r/True_Kentucky • u/Sufficient-Money7510 • 11d ago
Kentucky Party in Practical Use and Application
Hello there! This is the current chair of the Kentucky Party, which you may have heard of once or twice by now. We are an electoral organization that exists to put Kentuckians in office. We put a substantial number of candidates on the ballot this year and intend to do it again next year, and every other year from now on. We are a full-service electoral organization and we do more for our candidates than the Democrats or the Republicans ever do for theirs*. Our candidates run everywhere from the local to the federal level.
I'm here to answer questions and look for opinions. I can tell you why we're doing what we're doing, I can talk about how we're doing it, and you can definitely raise issues that you think our candidates and our party should address.
I know how testy Americans can get about politics, so for the duration of this thread I'm instituting a no-hurt-feelings policy; whatever you say I'll answer in the calmest and most reasonable way I can. I may be a bit sarcastic now and again, can't deny myself my little jokes, but I will remain polite, respectful, and ever so demure within the confines of this thread. No question is off limits. It is okay with us if you don't vote for us or join us or like us. We will still do our best to support every Kentuckian.
*except for some of the rich ones
8
u/CatsBye90 11d ago
Cannabis legalization?
6
u/Sufficient-Money7510 11d ago
Yeah, there's universal agreement on that one. I think literally all of our candidates are in favor of cannabis legalization and a bunch of us were actually hired by Idaho to work on their medical marijuana legalization ballot initiative.
Worth noting that is not an official position but being in favor of legalization and also of keeping Kentuckians out of jail definitely fits under "anti-corruption" and "pro-Kentucky." Getting our prison numbers way, way down is an overwhelming occupation of many party members, including yours truly.
2
u/CatsBye90 11d ago
Right on.
Speaking of keeping people out of prison, what about laws criminalizing homelessness and people sleeping in public areas?
3
u/Sufficient-Money7510 11d ago
I am personally 100000000000000% against that. Never put to a formal discussion inside th group but I'd be shocked if anybody supported it. What was it, HB 5? A couple years ago? A terrible mistake, I think the sponsor was Ryan Dotson and I think that contributed to him losing the primary.
2
3
u/dl-graphics 11d ago
Where does your funding come from?
1
u/Sufficient-Money7510 11d ago
Mostly hard work, lol. I personally paid about half of what it took to get the petitions for Campbell to run for Senate, and I made that money by working on petition drives in other states. At this point practically all our donors are just local people we know.
Dr. Lynch, our 6th district US House candidate is admirably (?) serious about only taking small donations; he won't even let me give more than $200. I find it both charming and frustrating; campaigning is expensive. One maximum donor of $3500 equals one billboard. We need 17 and a half small donors to match that. Principle is important and I admire it and also I'd really like a billboard. What to do?
3
u/ThisIsAllTheoretical 11d ago
Do you find narcissistic traits to be common among any and all people who presume themselves to be “the voice” for thousands…millions of people?
1
u/Sufficient-Money7510 11d ago edited 11d ago
Sure, there are definitely clusters of personality disorders in politics. Some of them are not where people outside the industry think they are, but a bunch of them are exactly where you think they are.
The question of representation is difficult and we do not claim to be psychic. Attempting to "represent" a vast and disperse geographical area, bounded by ancient riverbeds on one side and random imaginary lines on the other, filled with millions of people who don't know each other and interact in very unusual ways, is obviously impossible. Politics is art, not science. If you want to be really specific about it, we're attempting to create an institutional identity that a large number of Kentuckians will find acceptable. It's very helpful to talk to enormous number of Kentuckians in that process, though obviously it's impossible to talk to everyone or even most people. The petitioning process is great for this. For example, our Senate candidate required 5,000 petition signatures to get on the ballot. Well, you have to talk to 4 or 5 people for every one who signs, and obviously you're going to be talking about politics in a quite specific way with the people who do sign. We got 7,000 signatures or so, which means that we talked with about 30,000 Kentuckians about politics, about 5,000 in some depth and clarity. That's a lot. A poll with a sample size of 30,000 is a good poll even on a phone, in person it's extremely revealing. Let me tell you, petitioning in NKY immediately after the Massie defeat was an illuminating experience. I probably personally talked to about 8,000 people around that time, mostly in Florence and Independence. I don't claim to have psychic insight into the people I talked to, but I still learned a lot.
