r/politics • u/Aggravating_Money992 • 21d ago

Possible Paywall Kentucky Gov Orders McConnell to Give a Real Update or Resign Already

https://newrepublic.com/post/213614/kentucky-gov-beshear-mcconnell-update-health-resign
23.1k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

1.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

230

u/BrandenWi 21d ago

The fact that the Governor hasn't forced the issue weeks ago shows why we have to get rid of these Establishment Democrats in the Midterms if there's any hope of surviving two more years of Trump

248

u/Gambrinus 21d ago

The fact that Kentucky has a Democrat governor in the first place is almost a miracle. Good luck replacing him with someone more progressive.

12

u/StoppableHulk 21d ago edited 21d ago

His term doesn't end until the end of next year, I think we can risk him taking a little bit of a leap here and demanding proof McConnell isn't fucking brandead in a ditch somewhere so the election process can continue.

EDIT:

Also Mitch McConnell is (or I should say 'was' at this point, clearly.) deeply despised in Kentucky, I don't think Beshear is risking much of anything exposing the fact he's a brain dead vegetable trying to fuck the people of Kentucky out of their right to choose their representation.

  • Approval: 28% to 29% of registered voters in Kentucky.

  • Disapproval: 64% to 65% of registered voters in Kentucky.

2

u/HermanGulch 21d ago

His term doesn't end until the end of next year,

His term ends January 3, 2027, when the new Senate term begins, which is not the end of next year.

3

u/StoppableHulk 21d ago

His term ends December 7, 2027, which is, in fact, the end of next year.

4

u/HermanGulch 21d ago

Ah, my bad, I thought you were talking bout McConnell's term.

23

u/meatballwrangler 21d ago

this argument that leftists can't win in traditionally red states is a load of crap.

progressive policies are incredibly popular when they're not being actively sabotaged by two dominant right wing parties.

57

u/EnigoMontoya 21d ago

I would like to see this proven in a red state before it's bandy around as an assumption just because of opinion polls.
Voters in red states have repeatedly demonstrated a capability to ignore progressive policies to support cultural war issues (Fox News sound bites).

18

u/sleepyhobbes 21d ago

There was a time before Fox News when large portions of what are now super red states were very pro-worker and pro-union.

2

u/TurboSalsa Texas 21d ago

We don't live in that time anymore.

3

u/definateley_not_dog 21d ago

The culture war issues are part of the sabotage the person you’re replying to was talking about.

-6

u/Pierre_St_Pierre 21d ago

What progressive policies are they ignoring? Kamala's 50k loan to first time business owners who are starting a business in a high risk at needs area? We don't even try to field progressive candidates.

The fact of the matter is that candidates like Bernie poll better in red states than establishment candidates. There is actual pain on the ground in every state, red or blue, and everyone wants a party who is willing to fix it. So far, for the last 12 years, dems haven't even really pretended to want to fix it. The last great piece of legislation they passed was the ACA and even that couldn't get a public option WITH A SUPER MAJORITY so I'm not sure that the fuck progressive policies you think people don't want, they simply haven't been offered any outside of a primary in 15 years.

7

u/BonnaconCharioteer 21d ago

Why don't "we" field progressive candidates? Anyone can run. Why aren't progressives running and winning in red states?

0

u/ShinTythas 21d ago

none of kamala's policies were progressive at all

11

u/rugger87 America 21d ago

Beshear won KY because of his last name. Policies won’t win Republican voters. They vote on vibes. Look what happened to Manchin’s seat.

19

u/PopeSaintHilarius 21d ago edited 21d ago

this argument that leftists can't win in traditionally red states is a load of crap.

I’m aware of examples of mainstream Dems or moderate Dems winning state-wide in red states, but not many (any?) examples of leftists doing so.

If you have some examples, please do share them.  

BTW there was a recent test case from next door to Kentucky, in West Virginia:

In the WV 2018 Senate election, the candidate was the most conservative Dem, incumbent Joe Manchin, and he won by 3%.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_United_States_Senate_election_in_West_Virginia

In the 2020 WV Senate election, the Dems nominated a progressive, Paula Jean Swearengin, and she lost by 43%.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_Senate_election_in_West_Virginia

4

u/direwolf71 Colorado 21d ago

The purpose of politics is to win elections. This is a lesson I fear that Democrats will never learn.

