PDA

View Full Version : Watch Poll Results Here:




libertybrewcity
07-27-2010, 03:52 PM
Places to watch results:

http://www.news9.com/
http://newsok.com/

One Last Battle!
07-27-2010, 04:06 PM
How do I watch the results?

libertybrewcity
07-27-2010, 04:23 PM
How do I watch the results?

they haven't come in yet. 7pm central time i think

malkusm
07-27-2010, 04:32 PM
And, as always:

http://www.politico.com/2010/maps/

libertybrewcity
07-27-2010, 05:00 PM
And, as always:

http://www.politico.com/2010/maps/

oh yes.

tsai3904
07-27-2010, 06:26 PM
http://www.ok.gov/elections/support/10pri.html

Results are halfway down the page. They seem to have the most up to date results so far.

libertybrewcity
07-27-2010, 06:29 PM
(rep) for u.s. Representative, district no. 4 3 of 416
tom cole 297 78.99%
r.j. Harris 79 21.01%

olehounddog
07-27-2010, 06:43 PM
(rep) for u.s. Representative, district no. 4 7 of 416
tom cole 1,356 76.91%
r.j. Harris 407 23.09%

libertybrewcity
07-27-2010, 06:45 PM
(REP) FOR GOVERNOR 49 OF 2244
RANDY BROGDON 1,797 32.91%
ROGER L. JACKSON 154 2.82%
MARY FALLIN 3,333 61.03%
ROBERT HUBBARD 177 3.24%


looks like a worse loss for than harris than kokesh, didn't think that was possible. maybe things will turn around, it is still quite early

brenden.b
07-27-2010, 07:24 PM
Yeah...it's not looking good for Harris...

libertybrewcity
07-27-2010, 07:41 PM
(REP) FOR U.S. REPRESENTATIVE, DISTRICT NO. 4 177 OF 416
TOM COLE 10,965 78.22%
R.J. HARRIS 3,054 21.78%


(REP) FOR GOVERNOR 728 OF 2244
RANDY BROGDON 21,210 35.83%
ROGER L. JACKSON 1,784 3.01%
MARY FALLIN 34,048 57.52%
ROBERT HUBBARD 2,155 3.64%

Brogdan isn't doing horrible and has made small comeback in the past 20 minutes or so..

eh, not a good day for OK.

Kokeshfan
07-27-2010, 09:07 PM
I donated to his campaign a couple of times. He's a good man and will no doubt stay active.

Nathan Hale
07-27-2010, 09:48 PM
RJ got his ass handed to him. Brogdon did well. I'd like to see him run for Congress in 2012.

boneyard bill
07-31-2010, 01:20 AM
Actually I think RJ did quite well. What's disappointing is that our hopes were much higher. But 23% with no money and no name recognition against an entrenched incumbent is not awful. Indeed, a 40% showing by RJ would really have been rather earth-shaking for most incumbent Republican Congressman. If an unknown with no money could come that close, a well-known or well-healed challenger could be serious trouble with that kind of message. Kokesh did a little better but he wasn't running against an incumbent, and he did manage to raise some money although not enough for a Congressional race.

The real problem was with our expectations. A little-known candidate can't expect to do well the first time out without a lot of money.

But what this shows, and the Peter Schiff situation in Connecticut also shows, is that if your last name isn't Paul, you can't necessarily expect to raise a lot of money on the internet either. High name-recognition is important in fund-raising as well. And you can't expect to get a lot out of an e-mail from Ron Paul either because he has many candidates that he is supporting. Contributors still have to decide which candidate has the best chance.

But these guys have all made a start at building a base for future races. RJ might have a good shot at a state legislative race. Adam Kokesh might be a good candidate for a low-profile statewide race in New Mexico. If Peter Schiff doesn't win against McMullin, he still has laid the groundwork for a run against Lieberman if he wants to try to build on this year's efforts.

Nathan Hale
08-01-2010, 07:17 PM
Schiff raised a LOT of money on the internet.'

RJ Harris didn't end up with the level of support he ended up with because his last name wasn't Paul. He ended up where he did for several reasons:

1. He tried to primary an entrenched incumbent. Yeah, that's worth doing on occasion, but his occasion was not an occasion to pursue that avenue. We have a lot of candidates running, and nobody wanted to waste donation dollars on a windmill tilt.

2. He was divisive in the movement. None of us forget the attacks he made against Rand Paul, even if he retracted them. RJ sounded a lot like a 2005 libertarian (i.e. a libertarian in the age before libertarianism entered the spotlight and had to start acting like it had the spotlight).

3. There was some confusion about his deployment and whether or not he'd be attempting to run for the seat from Afghanistan (another knock against donating).