Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I live in Oklahoma City and the political environment here is why I have become so anti-Republican. If you work in the oil industry I guess it's alright, but it's not an easy place to live if you aren't white, heterosexual, Baptist, and Republican. It's also the most boring city it's size in the country and is the kind of place young people who can do so are moving away from, going to more liberal places like Dallas, Austin, and Denver. The few tolerable neighborhoods the city has are those that lean liberal (and these are very small pockets). Yes, the city voted overwhelmingly for Trump but that's why it compares unfavorably to cities half its size in other states. Oklahoma City is not a goal to aspire to by any means. Kansas City on the other hand shouldn't even count because Kansas City KS is reliant on much more liberal KCMO.
In addition, the economy has slowed down in recent years and it's getting worse thanks to a dysfunctional state government that thinks it's sole priorities are discriminating against LGBT people, suing Colorado for legalizing marijuana, and giving the top 1% tax breaks while raping the little man. They wave their Bibles though so people line up to vote for them. OKC was an excellent place to ride out the recession when oil was $100+ but now a lot of people are leaving for greener pastures.
There is a reason why most major cities are liberal and the few like OKC that aren't just aren't nice places to live.
I'm neither white, heterosexual, religious, nor Republican and I love OKC. Also, the city did not vote overwhelmingly for Trump, he barely won the county with 51.7%. As I've said numerous and numerous times before with maps and such, yet you just completely ignore them, central OKC voted blue. Also, AGAIN, I've posted data elsewhere that show that more young people are moving into OKC than moving out. Stop with the absurdity.
^^^ I agree that rising oil prices will be good for Oklahoma's economy, but the situation at the state capital is beyond dire. Tennessee turned itself around after being in a similar situation but it's also a more balanced state and isn't run quite as much on ideology as Oklahoma is. Time will tell what happens. The Reagan years nearly killed OKC. It was pretty much the Detroit of the plains back then. The city is in a better position than it was then but the state didn't learn its lesson.
As for the cost of living; it's low for a reason. OKC doesn't offer the quality of life places like Albuquerque, Fresno, and Tucson do. There's virtually no natural scenery, no city ordinances to promote beatification, and the ever-present threat of losing everything in a tornado.
All of the people I have met in OKC are very nice 'salt of the earth people', but I can still see what you're saying about the people/culture being true as well. And I generally agree with the rest of your post. If someone told me I had to live in a 'large' city in Oklahoma, I'd pick Tulsa. Parts of the Midtown area ('S.E. Hinton territory') are beautiful. Re Tennessee, I think Tennessee will benefit from the abolition of the Hall Tax, which will be gone by 2022, IIRC.
I'm neither white, heterosexual, religious, nor Republican and I love OKC. Also, the city did not vote overwhelmingly for Trump, he barely won the county with 51.7%. As I've said numerous and numerous times before with maps and such, yet you just completely ignore them, central OKC voted blue. Also, AGAIN, I've posted data elsewhere that show that more young people are moving into OKC than moving out. Stop with the absurdity.
Re what I bolded, do you think any of the positive things that lovecrowds pointed out have contributed to that?
24,000 new jobs in Metro Oklahoma City since Trump was elected.
With the energy prices increasing looks like Oklahoma and Kansas have much to gain also. Lots and Lots of energy comes from Oklahoma and Kansas.
Kansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma, North Dakota sure voted for their best interests when they rushed to the ballots last November to vote in President Trump in a huge, huge, huge landslide in those states.
You're so depressing the liberal Snowflake losers of the last election who don't want "deplorables" to have jobs.
I'm so happy every day with Trump in charge of the Swamp.
You're so depressing the liberal Snowflake losers of the last election who don't want "deplorables" to have jobs.
I'm so happy every day with Trump in charge of the Swamp.
Additionally.....
Seacove and KanyeMo probably agree on a whole host of things yet, based on the discussion in another thread, Seacove would want KanyeMo to suffer just because he happens to live in Oklahoma.
The reality is that the national job growth is on the same upward trajectory as it was for the last few years under Obama. It’s reasonable because Trump has enacted no major economic legislation. However, that doesn’t stop him from taking credit— like the rooster taking credit for the sun rising.
I’m still waiting for Trump to live up to his promise to coal miners about getting their high paying jobs back.
And the promise for better, cheaper healthcare with no cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.
Seacove and KanyeMo probably agree on a whole host of things yet, based on the discussion in another thread, Seacove would want KanyeMo to suffer just because he happens to live in Oklahoma.
When having a discussion, one must have a common set of facts. The OP is twisting the facts to make a political point, namely, that Trump is somehow responsible for job gains in certain places. The other thing about facts is that they are true whether you want to believe them or not. The reality is job growth has been positive nationwide for over seven years and it's now continuing on the same pattern under Trump -- which is expected because Trump hasn't changed any major economic policies.
Nobody can seriously argue that relaxing and gutting regulations that keep the air and water clean are booms to the economy. Nobody can claim that reversing an Obama rule that banned farmers from using a pesticide that's harmful to children's brains is good for the economy. Nobody can show that gutting net neutrality is an economic positive.
During Obama's term, Republican leaders did everything possible to torpedo his economic agenda that was geared to improving the economy. Their calculus was if they could keep the economy in recession until the next election, they'd have a good chance of taking the White House. In other words, if Americans suffered enough they'd get control of government (i.e. who cares if Americans suffer.)
It then is highly ironic that you accuse Seacove of doing what Mitch McConnell did -- hope Americans would continue to suffer, for political advantage of the other party. However, what I see is that Democrats don't want Americans to suffer to make Trump look bad, they just want to not let Trump take credit for things he had no control over. One example is the stock market. Trump is taking credit for the stock market being at record highs. However, the stock market has been making new highs for eight years. Moreover, foreign markets are also breaking new highs -- something that Trump definitely had no control. Likewise, Trump hasn't done anything to create jobs. The same job growth would be happening if HRC won.
What we can say is that Trump's other policies are a drag on the economy. His attack on Obamacare, which funds rural hospitals that are dependent upon the ACA and Medicaid, will force those hospitals to close, throwing lots of people into the unemployment rolls -- not to mention depriving Trump voters of hospitals.
Trump's reduction in corporate taxes will result in less investment by corporations. Companies can now deduct purchases and workers as expenses. When tax rates are high, they get a bigger deduction and effectively pay less for their expenses. Lower rates, and workers and purchases become more expensive.
I'm neither white, heterosexual, religious, nor Republican and I love OKC. Also, the city did not vote overwhelmingly for Trump, he barely won the county with 51.7%. As I've said numerous and numerous times before with maps and such, yet you just completely ignore them, central OKC voted blue. Also, AGAIN, I've posted data elsewhere that show that more young people are moving into OKC than moving out. Stop with the absurdity.
I wouldn't say barely won, it still went to Trump by 10.5%. With that being said it did trend against Trump and it was the smallest % victory for a GOP Presidential candidate there since LBJ won it in 1964.
Time to take a statistics course OP. Once again, correlation is not causation. Hurricane Harvey, Irma, and Maria occurred while Trump was president too. According to your logic, Trump caused all three natural disasters just because of the timing
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
.
losers of the last election who don't want "deplorables" to have jobs.
