoopTroup]

palatable pablum.

We just got back from brunch at The Green Onion...

The pablum was terrific.

[King Crimson]

You're drilling too deep my friend. In this case, the innate good sense of our people has made it possible for them to spot a fraud. Granted, in this case, he's an amiable, intelligent, affable, well-spoken fraud, but a fraud nevertheless. Maybe in ten or fifteen years after BHO's had a chance to make a record of service in the Senate, or run for and won a Governor's mansion, he could deserve another look. But from a state legislature to the White House in a span of four years? That's just crazy talk.

Thus, here in Oklahoma, all this equates to the fact people who wish to help BHO get elected, won't be able to do it with their vote. That's also due to the great wisdom of the Founders of the republic who knew it was dangerous to elect the chief executive based entirely on the results of the popular vote. Dems should "get" that part. Afterall, that is precisely the principle on which their "superdelegate" nomination scheme is based.

only a partially acceptable answer. there is no such thing as "innate" good sense, common sense, or whatever....nothing is more ideological than "common sense". political knowledge is created knowledge, it's not like grass growing. the appeal to "natural" metaphors are one of the oldest and most suspicious of all rhetorical tropes.

you need to realize that what Kristol and Strauss are talking about is closer to Leninism (vanguard party) than the protections in the electoral safeguards from the Founders re: what DeToqueville or Mill refer to as "the tyranny of the majority".

though, i agree the "super-delegate" system is unseemly, given that it seems to promote careerism and opportunism at the expense of vox populi.

[Whet]

the messiah:


Dumb Okies don't know he has been chosen!