Alison Lundergan Grimes: Rand Paul can’t run for president and Senate

[francisco]

At Politico:

Alison Lundergan Grimes: Rand Paul can’t run for president and Senate

Defeated Democrat declines to address her political future.

By James Hohmann

12/17/14 8:19 PM EST

Alison Lundergan Grimes, Kentucky’s secretary of State, is threatening to take Rand Paul to court to block him from running both for president and reelection to the Senate in 2016.

In her first television interview since Sen. Mitch McConnell routed her by 15 points last month, the Democratic Senate nominee declared that she will not be “bullied” by Paul, who is a heavy favorite to win a second Senate term if he’s allowed to stay on the ballot.

“The law is clear,” Grimes told WHAS-TV in Louisville. “You can’t be on the ballot twice for two offices.”

“We’ll look to the court for any guidance that is needed,” she added. “And at the end of the day, we’re not going to be bullied.”

Read more:

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/1...te-113662.html

[Millennial Conservatarian]

At Politico:



Read more:

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/1...te-113662.html

bring it on in court, bitch

[TaftFan]

Then how come she gets to have two last names?

[Brian4Liberty]

Well she's quite the unbiased judge, isn't she?

[Mr.NoSmile]

Well she's quite the unbiased judge, isn't she?

Given the law of Kentucky, she's not exactly wrong. Otherwise, I doubt Paul would even try to get it changed.

[Brett85]

I think Rand should just run for President and forget about the Senate. If Rand doesn't become President our country is basically screwed anyway, even if he were to remain in the Senate.

[Lucille]

I agree. Then when the neo-Trot establishment denies him the nom, he can run third party.

[Occam's Banana]

I think Rand should just run for President and forget about the Senate. If Rand doesn't become President our country is basically screwed anyway, even if he were to remain in the Senate.

I think Rand should just stay in the Senate and forget about the Presidency. If Rand does become President our country is basically screwed anyway ...

... and at least they won't be able to blame a "libertarian" President for any of it ...

[Brian4Liberty]

Given the law of Kentucky, she's not exactly wrong. Otherwise, I doubt Paul would even try to get it changed.

As far as I know, the Kentucky law simply says that he cannot appear on the ballot twice in Kentucky.

[KingNothing]

Alison Lundergan Grimes is possibly the ugliest name in American political history.

[robertwerden]

I suggest that Rand Paul write of the general elections 8 electoral votes Kentucky has and focus on the 55 that California has. After all, from 1968 to 1988 California voted Republican. So it is not a impossible idea that Rand, who has strong political following in silicon valley could not take California back. If he did, he would not even need the measly 8 votes from his home state.

[Mr.NoSmile]

As far as I know, the Kentucky law simply says that he cannot appear on the ballot twice in Kentucky.

Which is what Grimes echoed.

[NOVALibertarian]

I suggest that Rand Paul write of the general elections 8 electoral votes Kentucky has and focus on the 55 that California has. After all, from 1968 to 1988 California voted Republican. So it is not a impossible idea that Rand, who has strong political following in silicon valley could not take California back. If he did, he would not even need the measly 8 votes from his home state.

I don't think that would be feasible in 2016, although it could become a long-shot swing state in 2020 if Rand Paul's first term in office is a success. Campaign there in 2016? Sure. Abandon six potential electoral votes for fifty-five that will almost certainly go Democrat in 2016? That would be a dumb political move in an election that will certainly be a close one.

[Dary]

As far as I know, the Kentucky law simply says that he cannot appear on the ballot twice in Kentucky.

Which is what Grimes echoed.

Meaning that he could run as a write in candidate for one office or the other.

[MaxPower]

He should simply not appear on the presidential primary ballot in Kentucky, except perhaps as a write-in candidate, and then, in the event that he wins the presidential nomination, drop out of the Senate race so that he can be in the Kentucky general presidential election.

[archer1600]

He should simply not appear on the presidential primary ballot in Kentucky, except perhaps as a write-in candidate, and then, in the event that he wins the presidential nomination, drop out of the Senate race so that he can be in the Kentucky general presidential election.

Ive litterally heard no one refute this idea.

[tsai3904]

Ive litterally heard no one refute this idea.

He wants to run for both seats. In the scenario that he wins both the Senate and Presidential nomination, he doesn't want to drop out of the Senate race.

[specsaregood]

He wants to run for both seats. In the scenario that he wins both the Senate and Presidential nomination, he doesn't want to drop out of the Senate race.

The real problem being if he won the presidency, wouldn't the seat be appointed by a Democrat governor?

[tsai3904]

The real problem being if he won the presidency, wouldn't the seat be appointed by a Democrat governor?

If he won the Senate and Presidency, his Senate seat would be appointed by the Governor elected in November 2015. The appointed Senator would serve for two years until a special election in 2018.

[specsaregood]

If he won the Senate and Presidency, his Senate seat would be appointed by the Governor elected in November 2015. The appointed Senator would serve for two years until a special election in 2018.

Right and if history is any indication, that governor will most likely be a democrat. In reality it should be the GOP voters that are against him running for both seats and dem voters should be for it.

[Ronin Truth]

According to what legitimate authority?

[Paul4Prez]

None of the leading presidential candidates are really on the ballot in Kentucky, or any state. What's on the ballot is a slate of Electors pledged to that candidate. Rand would just need a dummy slate nominally pledged to someone else to get on the Kentucky presidential ballot. Then when he wins, the dummy candidate drops out and endorses Rand Paul.

[tsai3904]

None of the leading presidential candidates are really on the ballot in Kentucky, or any state. What's on the ballot is a slate of Electors pledged to that candidate. Rand would just need a dummy slate nominally pledged to someone else to get on the Kentucky presidential ballot. Then when he wins, the dummy candidate drops out and endorses Rand Paul.

Kentucky election law:

118.136 "Dummy" candidates prohibited.

No person shall file a notification and declaration to become a candidate in a primary election as a pretended, fictitious or "dummy" candidate for the purpose of influencing or controlling the selection of challengers or inspectors or officers of election, nor shall any person solicit, persuade, urge, influence or induce another person to file a notification and declaration with the intention that such person become a pretended, fictitious or "dummy" candidate for the purpose of influencing or controlling the selection of challengers or inspectors or officers of election.

http://www.lrc.ky.gov/Statutes/statute.aspx?id=27581

[Brett85]

He should simply not appear on the presidential primary ballot in Kentucky, except perhaps as a write-in candidate, and then, in the event that he wins the presidential nomination, drop out of the Senate race so that he can be in the Kentucky general presidential election.

The problem is that he can't drop out of the Senate race. Kentucky law states that in order to get your name removed from the ballot in a Senate race, you either have to be dead or be declared insane by a judge.

[RonPaulFanInGA]