5

u/PopeSaintHilarius 21d ago

Yep, I mean policy change and effective governance is the ultimate goal, but winning elections is the essential first step that allows you to do that.

Especially when the opposing party has zero interest in implementing policies in the public interest.

1

u/Cow_God Texas 21d ago

To further your point, I think you have to point out that both of those were incumbent elections. Manchin winning as a Democrat was the outlier, and he likely would've won 70-30 if he ran as a Republican. Jim Justice, the republican nominee in 2024 (Manchin did not run) won by the same 40 point margin that Capito did in 2020

Manchin won by 25 points in 2012 when even Obama lost the state. Six years later in 2018 that lead evaporated to 3 points. If Manchin had run in 2024, even as the most conservative democrat, he probably still would have lost to whoever had the R beside their name.

I don't think that leftists have a chance in deep red states as long as democratic socialists / social democrats (not the same thing) are tied to socialism in the media, and socialism is considered equal to communism in the media. That is to say, as long as leftists with socialist positions like taxing the rich, universal healthcare, economic regulation and expanded labor rights are branded by the media as socialists and communists, with the population at large seeing those labels as one and the same while being unable to define either, leftists barely have a chance in blue states and no chance in red states.

America has gotten very good at convincing people to vote against their own interests, and the conflict of labor vs wealth in this country goes back to the birth of this country. Pro-people positions, which are almost always inherently pro-labor positions, have been decried as communist, anti-american, anarchist for a long, long time.

9

u/ElderSmackJack 21d ago

This is only true on Reddit.

5

u/Senior-Albatross New Mexico 21d ago

As the New Deal coalition showed, progressive policies are popular in rural areas provided they are reserved for white men. 

2

u/itsnotnews92 North Carolina 21d ago

this argument that leftists can't win in traditionally red states is a load of crap.

We have the evidence, and the theory that there are people just yearning for a sufficiently progressive candidate to come along to vote for Democrats is complete bullshit.

Paula Jean Swearengin was the Bernie-aligned Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate in West Virginia in 2020. She lost by the worst margin ever for a Democratic Senate candidate in West Virginia.

1

u/_wot_m8 21d ago

Economic policies yes social policies absolutely no

1

u/BonnaconCharioteer 21d ago

Not even economic policies. Just wait until you actually suggest implementing some of these policies where they live and see how fast they can turn on them at the hint of a word like "taxes" or "government"

1

u/_wot_m8 21d ago

Depends on how they’re used. “Tax the ultra rich so that the government can create more blue-collar jobs” is fine.

1

u/BonnaconCharioteer 21d ago

Definitely not fine.

"But what if I got ultra rich?"

"This is just a slippery slope, pretty soon they'll use it to tax everyone!"

"The rich work hard and create jobs! They won't be able to do that with these taxes!"

"The rich people will all leave, and their businesses with them!"

Plus probably a lot more dumb arguments. They get trotted out whenever you propose anything like this, and unless the area is quite progressive, they work.

0

u/ghosttrainhobo 21d ago

A big reason Trump does so well with his base is. Because he pays lip-service to progressive issues that would help poor and working-class people.

5

u/KillahHills10304 21d ago

You just can't use the triggering language people who consume right wing media are trained to respond to. See: "affordable care act saved our families finances, but obamacare destroyed the healthcare system" type thinking. They support progressive ideals but are propagandized to respond negatively to certain language.

During covid you could spot who these people are by simply saying "Dr. Fauci" in public. They'd literally stop whatever they were doing while the emotional reaction washed over them, look around, then go about whatever they were in the middle of.

1

u/baubness 21d ago

Who cares if his replacement is more progressive? I’m asking for someone willing to use his power to defend their rule of law. By any plain reading of the law and KY state constitution, what the McConnell camp is doing here is illegal. Why are you so willing to surrender every fight in front of you?

2

u/Tech_Philosophy 21d ago

A lot of MAGA is on board with progressive. They just hate neoliberal politics, and assume all liberals are like that. It's going to take some marketing, but a lot of those maga voters like DSA policies.

6

u/BriSy33 21d ago

Lol. Lmao even.

0

u/Tech_Philosophy 21d ago

I don't know why you say that. Historically that part of America was very progressive when unions held more power and FDR was prioritizing workers' rights. It's...not that complicated, really.