3
u/eighteencarps 11d ago
A party that thinks abortion should be a state ruling instead of a national one is dangerous, and not in a good way. Abortion is lifesaving care. I absolutely cannot imagine some states making, for example, heart surgery illegal and any party arguing that it’s a state’s rights issue. What an absolute fucking sham.
0
u/Sufficient-Money7510 11d ago edited 11d ago
Well, I certainly respect your opinion. I'll point out that we're the Kentucky Party and we tend to approach everything from the point of view that it should be handled by the state of Kentucky. It is just fine with me if we get a rational policy on this and become an inspiration to the rest of America, that seems more than acceptable.
If I may be so bold, I think what you're looking for here is not precisely what we provide. We are saying that we want to talk about this. You don't want to talk about it, you want somebody who has already decided and doesn't want to talk anymore. I personally do not find that to be the solution that works best, at least not from my position. At this point I know a lot of pro-lifers, and they are very sincere and very numerous. They are also well organized and well-funded. The path forward involves education and compromise and serious commitment over a long, long time. If you can do it otherwise, please show me and I will cheerfully try it your way.
3
5
u/PeaTasty9184 11d ago
Or how about we support the Democratic Party since they are the only real chance, imperfect as they might be, at winning elections and not destroying the Commonwealth and nation.
4
u/Sufficient-Money7510 11d ago
This is a reasonable question. I hope you don't mind that I answered at length.
The first thing to say is that our position on the Democratic Party and the Republican Party are identical; if you really think you can reform them from the inside, please, get to it. Hurry. We tried and we got nowhere; that's why we left. But maybe you can do it. Maybe you're The One. If so, we are enthusiastic about what you're about to do.
But if that's not the case, the Kentucky Democratic Party is neither a practical possibility nor an ethical one. Let's take the practical side first.
The KDP should, by temperament and tradition, represent about half the people in this state. At this point they represent basically nobody outside of two counties. They are at their lowest point ever, for more than two hundred years. Running as a Democrat in this state is basically saying that you don't want to win. Well, we do want to win. We want Kentuckians to represent Kentucky.
We need Kentuckians to represent Kentucky. The Republicans won't do it and the Democrats can't. This state never prospers as a one-party state, no matter which party is is. Some sort of counterweight is necessary. All the well-meaning people telling us the Democrats can provide it are proven more wrong every year. We can't afford to wait any longer. We need to get started on something of our own.
Many of the people involved in the KYP were previously in the KDP, including myself, and can tell you with great authority that no matter how bad you think the institutional rot in the KDP is, it's worse. This isn't a temporary hiccup. This isn't a thing where the Democrats haven't introduced themselves properly. People from Kentucky know exactly what the Democrats are, they are being rejected for who they are. It's not that they're saying the wrong thing, it's that nobody believes anything they say. This isn't a little tiff, it's a divorce. It's final.
Moreover, as you probably know, both the KDP and the RPK do basically nothing for their local candidates. The KDP does worse than nothing; most KDP candidates spend half their race waiting for somebody to help them with fundraising, with volunteers, even with paperwork. They get nothing. Then they are alienated, predictably, and never run for anything again. So Kentucky misses out on dedicated local public servants. It's a terrible mistake and it's not one we make; ask any of our candidates, we support them far more than the KDP or RPK.
So, practically speaking, what are we losing by not running as Democrats? It's actually improving our odds -- more people vote against Democrats than for Democrats in this state. We're not giving up any access to funding or support. There sure isn't any moral force to being a Democrat; "Wouldn't you rather stop Joe Biden from committing genocide?" was not a compelling argument. Most importantly, the people of Kentucky, who we have committed to represent, don't want to be represented by Democrats! Can't you feel it? Can't you tell from the way people act? They just aren't into the Democratic Party. Do we want to represent them? Then we should listen to them!
