I pit Kris Kobach

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

I can kinda sorta see an argument where the party has voluntarily limited its freedom of association by nominating a candidate in the first place; that is, the state can say, you don’t have to participate in this electoral process but if you do it’s on our terms. It’s pretty weak, though.

[elucidator]

To what end? About the only possible joy in it for the tighty righties would be Dem voters who don’t know that there really isn’t a Democrat candidate. Which happy outcome they have totally undermined by making a Big Hairy Ass Deal out of it. Already, polls are showing Taylor voters are heading towards What’s-his-face.

Its a simpler choice now between Roberts and Not Roberts. But putting his name on the ballot now won’t get them much.

[Fiveyearlurker]

What is Kobach’s play if the Democrats just refuse to nominate someone, which seems to be the likely response?

[Frank]

@Fiveyearlurker

What is Kobach’s play if the Democrats just refuse to nominate someone, which seems to be the likely response?

Cross-posted in part from the Elections thread:

@Frank

A bylined news article from the LA Times:

Secretary of State Kris Kobach has told county election officials to begin sending out ballots to voters overseas and in the military starting Saturday, instead of delaying the process by a week so that Democrats could appoint a nominee, a spokeswoman for his office confirmed.

Along with the ballots, voters will receive a letter cautioning them that they could be receiving new, replacement ballots later on if Democrats decide to appoint a nominee. In-state voters will not receive ballots until after Oct. 15.

OK, I guess, but is he trying to say that the current ballots won’t count if replacement ballots are sent out? After the deadline?

[Snowboarder_Bo]

Let’s go to the quarry and throw stuff down there hilarious! He seems to maybe be embracing the concept of “Goddammit I will fuck this election up! Nothing will stop me!” pretty hard, eh?

[Frank]

@Snowboarder_Bo

Let’s go to the quarry and throw stuff down there hilarious!

[hijack]Let’s go to the quarry and throw you down there.[/hijack]

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@Finagle

Well, you can probably compel them to nominate someone, but you probably can’t compel someone to run.

What penalties does the law prescribe for noncompliance? If there are none, how on earth can they be compelled to comply?

[Zakalwe]

@Terr

There is a law in Kansas that prevents a candidate appearing in two spots on the same ballot.

Thanks! That’s what I was looking for.* What’s the statute?

*And don’t you just have to wonder what horrific prior incident caused THAT law to get passed?

[Terr]

@Zakalwe

Thanks! That’s what I was looking for.* What’s the statute?

*And don’t you just have to wonder what horrific prior incident caused THAT law to get passed?

I believe it is this one:

http://kansasstatutes.lesterama.org/Chapter_25/Article_6/25-613.html

[Lord_Feldon]

@Zakalwe

Is there a rule that says that the nominee must be a member of the Party? Why not just nominate Orman?

Even if that was possible, that would just screw him over. Only a few states allow fusion, so if Orman had two lines on the ballot, they would probably try to count each one as a separate candidate.