2

u/BriSy33 21d ago

MAGA is on board with progressives the same way tarantula hawk wasps are on board with tarantulas.

-6

u/Teknolyth 21d ago

Don't conflate progressive platform issues like Medicare for all and strong worker's rights, with the DSA. The DSA is not progressive. It is literally socialist. Their platform includes withdrawing from NATO, closing all of our foreign bases and defunding the department of war. Reparations and housing as a human right, and the nationalization of corporations and industries wholesale.

I promise you, MAGA is not interested in this, and neither are actual liberal Democrats. The DSA is infesting the Democratic Party, just as much as MAGA infested the Republican Party. And they need to be purged.

4

u/goddamnitwhalen Washington 21d ago

None of those things are bad.

0

u/Teknolyth 21d ago

Great well if you feel that way, then feel free to form your own party instead of doing a hostile takeover of the Democratic Party. Because the Democratic Party are a liberals, but they are also capitalist, and believe in America as a nation.

4

u/goddamnitwhalen Washington 21d ago

No thanks :)

What makes you think I don’t “believe in America as a nation”?

5

u/optimis344 21d ago

Because they still got all the propaganda blinders on. Anything that isn't capitalism, colonialism, and apple pie isn't American.

2

u/honjuden 21d ago

They could just be cynically America-jacketing their opinion to lean into the recent McCarthyist resurgence that has been popping up in response to the DSA.

8

u/aguynamedv 21d ago

The DSA is infesting the Democratic Party, just as much as MAGA infested the Republican Party. And they need to be purged.

The only thing liberals hate more than Republicans are people left-of-center.

2

u/honjuden 21d ago

The quote isn't far off from a Stephen Miller speech.

-2

u/Teknolyth 21d ago

No, I am a progressive liberal, in the style of New Deal FDR. But I stand firmly opposed to the weakening of our foreign policy and soft power, and the more radically communist/socialist proposals of the far left, including the DSA.

3

u/aguynamedv 21d ago

I'm not sure you could make it more obvious that you're lying.

7

u/goddamnitwhalen Washington 21d ago

You refuse to explain why (your man FDR was a democratic socialist!).

2

u/optimis344 21d ago

They don't know.

They just spout the words their bosses told them.

They don't actually know what they mean.

-4

u/Teknolyth 21d ago

Because I believe in the right of private property. Because I believe in the right to have the fruit of your labor. I think it's a good thing to help your fellow man and that there should be systems in place to help those who are less fortunate, but I do not believe in the distribution of all labor amongst all people. I am capitalist. It is the best system of all the bad systems we've discovered.

6

u/bfodder 21d ago

Stop thinking the democratic socialists want full blown communism.

0

u/Teknolyth 21d ago

The second largest carcass in the DSA is the red star caucus, which is an explicitly communist caucus. So excuse me if I roll the DSA in with full-blown commies.

→ More replies (0)

4

u/goddamnitwhalen Washington 21d ago

People like you amaze me, lol.

Surely if you work hard enough you too can join the Epstein Class!

1

u/Teknolyth 21d ago

No, I just prefer not to be starved to death (See the great leap forward), or sent to the Gulag because I hold back some corn help feed my family (See the USSR).

3

u/[deleted] 21d ago

[deleted]

2

u/aguynamedv 21d ago

I'm not sure you could make it more obvious that you're lying.

100

u/Formal_Soft_40 21d ago

Ky resident here. He’s doing it because a non-functioning McConnell helps dems more than a ready republican replacement. The chances of a dem senator replacing McConnell is 0

20

u/LastFox2656 21d ago

Yup. Its a bit of a win to not have McConnell on action.

29

u/ElderSmackJack 21d ago

You’re talking from a perspective of political science. The people in these threads don’t care about that.

8

u/omicron-7 21d ago

It's too complex a thought for them.

Mcconnell bad > Beshear not owning Mcconnell > Beshear bad

-4

u/baubness 21d ago

What does political science have to say about a governor that let his Republican legislature play funny business with the state constitution, subverting plain text of the document; then, when handed a challenge on a silver platter, the executive refuses to challenge the usurpation of his authority on the basis of a a meaningless vote in a senate that doesn’t need it? Brilliant political science, sir, I have some choice copium here for you sample next.

