How convenient.The Oklahoman seems to have a successfully stubborn paywall,
Wrong, it does contain information that does not appear to be in the NPR article, such as the comments from Adam Soltani which do not appear to be in the NPR article. It is as far as I can see a local Oklahoman outlet, which contains numerous other articles on this topic, and the author of the piece is a (left-leaning) local Oklahoman journalist with a day job at another local newspaper. One might reasonably hypothesise that they know what's going on in their home state politics without the need for NPR to tell them.That article is an op-ed repackaging of exactly the NPR article. It adds no further information... and there's no reason to believe the author has any source at all other than NPR.
I think as commonly happens you are trying to hammer a square peg of real world evidence into the round hole of your beliefs.I don't know why you are dying on this hill.
Again, you are trying to argue here that the man Oklahoman Republicans voted in to represent their party does not represent the party. I do accept that this is potentially true (as previously stated) but it moves the burden onto you to demonstrate otherwise.
Thus NPR has drawn the most reasonable conclusion from the evidence reasonably available. You are wrong to criticise them for doing so just because you don't like the outcome.