If Edmondson narrowly wins ...

[Anzeigenhauptmeister]

... what will the county map look like?
This is an interesting question, inasmuch as the most populous counties - unlike in almost every other state - are Republican strongholds.
Whenever a Democrat narrowly won a statewide election (or narrowly lost, respectively) they couldn't win the five most populous counties: Oklahoma, Tulsa, Cleveland, Comanche, Canadian. These counties make up 46% of the whole Oklahoman population.
Why do you think this is?

Here's the 2002 gubernatorial election results map; Democrat Brad Henry beat Republican Steve Largent by 0.66%:



In 1976, Jimmy Carter only lost by only 1.21%:



And here's the current population map:

[DINGO Joe]

Take the 2014 map and apply an even swing to get Edmondson to 49-50.  He'll win the OKC/Cleveland area as it's now the most Democratic in the state, and the R from OKC lost to the R from Tulsa.  Tulsa will be close.

[IceSpear]

It ain't 2002 anymore. Oklahoma County and Cleveland County are must wins for Edmondson if he wants to win. Actually, he'd probably need to get decent sized margins in them.

[Anzeigenhauptmeister]

It ain't 2002 anymore. Oklahoma County and Cleveland County are must wins for Edmondson if he wants to win. Actually, he'd probably need to get decent sized margins in them.

Even Joe Dorman, who performed quite decently and took six counties, didn't win any of the big five. I'd guess those were counties with a high share of Native Americans.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

OK probably remains GOP

[progressive85]

He's a good candidate for the Democrats, which you would think wouldn't stand a chance, but governor's races have always been a little different than federal races, and this is going to be about whether people in the state think its going in the right direction, and if there ever was a year for a Democrat to win in Oklahoma, this would be it.

[RussFeingoldWasRobbed]

Edmondson is from OK-2 so he should do better there then most democrats would. I think he wins Muskogee and maybe 2-3 other counties. But other then that, he's got to win OK-County and Cleveland by decent margins and cut into Canadian, Comanche, and Tulsa

[GM Team Member and Senator WB]

He's a good candidate for the Democrats, which you would think wouldn't stand a chance, but governor's races have always been a little different than federal races, and this is going to be about whether people in the state think its going in the right direction, and if there ever was a year for a Democrat to win in Oklahoma, this would be it.

I'd assume part of the reason he's doing so well is, y'know, Fallin being at over 80% disapproval.

[I’m not Stu]

Edmondson would have to win Oklahoma, Cleveland, and Tulsa counties in order to win statewide.

[Adam Griffin]

Something like this:



He'd need 59% in OKC & Comanche, 57% in Cleveland, 53% in Muskogee, 52% in Tulsa, 42% in Wagoner and Pottawatomie, and 41% in Canadian and Rogers. A lot of smaller counties in Little Dixie and its periphery come down to sheer coin flips here.

He'd need 25-30 point swings in the most populated counties; there'd be no improvement in the Panhandle and the most western portions of the state; from there, the swings would grow in strength as you move east until you reach the most Democratic-friendly portions of Little Dixie, where swings in his favor would exist, but would be tapered compared to some other regions.

[RussFeingoldWasRobbed]

Something like this:



He'd need 59% in OKC & Comanche, 57% in Cleveland, 53% in Muskogee, 52% in Tulsa, 42% in Wagoner and Pottawatomie, and 41% in Canadian and Rogers. A lot of smaller counties in Little Dixie and its periphery come down to sheer coin flips here.

He'd need 25-30 point swings in the most populated counties; there'd be no improvement in the Panhandle and the most western portions of the state; from there, the swings would grow in strength as you move east until you reach the most Democratic-friendly portions of Little Dixie, where swings in his favor would exist, but would be tapered compared to some other regions.

This for sure

[Anzeigenhauptmeister]

Something like this:

That would literally be a realignment election with a state. Where did this happen the last time? Probably in Minnesota during the presidential election?

[DINGO Joe]

Something like this:

That would literally be a realignment election with a state. Where did this happen the last time? Probably in Minnesota during the presidential election?

It would just be Oklahoma becoming like the rest of the country--D cities and R rural.

[Anzeigenhauptmeister]

It would just be Oklahoma becoming like the rest of the country--D cities and R rural.

The Kansans and Alaskans still vote Oklahoma-style, but they are poised to vote "normally".
To some extent, the New Hampshirites and Hawaiians vote similar to the Oklahomans as their most populous counties are way more Republican than their smaller ones.

But why do they still vote the way they vote? Are the big five counties more upscale than the others?

[Adam Griffin]

Something like this:

That would literally be a realignment election with a state. Where did this happen the last time? Probably in Minnesota during the presidential election?

Since Democrats last won fairly consistently statewide in Oklahoma, the 5 counties you mentioned that make up basically half the population have swelled in size; that means the remainder of the state has shrunk as a share of the state's population. Democrats would need to do even better than they did when Clinton and GWB were in office in places like Little Dixie for a win not rooted in some form of realignment to be a reality. That seems patently unreasonable, especially given what we know about the modern coalitions and OK's recent voting behavior.

[Skunk]

Something like this:



He'd need 59% in OKC & Comanche, 57% in Cleveland, 53% in Muskogee, 52% in Tulsa, 42% in Wagoner and Pottawatomie, and 41% in Canadian and Rogers. A lot of smaller counties in Little Dixie and its periphery come down to sheer coin flips here.

He'd need 25-30 point swings in the most populated counties; there'd be no improvement in the Panhandle and the most western portions of the state; from there, the swings would grow in strength as you move east until you reach the most Democratic-friendly portions of Little Dixie, where swings in his favor would exist, but would be tapered compared to some other regions.

Yeah, you pretty much hit the nail on the head with this one. A Democratic victory in the style of 2002 is pretty much impossible here now. It's a tall order, but I think Edmondson will be able to play well in OKC and surrounding areas considering Cornett lost. Tulsa I'm more worried about since Stitt has the home advantage but I don't think it's impossible for Edmondson to win it, a lot of the massive swings we've seen in special elections here have come from districts around Tulsa.