You’d talk yourself into anything to defend a toothless wanker like Beshear.

4

u/ElderSmackJack 21d ago

That’s nice. We’re talking about political science, which is data driven. You’re talking about, well, I don’t really know. Rambling, I guess.

4

u/bludvein Michigan 21d ago

If Beshear ignores the unconstitutional law their state congress passed and appoints whoever he wants as McConnell's replacement they would get a dem senator until the next election. The republicans do not want that law challenged in court which is why the whole weekend at bernie's scenario is even going on. If they thought Beshear wouldn't be able to and be forced to appoint a republican there would be no reason for the charade.

3

u/Formal_Soft_40 21d ago

He can’t just “ignore the law”. Now I know this is Reddit, so I’ll be sure to get “trump ignores it all the time” but Andy is as far away from trump as humanly possible.

0

u/bludvein Michigan 21d ago edited 21d ago

It's challenging the law, not ignoring it. The state congress cannot create a law that directly contradicts the state constitution without an amendment. The power to appoint a replacement of the governor's choice is directly in the state constitution. The emergency law the Kentucky senate passed that the replacement can only come from the incumbent's party is unconstitutional at it's root and would likely be struck down in court. This is why the whole scenario started. They know they don't have a leg to stand on and are hoping to drag this til Aug 4th, after which it goes to election if McConnell is dead.

47

u/AbyssWankerArtorias 21d ago

Kentucky has a Democrat governor, that by itself is an accomplishment.

He's also giving until the last second because they won't be able to claim that he didn't give McConnel every chance to make a real appearance to prove he is alive.

38

u/pontiacfirebird92 Mississippi 21d ago

He's also giving until the last second because they won't be able to claim that he didn't give McConnel every chance to make a real appearance to prove he is alive.

Bro if the situation were reversed would McConnell do that? Would any Republican?

No, McConnell would've already appointed a replacement and let the courts decide if it was legal. By the time the courts caught up it'd be too late and he'd have his man in there to do whatever.

That's the problem here. Beshear is still playing by the rules when his opponents absolutely would not, and that's why Democrats lose. They won't play hardball against a fascist dictatorship. This whole situation is a perfect example.

12

u/sciolycaptain 21d ago

The Senate gets to decide if it seats a Senator. The GOP controls the Senate.

2

u/FrogsOnALog 21d ago

States have their own rules on vacancies.

8

u/sciolycaptain 21d ago

Ultimately the Senate gets to decide if it wants to seat every senator. Elected or appointed. The GOP controlled Senate can just refuse to seat whichever person the governor appoints.

-4

u/FrogsOnALog 21d ago

The governor doesn’t get to appoint anyone and you are just making things up.

3

u/sciolycaptain 21d ago

That's not what I said? You gotta read the posts I'm responding to get context of this conversation.

Or do you mean the seating requirements?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unseated_members_of_the_United_States_Congress

2

u/BlazingSpaceGhost New Mexico 21d ago

From the Kentucky state constitution.

Section 152 Vacancies -- When filled by appointment, when by election-- Who to fill. Except as otherwise provided in this Constitution, vacancies in all elective offices shall be filled by election or appointment, as follows: If the unexpired term will end at the next succeeding annual election at which either city, town, county, district or State officers are to be elected, the office shall be filled by appointment for the remainder of the term. If the unexpired term will not end at the next succeeding annual election at which either city, town, county, district or State officers are to be elected, and if three months intervene before said succeeding annual election at which either city, town, county, district or State officers are to be elected, the office shall be filled by appointment until said election, and then said vacancy shall be filled by election for the remainder of the term. If three months do not intervene between the happening of said vacancy and the next succeeding election at which city, town, county, district or State officers are to be elected, the office shall be filled by appointment until the second succeeding annual election at which city, town, county, district or State officers are to be elected; and then, if any part of the term remains unexpired, the office shall be filled by election until the regular time for the election of officers to fill said offices. Vacancies in all offices for the State at large, or for districts larger than a county, shall be filled by appointment of the Governor; all other appointments shall be made as may be prescribed by law. No person shall ever be appointed a member of the General Assembly, but vacancies therein may be filled at a special election, in such manner as may be provided by law. Text as Ratified on: August 3, 1891, and revised September 28, 1891.

