Rand Paul asks Kentucky GOP leaders for a presidential caucus in 2016

[tsai3904]

Rand Paul asks Kentucky GOP leaders for a presidential caucus in 2016

Requesting help to avoid a "costly and time-consuming legal challenge," U.S. Sen. Rand Paul is asking members of the Republican Party of Kentucky's central committee to create a presidential caucus in 2016.

In a letter dated Feb. 9, Paul told GOP leaders that an earlier presidential preference vote would give Kentuckians "more leverage to be relevant."

"As you may have heard, you, as a member of the Kentucky Republican Central Committee, will be the one to decide if you want to help me get an equal chance at the nomination," Paul wrote.

The letter went out to hundreds of other Kentucky Republicans ahead of the party's 54-member executive committee meeting on March 7 in Bowling Green, where Paul will pitch the caucus idea to members for a vote.

...

More:
http://www.kentucky.com/2015/02/12/3...p-leaders.html

[philipped]

In his strongest sign yet that he will run for president, U.S. Sen. Rand Paul asked state party leaders this week for a presidential caucus in 2016 to avoid a costly legal battle on whether he can run for president and re-election to his Senate office at the same time.

The Kentucky Republican wrote to the state party's Central Committee on Feb. 9, first reported by the Lexington Herald-Leader, asking for a change in the rules so that he "can be treated equally compared to other potential candidates for the Presidency."

Paul has already said he will run for re-election to his Senate seat in 2016. If he also runs for president, he would appear on the state's May 2016 primary ballot twice, which is not allowed under state law. But if the state party chooses its presidential nominee through a caucus on a different date, Paul would only appear on the ballot as a U.S. Senate candidate.

Paul has routinely said he has not decided if he will run for president. But his letter strongly implied he has made his decision.

"I believe I can keep helping the people of Kentucky as Senator, but I think there is no doubt I could help them even more as President," Paul wrote. "I hope that would make Kentucky proud if I were to do so."

The Republican Party of Kentucky's Central Committee is scheduled to meet in Bowling Green on March 7 to discuss the idea, and Paul noted in his letter he will be there to personally make his pitch. Paul wants a caucus in March, moving Kentucky's primary earlier in the schedule but not far enough to incur penalties from the Republican National Committee. The caucus would only be for president, meaning other federal and state races would still be decided in a May primary.

And if the party doesn't like it, they can always change it back, Paul said.

"When I first ran for office, I had a full time job and kept it throughout the campaign," Paul said. "My pledge to you is that I will treat my current job as seriously as I treated being a doctor while running for office in 2010. I will fulfill my duties in the Senate."

If approved, the concept would only fix Paul's problem in the presidential primary. But if he wins the nomination, he would still likely need a court order to appear on the ballot twice in the general election in Kentucky.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireS...-2016-28919033

Can anyone say Green light?

[Brett85]

He would still face a big problem in the general election. He would lose Kentucky's 8 electoral votes in the general election if he couldn't get a court to strike down the law.

[Brett85]

It is unclear from the letter how a move to a caucus would help Republicans if Paul were to win the nomination for president. Under Kentucky law, there is no provision for substituting candidates on the ballot after the filing deadline, which means the GOP probably couldn't field another candidate for U.S. Senate if Paul also won that primary election.

...

[Brett85]

On second thought, would it work for Rand to just have his wife file for President in the state of Kentucky, and then just instruct those delegates to vote for Rand for President? That seems like an option, but I'm not sure.

[philipped]

On second thought, would it work for Rand to just have his wife file for President in the state of Kentucky, and then just instruct those delegates to vote for Rand for President? That seems like an option, but I'm not sure.

Where's Massie when you need him?

[tsai3904]

On second thought, would it work for Rand to just have his wife file for President in the state of Kentucky, and then just instruct those delegates to vote for Rand for President? That seems like an option, but I'm not sure.

This Kentucky statute may or may not apply:

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]

This Kentucky statute may or may not apply:



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

It doesn't seem like that would apply. For one thing, it only refers to the primary and not the general election.

[anaconda]

On second thought, would it work for Rand to just have his wife file for President in the state of Kentucky, and then just instruct those delegates to vote for Rand for President? That seems like an option, but I'm not sure.

This has been my longstanding question. But could the RNC could simply "unseat" those delegates like they did to Ron in 2012?