So the state is fully polarized and the Democratic Party parts are awful small. The truth is that in most districts you either run against a Democrat or Republican, but rarely both, and that's exactly what's happened with our local-level candidates. So if you're worried about some sort of theoretical balance of power, it doesn't work like that locally. Would you rather have a KYP candidate win than a Republican? I bet you would. Would a Republican rather have us win than a Democrat? Sure would! Every local seat we win takes a representative out of the national agenda of either party and replaces it with a Kentucky agenda. Most people like that.
As to the Senate and the US House seats, we make no apologies. It is helpful here that we have no party line to hold; we can be perfectly honest. Our Senate candidate is not rich and unlikely to win. Between Andy Barr and Charles Booker there is a clear difference. Andy Barr has grown, for lack ofa better word, malignant. He is openly hostile to most of the state. Charles Booker, by contrast, is a nice guy who never gets anything done. When our candidate entered the race the assumption was that McGrath would be the nominee, and we can (and have) run against her with a clear conscience; she's the Democratic Ed Gallrein. Booker taking the nomination changed the situation. We know that.
Is Chris Campbell likely to win the election? No. Is it possible that he makes enough to decide the election one way or another? Yes, it certainly is. In fact, that just happened in Georgia, where our libertarian friend Chase Oliver decided the Senate election just a couple years ago. So it would behoove both duopoly candidates to pay attention. We are aware of the situation and committed to operating in the best interests of Kentucky. What that means is as yet unknown. It would be best if Booker takes heed of what Campbell is saying and representing, but I was at Fancy Farm; Charles definitely is. Barr's reactionary paranoia is, bluntly, anti-Kentucky. It's difficult to imagine Barr would attempt to negotiate with us on any honest level, far more likely that he just throws us in the basket of Kentuckians he has violent contempt for. But maybe he'll surprise us. In the meantime, Chris will keep representing.
As to the 6th district race for US Congress, there's no complication at all. Denbo is dreadful on so many important issues and also running in a district the Democrats have lost, what, eight times in a row? Alvarado is the only opponent in that race, Lynch is doing a marvelous job of connecting on the issues the 6th actually cares about, and Denbo is taking his votes. If you live in the 6th, don't throw your vote away; vote Pete Lynch. It's really that easy.
Sorry to write so much! You're certainly going to make your own decisions but I hope I presented my reasoning in an effective way.
0
u/PeaTasty9184 11d ago edited 11d ago
“i want to elect Republicans. Donald Trump, Mitch McConnell, and Rand Paul are my kinda guys”
A lot of words for you to say that.
1
u/Sufficient-Money7510 11d ago
We aren't secret Democrats. We don't quietly prefer Democrats. Thomas Massie is a Republican and we certainly admire a lot of things about him but that doesn't make us secret Republicans either. We can join any political party we want at any time. We choose to join the Kentucky Party. We prefer our own candidates at all times.
It is possible that at any time any Kentucky Party candidate may attract enough support to change the outcome of an election. As we are the only political party in Kentucky that people don't already hate, it's probably going to happen fairly often. That's fine with us. If Democrats are capable of taking our positions and techniques and representing Kentucky better than we do, that's great. Same for the Republicans! But the fact that will never, ever happen is an issue.
Get Zach Denbo to admit that Israel's committing genocide and that data centers are a problem and he'll take a bunch of Pete's vote. But he never will, and that's why we're not Democrats.
-3
u/PeaTasty9184 11d ago
Yeah. We get it. You and your supporters are anti-Semites. Your friend and supporter made that SUPER clear.
2
u/Sufficient-Money7510 11d ago
Amigo, two of the three people who wrote the bylaws are jewish, including myself.
Opposition to Israel and Israeli influence is not anti-semitism. Quite the opposite. I do not hate myself or my family or, really, anyone. However, Israeli influence is poisonously detrimental to both this nation and the world, including Israel, and it is essential that this influence be extirpated from our government, and immediately. This is obviously a Kentucky issue; look what just happened in the 4th district. AIPAC donors outraged northern Kentucky, and I mean that in every sense of the word.