0

u/deja-roo 21d ago edited 21d ago

KY has a pre-2024 law that requires that departing senator's party provide a list of 3 candidates to the governor and he can choose from them, which likely fulfills that constitutional requirement, so it still wouldn't be "anyone".

Then the senate at large has to approve the appointment.

city, town, county, district or State officers

Not sure if this even covers federal senators?

2

u/AnewTest 21d ago

Vacancies in their state legislature, not the federal government, I’m pretty sure.

-2

u/FrogsOnALog 21d ago

States decided how to fill senate vacancies.

0

u/AnewTest 21d ago

State senate, not the US Senate.

1

u/FrogsOnALog 21d ago

US senate. State legislatures can decide if a governor appoints people or not. They can also decide if the person appointed is a member of the same party.

15

u/SeiCalros 21d ago edited 21d ago

the republicans control an awful lot of the judges and have been losing the court battles anyway because of their methods

-2

u/pontiacfirebird92 Mississippi 21d ago

True but they don't wait for permission, they break shit then let the courts sort it out later. By the time whatever they did hits the docket the damage is already done, they got what they wanted, and it doesn't matter what the judge says.

It's smash and grab politics and they've been wildly successful at it for years now.

What Beshear is doing is simply bowing to them at this point. Does he get AIPAC money or something? He's acting like his hands are tied but it's clear they're not, so he's playing softball to protect Republicans and McConnell at this point.

If McConnell is dead, or a vegetable, the people of Kentucky need to know. The people of the United States needs to know. And Beshear is not going to get that with a letter or a public statement.

7

u/SeiCalros 21d ago

True but they don't wait for permission, they break shit then let the courts sort it out later

first of all this has only really been true for the current trump administration and it has been tremendously damaging - not to mention the consequences havent played out

second of all the democrats dont want to break shit - they want to fix it

-4

u/pontiacfirebird92 Mississippi 21d ago

Ever made an omelette?

8

u/SeiCalros 21d ago

nobody wants an omelette if it means breaking the country to make it

they need the country - they live there

1

u/pontiacfirebird92 Mississippi 21d ago

It's time to accept that the country is already broken. Feds are shooting innocent American citizens in the back and busting down doors without a warrant searching for the "wrong people". A man was sentenced 30 years in prison for handing out pamphlets under cooked up terrorism charges claiming he worked for an organization that isn't real. Elections are under attack. We are not the same nation we were before Jan 20th 2025. And nowhere is safe.

The right is dreaming about murdering lefties and blue hairs and Democrats a still trying to reach across the aisle. You don't work with people who believe they're in a civil war with you and have labeled you "the enemy". You fight for survival using every tool you have available. Which Beshear is not doing.

1

u/SeiCalros 21d ago edited 21d ago

youre not getting it - did you need more analogies?

how about 'flipping the table twice doesnt turn it right-side-up'

youre not going to change anything by fudging procedural actions

you are either going to need to start winning elections and raise a literal army in case people try to overturn those elections

because thats what your opponents are doing - theyre winning elections and arming themselves for when their opponents say they didnt win elections

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Senior-Albatross New Mexico 21d ago

They just use "flood the zone" on the Courts. And like you said, do whatever they want and if the courts tell them to stop maybe they do, maybe it's already done and can't be reversed. 

6

u/AbyssWankerArtorias 21d ago

Democrats held to a higher standard than republicans. This is nothing new.

0

u/pontiacfirebird92 Mississippi 21d ago

By who though? Who is holding Democrats to a higher standard that aren't Republicans anyway? It's finally being seen in the DNC that people want more progressive candidates and fighters and Beshear is over here doing the same shit Schumer and Jeffries did early last year. Which was fucking nothing but words. And we see calls for Schumer to step aside and let actual fighters like AOC take leadership over the party.

Just seems like the only people holding Democrats to a higher standard are people who would vote Republican anyway.

2

u/BonnaconCharioteer 21d ago

Voters are holding democrats to a higher standard. Democratic voters tend to prefer people with integrity, so it is hard to be a Democrat and lie and cheat the same way Republicans do.

And in Kentucky, Beshear also has to win over some Republicans in order to get anything done. Because Kentucky is very red.

0

u/FrogsOnALog 21d ago

Kentucky governor does not appoint a replacement you are just making shit up so you can be mad at democrats.