[anaconda]

Would it be complete suicide for the KY GOP to do this? In fact, why would they? Their establishment overlords might be very angry with them.

[William Tell]

Would it be complete suicide for the KY GOP to do this? In fact, why would they? Their establishment overlords might be very angry with them.

Rand Paul is the establishment in Kentucky now. And McConnell is allegedly in support of his running. I know the Texas GOP has not been happy with how the RNC has ignored the grassroots. And the TX GOP is doing better than most. I don't see political suicide in any of this.

[Brett85]

It seems like for the general election, the only other option would be for Rand to withdraw from the Senate race and for some other candidate to run as a write in candidate for Senate. The law allows a candidate to advertise that they're a write in candidate in polling places, so that could potentially work.

[Crashland]

It seems like for the general election, the only other option would be for Rand to withdraw from the Senate race and for some other candidate to run as a write in candidate for Senate. The law allows a candidate to advertise that they're a write in candidate in polling places, so that could potentially work.

He would have to withdraw early enough to not be printed on the ballot as the GOP senate candidate. Not sure when the deadline for doing that might be, or is that even possible to do once you have won the GOP senate primary?

[Brett85]

He would have to withdraw early enough to not be printed on the ballot as the GOP senate candidate. Not sure when the deadline for doing that might be, or is that even possible to do once you have won the GOP senate primary?

I could be wrong, but I thought it was possible to withdraw, but just that you can't replace a candidate who withdraws with another candidate.

[anaconda]

It doesn't seem like that would apply. For one thing, it only refers to the primary and not the general election.

But the "dummy" candidate needs to be on the KY primary ballot....

[Brett85]

But the "dummy" candidate needs to be on the KY primary ballot....

Oh yeah. I guess so. I hope Rand's people have some plan for what to do if he actually wins the GOP nomination. I hope that Rand doesn't have it in his mind that he's not likely to win, so he's not going to worry about what he'll have to do if he wins the GOP nomination.

[Foreigner]

My understanding is that if Rand wins the GOP nomination, he would either have to fold the KY electoral votes in the general, or withdraw from his simultaneous senate bid. (which could hand the dems a senate seat)

Best bet would be to have a Paul ally, who also would be a good candidate on his own, file for the GOP nomination for senate in addition to Paul. So if Rand wins the GOP nomination for president, Rand withdraws from the senate bid, and his ally goes into campaign modus for senate. I don't think this should be Thomas Massie, since then he would throw away his congress-seat in the event Paul doesn't become the GOP nominee.

If this doesn't happen, a solid Republican can always run as an independent, but this isn't as good of a plan as having the GOP nomination.

I think folding the electoral votes for KY would be a PR disaster for Paul, prompting cries of "He isn't even trying" and "Folding the nomination to Hillary to further his personal ambitions" etc.

[Brett85]

I think folding the electoral votes for KY would be a PR disaster for Paul, prompting cries of "He isn't even trying" and "Folding the nomination to Hillary to further his personal ambitions" etc.

But couldn't he still run a write in campaign for President in Kentucky? Lisa Murkowski won her Senate race pretty easily running as a write in candidate. It can be done.

[Foreigner]

But couldn't he still run a write in campaign for President in Kentucky? Lisa Murkowski won her Senate race pretty easily running as a write in candidate. It can be done.

True, forgot about that. Still, riskier than having somebody on the actual ballot. You can bet the DNC is gonna spend enormous sums to promote their candidate if they see an opening.

[Brett85]

But the "dummy" candidate needs to be on the KY primary ballot....

Wait, lets go back to this again. Why would the dummy candidate need to be on the KY primary ballot for President to be on the general election ballot? If Rand won the GOP nomination, why couldn't he just choose not to file for the Presidential ballot in Kentucky and have Kelly file instead? Does the law require that the person who actually wins the GOP nomination has to be the one on the ballot in the Presidential race? Even if that were the case, that would mean that it also wouldn't work for Rand to have Kelly on the ballot in the primary election either.

[anaconda]

Wait, lets go back to this again. Why would the dummy candidate need to be on the KY primary ballot for President to be on the general election ballot? If Rand won the GOP nomination, why couldn't he just choose not to file for the Presidential ballot in Kentucky and have Kelly file instead? Does the law require that the person who actually wins the GOP nomination has to be the one on the ballot in the Presidential race? Even if that were the case, that would mean that it also wouldn't work for Rand to have Kelly on the ballot in the primary election either.

