OK US Senate debate tonight: RINO wankford vs. Kucinich-type liberal Connie Johnson

[invisible]

Tonight at 7 PM CENTRAL time there will be a debate for the OK US Senate election. RINO wankford will debate Kucinich-type liberal Connie Johnson. Should be an interesting debate, since wankford has an awful record as a Congressman, and Connie Johnson is an honest anti-corporatist liberal.

Johnson has been pretty much the biggest liberal in the OK State Legislature, and has been the face of MJ legalization, criminal justice reform, and has been at the forefront of anti-real id efforts and fighting corporatism in the state. Since I'm from her district, and am often down at the Capitol talking to State Legislators, I've gotten to know her on a personal level. I don't agree with her on all of the issues (after all, she's very much so a liberal), but she has always made the time to sit down and talk issues, and actually listen to what the voters have to say. Very nice gal, much more intelligent than wankford, and is overall much better on the issues despite being very much so a liberal. Contrast this with the arrogance of wankford, as can be readily seen on youtubes of his town hall appearances.

Event is supposed to stream on fox23.com, and will also be shown / streamed on CSPAN.

[invisible]

Interestingly enough, someone is trying very hard to ram this debate down the memory hole. All the live coverage was pulled at the last minute, and the debate didn't stream. No video seems to exist anywhere online, except for a small clip shown as part of a TV stations report. No transcript seems to be available either. Here is the best documentation I've been able to find:

This link had people giving a play by play, and is about the closest thing available to a complete transcript. The quotes I give here are only a few small snippets, there is much more at the link.
http://newsok.com/live-lankford-johnson-u.s.-senate-debate-in-stillwater/article/5349489

Johnson: As your next US Senator, I commit to being a voice but also to being an ear, to listen to your concerns.
Now that's an interesting quote. Note how it jibes with what I had said about her in the OP. Especially interesting is that she actually used one of my arguments on an issue, virtually verbatim. This quote is not just fluff, she is speaking the truth, and does actually listen.

Next question for Lankford: Do you believe quality healthcare is a right or a privilege in America?

Lankford says it's both.

Johnson says she agrees with Lankford, that healthcare is both a right and a privilege.

Next question's for Lankford: Should Congress legalize marijuana?

Lankford: "I have seen firsthand the damages that come to families by drug use."

I just don't think legalizing marijuana is a good idea.

Johnson cites her work in the Okla. Senate.

Johnson re: marijuana: Prohibition does not work. It didn't work with alcohol and it's not working with marijuana.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/2014_elections/debate-shows-differences-between-u-s-senate-candidates-lankford-johnson/article_5dccd72a-52e6-5766-8eda-c617b36d13a8.html

“Everybody has a conundrum about the role of government,” she said following the debate. “While we’re denouncing the Supreme Court on marriage equality, we celebrate Supreme Court decisions like Citizens United, which allows corporations to put unlimited money into campaigns, and a decision that strikes down half of the Voting Rights Act.

“Government ought to provide the things we can’t do as individuals. … The state should have no business in who people want to be with.”

In somewhat the same vein, Johnson said her advocacy of drug law was about fairness and making cannabis available to those who need it for medical purposes. She did not say she advocated total legalization.
Bolding in the above quote was mine. Note the very last sentence quoted here. This is very dishonest reporting! While Johnson may not have said anything about full on legalization in response to that after-the-debate question at that moment, she not only DID speak in favor of it during the debate, but her record in the State Senate shows she has authored several bills for it (SB2116 being the most recent).

http://www.ocolly.com/news/article_df312dda-4ea8-11e4-9672-001a4bcf6878.html

EBOLA

Lankford stressed that the U.S. needs to verify whether people coming from West Africa have had contact with those infected by the virus and commented that President Barack Obama is doing a “decent” job handling the issue. He also called the U.S. to action by saying, “No other place in the world is better equipped than we are to deal with this disease, and it would be wrong of us as a nation to back up and say that we are just going to let half a million people die in West Africa because we are afraid.”

Johnson referred to the disease as “the most dire world health issue of our time.” Johnson said that because of our “mobile society” no one would consider it a hassle to participate in extra screening at ports and airports. “Until we get this virus under control, I don’t think any measure is too extreme,” she said.
Again, the bolding above is mine.

So why is this debate being swept under the rug? I think wankford is scared, and that liberal Johnson has a chance. If you look at youtubes of both candidates, you will see that the public has a huge amount of dissatisfaction with wankford, and that Connie Johnson draws almost universally favorable crowd response. The various ballot petitions for one form or another of MJ legalization have all gotten more signatures than votes needed to win the general election. If those signatures (from registered voters) translate into votes, and Johnson can motivate those single-issue voters, she does have the numbers to beat wankford. The odds are against her given the state's demographics, but it'll be interesting to see what happens.