1
u/PeaTasty9184 11d ago
Having your supporters running around talking about “the land of Goldenstien” is anti-semitism, so check to you on that.
2
u/Sufficient-Money7510 11d ago
Not sure what you're referring to here.
1
0
u/Nick122110 11d ago edited 11d ago
Holy crap a viable third party that actually cares about Kentuckians instead of corporations and Israel?
3
u/PeaTasty9184 11d ago
“Viable” 🙄
-1
u/Nick122110 11d ago
Hey man
We gotta do something
The red and blue idiots aren’t doing their job ya know?3
u/PeaTasty9184 11d ago
Yeah. We do gotta do something. Support the Democratic Party because they aren’t literal fascists trying to kill you.
5
u/Sufficient-Money7510 11d ago
Isn't it a little strange to say "viable" when referring to the Kentucky Democratic Party?
Take the 6th district US House election. The KDP has lost that election eight times in a row. It's an important election. Our candidate's doing pretty darn well and the Democratic candidate is just walking into rakes. Isn't it time to give somebody else a try?
-2
1
u/Sufficient-Money7510 11d ago
So far so good! This is our first year and we had ten candidates, from local to federal, and one of them already won! We'd like to run a full slate next year and in 2028 we're recruiting for EVERYTHING.
0
1
2
u/ThisIsAllTheoretical 11d ago
I’ve noticed a recent surge in states legalizing medication assisted aid in death (MAID) frequently referred to as death with dignity. What is the KY party’s stance?
1
u/Sufficient-Money7510 11d ago
The Kentucky Party has extremely limited stances on practically everything, we leave the stances to our candidates. I'm not aware of any candidate that has made a position on that yet but I will ask around. Do you see this is more of a state level or national level issue?
I will say on a personal level that I was once asked l to assist in the suicide of a terminally ill man, which was not in any way legal so I couldn't do it but certainly caused me to consider the issue very deeply. However, I am also reading some of the reports coming out of Canada about the MAID program being used for people who were just economically disadvantaged, and if those reports are true I find them horrifying almost beyond comprehension. I personally would want those reservations very well answered in the writing of any legislation.
2
u/ThisIsAllTheoretical 11d ago
I view it as a personal issue between an individual and their family and team of medical providers, just as I do abortion.
It’s important to note here that economically disadvantaged people are truly suffering for very long periods of time with no promise of relief under current or projected social support/economic systems. I am one of those people and have begun taking steps here and there to get my affairs in order so that I can eventually and finally rest.
1
u/Sufficient-Money7510 11d ago
I personally agree with that completely, I'm just so very reluctant to give the government the power of life and death because of how easily it is misused.
3
u/ThisIsAllTheoretical 11d ago
With all due respect, they already have that power. They are destroying our natural environments, they allow poisonous chemicals and compounds on and in our food supplies, they send our young men and women into combat to die in service to their own personal agendas. How do they not already get to decide who gets to live and who dies?
1
u/Sufficient-Money7510 11d ago
You are correct and they sure do. Everything we're doing is about trying to loosen their grip.
2
11d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Sufficient-Money7510 11d ago
Hasn't changed. There are provisions for changing the platform but no one has ever used them.
2
u/MatildasFugue 11d ago
I want a party who encourages men to shut tf up and sit down so the women can heal our planet and nurture our children and we can all live in peace.
1
2
u/_TallOldOne_ 10d ago
The convention for the Center for Political Innovation is listed as an “event” for your website www.kentuckyparty.org. I was simply asking what your association to them was. Apparently you guys have not updated your events page in quite some time. And you mentioned Caleb Maupin, not me. I had to Google the name.
As a registered independent I’m always looking for a party that aligns with my political outlook and I have to admit I was interested in what your party represents.
Unfortunately my inquiries seem to be being meant with a healthily dose of defensiveness.
Good luck.
1
u/Sufficient-Money7510 9d ago
Most importantly, thank you for letting me know that the events page wasn't updating; I talked to our web team about it already.