I'm assuming that the reason for "dummy" candidates is so that Rand can stay off the ballot for that particular race but collect the delegates at the convention(s). If Rand doesn't have a stand-in for the primary he can't collect primary delegates. If he doesn't have a stand-in for the general election he can't collect general election delegates. Kelley might have to run for POTUS in both the primary and the general. I'm assuming you are correct about your inference that Rand would need to stay off of the presidential general election ballot in Kentucky since he would have presumably not filed in that state (but I'm talking over my pay grade here..I don't recall that primary winners need to file a second time - I think they file just once before the primaries begin, no?..). I think the best approach is for Rand to get on the ballot in KY for Senate and mount an aggressive write-in campaign for POTUS in KY. Then it will look like he's fully committed and serious. Everyone will try to attack him as being not committed but he should be able to spin that away quite easily. Rand could say his attackers are inferring that Kentuckians are too stupid to write his name in the ballot booth and object to their condescending indignity. Might be a great approach.

[r3volution 3.0]

So, if this passes, the KY presidential primary will be in March and the KY senatorial primary will be in May.

By May, it will be 100% clear whether or not Rand is going to be the GOP nominee for president.

If he is, then he can drop out of the senate primary and endorse someone else (an ally who will have been planted in advance), who will take his senate seat no matter what happens to Rand in the presidential general election.

If he's not, then he stays in the senate primary and keeps his seat.

[anaconda]

So, if this passes, the KY presidential primary will be in March and the KY senatorial primary will be in May.

By May, it will be 100% clear whether or not Rand is going to be the GOP nominee for president.

If he is, then he can drop out of the senate primary and endorse someone else (an ally who will have been planted in advance), who will take his senate seat no matter what happens to Rand in the presidential general election.

If he's not, then he stays in the senate primary and keeps his seat.

Can we confirm that these events would transpire before filing deadlines? I'm thinking not...I believe Ron filed in early 2007, for example, for 2008.

[r3volution 3.0]

Can we confirm that these events would transpire before filing deadlines? I'm thinking not...I believe Ron filed in early 2007, for example, for 2008.

IIRC the filing deadline for both Kentucky primaries is in January 2016.

So, if the plan is as I laid out, Rand would file for both, and his chosen replacement would file for senate only.

Then Rand would be on the ballot in every state in the presidential primary.

By May when the KY senate primary comes along, Rand can drop out and endorse his replacement (if he's winning the presidential primary), or his replacement can drop out and endorse him (if he's not).

[JJ2]

IIRC the filing deadline for both Kentucky primaries is in January 2016.

So, if the plan is as I laid out, Rand would file for both, and his chosen replacement would file for senate only.

Then Rand would be on the ballot in every state in the presidential primary.

By May when the KY senate primary comes along, Rand can drop out and endorse his replacement (if he's winning the presidential primary), or his replacement can drop out and endorse him (if he's not).

Sounds like a good idea and that way the GOP doesn't have to worry about losing a Senate seat by nominating Rand.

[eleganz]

IIRC the filing deadline for both Kentucky primaries is in January 2016.

So, if the plan is as I laid out, Rand would file for both, and his chosen replacement would file for senate only.

Then Rand would be on the ballot in every state in the presidential primary.

By May when the KY senate primary comes along, Rand can drop out and endorse his replacement (if he's winning the presidential primary), or his replacement can drop out and endorse him (if he's not).

Yea but it seems like Rand wants KY GOP to move their caucus to before Super Tuesday?

[NoOneButPaul]

I think this is a huge issue that needs to be resolved...

[cindy25]

He would still face a big problem in the general election. He would lose Kentucky's 8 electoral votes in the general election if he couldn't get a court to strike down the law.

people don't vote for president, they vote for electors. you can , if you ask, even split your vote for electors on a write in ballot. so just run uncommitted Republican electors.

[cindy25]

Sounds like a good idea and that way the GOP doesn't have to worry about losing a Senate seat by nominating Rand.

the problem with this scenario is that Massie should be next in line, and would have to give up his house seat just to be a stand in. picking a 2nd level candidate could cost the senate seat anyway.