Well, maybe not tonight but maybe in the next few days.
Because he can’t run for President and his Senate seat at the same time.
Rachel explained it tonight.
He may have to choose which seat he wants to run for. I’m betting he’ll try to keep his Senate seat.
I want to see if they hold to their noble principles and pay for it themselves, or whether they take dirty, evil money from taxpayers.
The link in the OP didn’t get me to that story. This link to Mother Jonesworked. It’s a complicated situation and he’s offering to pay the party the costs of moving up the caucus.
The fun just keeps on coming in this election.
Sorry. It was such a late breaking story I didn’t do my job well.
Strawman. The Monopoly Free Parking Tragedy.
Is that anything like the Get Out Of Jail Paradox?
I believe Bricker is saying you have to play by the same rules that everyone else is playing by even if you don’t agree with those rules. To do otherwise would put you at a disadvantage.
Out of curiosity, what is the background of this law? Has it existed all along? If so, why didn’t Paul foresee this issue? Or is this a new law which was enacted recently just to mess with Paul?
He did foresee the issue, but it’s not like he could have done much about it. Before he was advocating for a switch to a caucus, he was trying to get the law changed. But since the GOP didn’t win a majority in the Kentucky House of Representatives in November that won’t be possible.
But if they do go for the early caucus, he can still pursue both, right? Wasn’t that the point of switching?
You mean the Democrats don’t get to decide between a publicly-funded primary or a party-funded caucus? That certainly seems odd.
JFTR, under the existing rules, Rand Paul does NOT have to choose between running for President and running to keep his Senate seat.
In Kentucky, he can only be on the ballot for one office at a time. He can be on Presidential primary and caucus ballots in all of the other states and territories while being only on the primary ballot for Senate in Kentucky. So he could run for Senate in Kentucky while running for President everywhere else.
In a close GOP nomination race, this might make a difference, but given that the norm is for candidates to either win the nomination by a comfortable margin, or lose, the fate of his Presidential campaign is not likely to hinge on whether he’s eligible for the votes of the Kentucky delegation. (The author of the Mother Jones piece disagrees on this point, saying “to have a realistic shot at the presidential nomination, he will have to win Kentucky.” I’m not seeing it.)
The other thing is, as the MoJo piece also mentions, the Kentucky primary is currently scheduled for May 17. I don’t know how far in advance Rand would have to choose, but my dim recollection is that such deadlines are usually 30-60 days in advance of the primary. By March 15, 25 states will have already had their GOP primaries or caucuses, including several big states like Texas, Florida, Illinois, Ohio, and Michigan.
If he’s still legitimately in the running at that point, he could (and should, IMHO) drop out of the Senate race to continue to pursue the Presidential nomination, so that other Kentucky Republicans have time to campaign for the nomination. (Also, if he’s still got a genuine shot at the nomination after March 15, it’s a safe bet that his campaign’s money problems will ease off considerably.)
If he’s not really in the running anymore by then, but still wants to stay on the campaign trail in the Presidential race, then it doesn’t really matter if he doesn’t pick up Kentucky’s delegates for the nomination: he can stay on the ballot for Senate in Kentucky, while not being on the Kentucky Presidential primary ballot, and continue to run for President for show.
ISTM that it’s only a dilemma if Rand still has a genuine shot at the nomination after March 15 (but is far from a lock), yet still wants the fail-safe of his Senate seat as he continues to run for President. If he’s in that position on the morning of March 16, he should simply man up and decide which way he’s going to go.
The Kentucky primary is currently scheduled for May 17. I don’t know how far ahead he has to decide which ballot he’s on, but 60 days is probably a worst case. That’s March 18.
By March 15, 25 states will have had their primaries, including Texas, Florida, Ohio, Illinois, and Michigan. If he’s still got a realistic shot for the nomination as of March 18, he should man up, go all in for his Presidential run, and drop the Senate race. If he’s pretty much running for show at that point, it doesn’t matter whether he’s on the Presidential ballot in Kentucky: he can run for Senate in Kentucky, while remaining on the primary ballot everywhere else. Or he can just shut down the Presidential campaign.
And if he can’t make a decision based on the primary votes of half the country, then he has no business trying to make the sorts of decisions Presidents have to make.
Right. The choice is easy: run for Senate and stay off the presidential ballot. Does he think that there will be a brokered convention or a challenged convention where Kentucky’s delegates will put him over the top? I think he is wasting valuable campaign assets to set up this caucus.
Kentucky GOP approves the switch to a caucus on March 5th. Nothing to see with respect to Paul dropping anytime soon.
So Kentucky Repubs will hold a separate caucus, thus he can be on the ballot for his Senate seat on regular voting day?
Yes.
Can we update the misleading thread title?
I’ll do it.
It’ll be accurate soon enough.