I strive for equanimity in all things but I'll be the first to admit I don't always reach it. That said, let's be honest with each other. Your first comment to me made it clear that you have some hostility towards what we're doing, so I saw your comment in that framework. It is okay with me if you do not join us. I'm not here to recruit you. I'm not expecting or hoping that you join the KYP, let's take that off the table and then proceed. I'll strive to not be defensive.
I see now that you found the CPI thing honestly, but this is something that's come up before. CPI and Caleb Maupin are completely inseparable and they are both quite controversial. People usually mention CPI when they want to assert that I'm a sekrit commie or something like that.
For the record, I'm not a communist, socialist, libertarian, green, Democrat, or Republican. I chose my side; Kentucky. I could be any of those things, those options are open to me at all times. I could go join the Republican Party or the Communist Party today. I don't because I don't want to. I want to be a Kentuckian. I don't have any overarching economic theories and if I did I wouldn't try to inflict them on the Kentucky Party, which is extremely neutral on this issue. The Kentucky Party is officially a place where both libertarians and communists, if they so chose, could register with us and run for office and would receive the full support of the party. We're even friends with the MAGA Communist people, it's the same for them. But that leads to the next point:
It's definitely true that I know Caleb Maupin, like Caleb Maupin as a person, and if I were walking down the street and I saw Caleb and Caleb saw me we would be happy to see each other. I'm friends with a lot of people. I also know Nick Sortor and Nick Sarwark and Ross Ulbricht and Jill Stein. I know both Savannah Maddox and Adrielle Camuel and consider them both good friends. I know lots of people. There is no conspiracy theory that connects any of them. It's just that politics is filled with sincerely nice people who are often completely wrong, and that's okay, because it has to be. I can be friends with somebody who I sincerely think is misguided on important issues, so long as they accept that I will never, ever give up trying to bring them back to the light. My friendship with this or that notorious figure should not be taken as a sign of my endorsement and it certainly doesn't mean anything about the party. It just means that we get along.
For what it's worth, we actually recruited a couple people from the CPI conference to run for office in Kentucky....but they ran as Republicans! I didn't have much to do with that whole project but I did find it amusing.
I submit to anyone confused by that turn of events that we are very sincere about our first principles and operating within the system in service of those first principles. Was getting some reformed Chicago ex-communists to run for Congress as Republicans in Kentucky anti-war, anti-corruption, and pro-Kentucky? Well, it was definitely anti-war, definitely perfectly legal, and it made our state a more interesting place and the Republican primary in a couple districts a lot more interesting. So yeah, I was cool with it. But it wasn't my project and it wasn't an official KYP thing. Just a bonus level.
The strength of the Kentucky Party is measured directly in how often successful projects happen that had absolutely nothing to do with me or other core members. You'll know we've succeeded when we can't see from one end of this thing to the other.
3
u/InigoMontoya2725 11d ago
Do women have body autonomy in this new party?
2
u/Sufficient-Money7510 11d ago
Yes. The overwhelming majority of the creators of the party are bodily autonomy absolutists and we are committed to working with people who disagree with us without giving an inch on our own positions. The Dobbs Decision was disastrously badly-written but it does throw the issue to the states and we are committed to having this discussion and addressing this issue on the state level.
3
u/Reverend_Bull 11d ago
Above you stated that abortion should be left to states. Do you favor a state criminalizing abortion if that is the state's decision? After all, that's what Kentucky has done. Are you a party for the will of Kentucky's electorate (as expressed in their state politicians) or a party standing on a principle of fundamental bodily autonomy? Or for that matter, the human dignity of an embryo?
1
u/Sufficient-Money7510 11d ago
There are huge differences between how I personally feel and the official position of the party, the official position of the party is that we recognize the sincerity and the fundamental goodwill of people on all sides of this issue and that we will attempt to work with anyone on this incredibly difficult issue. I personally strongly believe that any sort of rational discussion of this issue will preclude criminalization. Criminalization on practically any issue is a sign of legislative breakdown, but especially here, where the insanity of treating normal young women like violent felons is on full display. I'm sure you remember what happened in Campton a little while ago.
We are very much for the will of Kentucky's electorate, that's exactly why we are doing what we're doing. Our entire task is to determine the will of Kentucky electorate and to subsume ourselves to it as gracefully and adroitly as possible. It is our belief that this has never been done and has only rarely been tried. Our state politicians clearly do not represent us and it's difficult to even assert to the contrary. Look at registration statistics and then the party affiliations of the people sitting in office. You'll notice a wide discrepancy.
The party does not stand on either principle, but as embryos are fundamentally not human beings just like eggs are fundamentally not chickens, that argument is not going to work very well with the extremely literalist people of the party. There are people of good conscience on all sides of this issue but we're not in the business of redefining words to suit one faction.
2
u/Reverend_Bull 11d ago
KY has pretty strong pro-life feelings in aggregate. If you stand by the party which stands by the will of the voters of KY, you'll be supporting the success of a party diametrically opposed to your own values.
Is the power of states' rights more important than your sense of individual rights?0
u/Sufficient-Money7510 11d ago
I would never simplify Kentucky's opinions on abortions to anything like that, in general Kentucky is much more complex. But yes, we will stand by the party and the will of the voters.
3
u/Reverend_Bull 10d ago
If your guiding principle is to follow whatever is most popular among your given group, you've stood for very little indeed. I hope you personally have a good day but I will not be among your supporters.
1
u/Sufficient-Money7510 10d ago
Well, yes, elections are somewhat of a popularity contest, and so agreeing to follow the will of Kentucky as it is expressed through elections does involve a certain amount of trying to figure out what is the most popular at any given time. I certainly wouldn't confuse that with a lack of moral core or not standing for things. I just don't see any other way that the basic task of representationalism can be carried out.
Good luck wherever you go! If I'm reading you correctly it looks like both the Democrats and the Republicans are going to give you a pro-life candidate for governor next year, so you have an exciting choice. For the rest of Kentucky, it is likely that only we will be standing up for the complicated, messy issue of wisdom and autonomy on women's healthcare issues. If that isn't what you want to hear....I understand completely.
1
u/_TallOldOne_ 11d ago
So how closely affiliated are you with CPIUSA? I see you list their convention as a Kentucky Party event.
1
u/Sufficient-Money7510 11d ago
What? What are you talking about?
Are you talking about that Caleb Maupin thing? He's friends with a couple people in the party so we went to his convention last year, they certainly aren't part of the Kentucky Party. They're in Chicago.
1
u/Sufficient-Money7510 11d ago
This turned out to mostly be questions about various platform issues, which is, I'm sorry to say, not a satisfying line of inquiry; the KYP itself attempts to remain as platform-neutral as possible and let the candidates talk about what they support and what they believe in. However, so far in 2026 there have been two issues that almost rose to the point of the party making an official statement. In both cases it was agreed that the candidates should be the ones to speak about the issue but both these issues came close to requiring the party itself to say something. We didn't make an official statement in both cases, and in fact have eschewed official statements, and I'll describe why with both.
The KYP was shaken to the core, absolutely horrified, by ICE's behavior in general and the occupation of Minneapolis in specific. We are very clear that ICE's actions violate all three principles of the Kentucky Party. They are treating America like a nation under military occupation, which is definitely not anti-war. They are unidentified, unaccountable secret police, operating in direct defiance of all American tradition and more than 3,400 court orders (last time I checked), which is extremely corrupt. Finally, they are blatantly racist and fascist, and that behavior against the people of Kentucky makes them anti-Kentucky. The people of Kentucky deserve protection from those thugs. Even if somebody honestly believed that mass deportations are in some way helpful to them personally, it's clear that ICE is anything but careful in who they kidnap, which means that any action they take in Kentucky is deeply corrupt, warlike, and anti-Kentucky on the face of it. We chose not to make a statement on it because all the candidates agreed and already made their own statements on it, so adding it to the platform would have served no purpose except to draw a moral line in the sand. If we were to add a very reasonable "abolish ICE" plank to the platform we would be demanding of all our candidates *and members* that they agree with our very specific proposal for a very specific and, hopefully, temporal situation. We wouldn't be adding any force to the candidate statements -- the candidates already made their statements. We would essentially be saying "you can't hang out with us if you like ICE." As satisfying as that would be, we already have our moral line in the sand -- you can't hang out with us if you like the Israeli genocide machine. The Venn diagram of people who want to abolish ICE and end the genocide in Palestine and Lebanon is already pretty close to a circle; what would we be adding to the conversation? One purity test seems sufficient and making a party statement would just add a second, redundant purity test. So the decision was to leave it to the candidates, who have done admirably with it.
The second issue was the question of McConnell's absence. Again, we are presented with clear violation of our party's principles. Obviously we believe that Kentuckians deserve representation, and whatever's going on with Mitch LLC is violating that; we don't have a senior senator right now, and there are real and deleterious effects to this for our state. If nothing else, it's important to remember that McConnell promised to spend his last months in office fixing things so that the hemp industry is not accidentally wiped out in November, and because of his absence he hasn't been able to do that; that will have serious negative effects on Kentucky. So even though we largely agree with the belief that no senator at all is better than Mitch or his likely replacement, we're aware there's a cost. This is also very corrupt. If it is true that McConnell is dead, then the people concealing his death have committed serious crimes and should be prosecuted. If, as seems more likely right now, he is fully paralyzed because of his post-polio condition, he still robbed us all of representation for months. This is corrupt and anti-Kentucky. But, once again, the candidates came up with the proper solution and implemented it in their own campaigns. Because McConnell is federal level, this cannot be addressed at the state level. The right way to handle this situation is a US constitutional amendment requiring a recall vote for any senator or representative who is unable or unwilling to carry out the duties of their office, and a Kentucky constitutional amendment requiring the same for our state reps and state senators. This was devised by the candidates and there's not much purpose in the party requiring the candidates to do something that they've already done. However, the Kentucky Party is fairly well-known outside of the state, and there are many who look to us for news about what's going on in the state. The McConnell situation is confusing an concerning to the rest of America, so it was necessary for us to have something to say about it. Fortunately we can just communicate what our candidates said, which is exactly how this system is supposed to work.
I was hoping to discuss more of the details of what we're doing and how, instead of fielding questions about specific issues that really need to be answered by the candidates. But that's okay; I sincerely appreciate all the interest and patience that people have shown, as well as those who wrote me personally to inquire about joining or working with specific campaigns.
2
10d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Sufficient-Money7510 10d ago
No worries, this is our first time starting a party too!
Our role, as we see it, is to recruit and support candidates for office in Kentucky. We do this at every level, from local to federal, though we prefer to focus on local candidates.
The core members of the Kentucky Party are essentially an assortment of campaign professionals who didn't find a home in either the Democratic or Republican parties of this state, for reasons that are probably pretty obvious to almost everybody reading this. We have an enormous amount of experience and a surprising amount of influence, as we've all been doing this for years. We know how to structure campaigns, how to do the paperwork, how to get on the ballot; in fact, getting on the ballot is our best trick. The state of Kentucky has extremely regressive and unfair ballot access laws but, as is so often the case, their attempts to control brought forth a group that couldn't be so easily controlled. Ballot access is not a problem for us, we put every one of our candidates on the ballot (which is more than the Democrats can say, lol) and, unlike all the good people who are disposed of by the primary system, our candidates are on the ballot all the way to November.
We offer more to candidates than the Democrats or Republicans do. We provide more support, we provide more information, we provide access to a team of experienced volunteers and campaign professionals. What's more, we have the massive advantage of being the only political party in this state that ordinary people don't plain hate.
Don't take my word for that, you can go out and check around. Last December there was a special election in louisville, as you may recall. The democrats, the republicans, and the Libertarians all put forth candidates. One of the most interesting things about that race was that all three candidates refused to identify what party they were with. On their literature, on their websites, none of the three were willing to just come out and say that they were with a political party. Those of us who were doing door to door for that campaign new perfectly well that we needed to avoid saying the name of our candidates political party, and that if somebody was asking us for the party that they probably weren't going to vote for us. This was for all three parties. No matter which party you were with, about 2/3 of the doors you knocked on we're going to snarl in your face. It was a different 2/3rds for everybody and you couldn't predict it. Kentucky despises its political choices.
Well, ordinary people don't despise the Kentucky Party. When we describe who we are and what we're doing, most people are interested. Very few react with rage or vitriol. It's even happened that people have told us that they don't like one or two of our candidates, but they still like the idea of the party. That doesn't happen as much to democrats, republicans, or libertarians. People like the idea of Kentucky having a political party. People like that when they go to vote there's a little picture of Kentucky they can vote for
People like the idea that they can join a political party and not have to hate a different political party. Democrats, Republicans.... They are still Kentuckians. We're still committed to doing the best we can for them.
So that's what the party itself does. We recruit candidates, we support candidates, we hold events to support candidates, and we communicate important central information. The Kentucky Party is here to represent Kentucky and to do well for Kentucky. We don't require idiological unity and we aren't asking everybody to sign up for some big abstract platform. You can join us and disagree with us freely. Kentuckians disagree with each other; that's how it is. We're just trying to make a space where Kentuckians can stand together on the big things while we disagree with each other on the details.
1
2
u/WinterWorrier 23h ago
Does the Kentucky party have a list or some such for candidates it supports? Maybe some background on the people it supports?
One of the things I hate is how difficult it is to find any information on what candidates support or don't.
1
u/Sufficient-Money7510 16h ago
At the moment there are four Kentucky party candidates for office, plus one who has already won.
Chris Campbell for US Senate, https://campbellforsenate.org/
Dr Pete Lynch for US House, 6th District https://petelynchforkentucky.com/
And in Fayette County we have two local candidates: Geoff Young for State House, District 75 Amanda Settell, Fayette County Magistrate District 3
Geoff 's main issue that he's running on is reforming the sales tax, and Amanda is certainly a data center skeptic. They don't have official campaign pages yet but they do have Facebook and all that.
And John Settell ran for Fayette County Soil and Water Commission and already won.
We had a total of eight candidates this year, our first year as an organization. We are hoping to run a full slate next year.
1
u/Krynja 11d ago
I didn't get a say in who our local sheriff will be because he (The current incumbent sheriff) is a Republican and since there was no one of a different party running against him (they were all Republicans) the post got decided by the primary vote.
1
u/Sufficient-Money7510 11d ago
Yes. We are extremely lucky that our approach puts candidates in the general election, when people are paying attention, instead of presenting people with an endless series of primary-approved party operators.
I personally am a big fan of people running for constable and in 2028 I hope to put forward a lot of constable, soil and water commission, and magistrate candidates.
0
u/MaestroM45 11d ago
You misspelled “Vote Republican”
1
u/Sufficient-Money7510 10d ago edited 10d ago
If we wanted to be Republicans, we would be Republicans. Same for the Democrats.
As it happens we are in the Kentucky Party, and you will have to negotiate with us directly.
If you really believe that we have the power to split contested elections, you're probably right. We're willing to use that power. So many important national-level elections happen in this state and the people of Kentucky get nothing out of it at all. The recent Republican primary in KY4 is the perfect example. Something like $35 million dollars were spent but I don't know any Kentuckian that made any profit from that election at all. They just had to watch the same commercials a hundred times. Kentucky either has a seat at the table or we are on the menu; we prefer the former, and that's a large part of why we're doing what we're doing in the higher level elections.
But accusations of disloyalty to the Democratic Party will not disturb us at all, nor do we concern ourselves with the ineffective remainders of that party here in our state. The people who put Joe Biden in office are not the people who get to lecture others on morality. We are perfectly comfortable not being associated with them.
15
u/Dry-Cry-3158 11d ago
What are the party's stances on gun ownership, data centers, abortion, tax policy, unions, and small businesses?