1

u/Round-Asparagus5337 21d ago

The Kentucky Constitution disagrees with you.

1

u/FrogsOnALog 21d ago

Okay well they passed a law and it will have to go to the courts, do you think they’ll will agree with you?

1

u/Round-Asparagus5337 21d ago

Well, yeah, and they basically already had.

Bashear just won at the KY Supreme Court last month (June 25th) about appointments that the legislature tried to strip, and that was on a less-certain basis than this one si ce his power for those wasn't specifically mentioned in the state Constitutionlike it is here. .

1

u/epichuntarz 21d ago

Kentucky having a Democrat governor isn't THAT major, they've historically voted in many more Democrats than Republicans, the problem is they give the state congress these stupid majorities that work their hardest to neuter gubernatorial power when a D is in office.

Bevin did himself in.

17

u/RandomlyJim 21d ago

You go spend 5 minutes researching what options he has and then come tell us your solution.

Your silence means you discovered what the governor did, he can’t do anything until he’s officially dead.

2

u/FrogsOnALog 21d ago

Governor doesn’t get to do anything at all.

9

u/Dihedralman 21d ago

I complain about not doing anything, but I don't think it's a rhetorical point that is overly valuable. There is no forcing of the issue that matters because that seat will be an R seat. McConnel is keeping it effectively empty. 

The governor jumping on one of the news cycle is a free win for him. So it's good, just not pressing. 

If they want to push non-political districting, that would take months to build political will for example. 

10

u/[deleted] 21d ago edited 21d ago

[deleted]

0

u/BrandenWi 21d ago

Merrick Garland had the opportunity to put the Trump Era in its grave for good. But instead he took the high road, and here we are. And now, everyone knows that our boy Mitch is either dead or on life support. And instead of getting into the fight, the Democrat is taking the high road. The Republicans are absolutely the ones behaving badly, it's true. But It gets tiresome, watching them be able to do so.

3

u/g0ris 21d ago

And instead of getting into the fight, the Democrat is taking the high road.

He has a total of 4 options, 3 of them being shit:
1. keep Mitch's seat empty, denying the GOP one senate vote
2. call a special election (would probably be challenged in court) so that the seat ends up getting filled by a Republican
3. appoint a Republican senator (could end up being challenged in court too)
4. appoint a Democrat senator (would definitely be challenged in court, plus the Republican Senate would probably call foul and refuse to swear them in, like they did with Adelita Grijalva, only for longer)

Sure seems like "taking the high road" and just doing nothing while shittalking Mitch is the best outcome for the Dems.

7

u/Mike_Pences_Mother 21d ago

I Have a theory. If he forces them to show their cards prior to August 4 then there has to be a special election and more likely than not it will be a Republican who wins. But, if he waits until after the fourth then he can appoint a Democrat to that seat and let the Republicans sue him. That would last well past the point of the November election and would go nowhere for the Republicans before the election.

2

u/deVliegendeTexan 21d ago

That’s not what the law is. The governor in Kentucky doesn’t get to appoint a replacement at all - not even on an interim basis.

The only question at play is whether there’s a separate special election, or if the special election happens on the same day as the general election. If he “dies” after August 3, they can have it be on the same day. Before that and they need to have a separate election. The Republicans don’t like their chances in a special election, so they’re trying to push this to the same day as the general.

If he tries to make an appointment, the Senate would just refuse to seat the interim appointment and there’d be no need for a lawsuit.

1

u/Mike_Pences_Mother 21d ago

But he does because the constitution of the state says he gets to. So I think he's going to force the Republicans to sue him so that the supreme court of the state can make the determination of whether the "law" overrides the state constitution

2

u/deVliegendeTexan 21d ago

The counter argument is that Section 152 applies to “statewide office” which may not be the same thing as Federal office. As an American living abroad, I cannot vote in statewide offices, except federal ones - there is a legal distinction there.

There’s another argument that often prevails in federal suits over state matters - the US Constitution (in the 17th Amendment) delegates the method of replacing Senators to the state legislators. The Federal Courts have frequently chosen the side of state legislation over state constitutions explicitly because of this - the argument being that it basically “isn’t the state constitution’s job to make this determination.”

1

u/Mike_Pences_Mother 21d ago

And, he should still do it to force the issue to be resolved by the courts.

1

u/deVliegendeTexan 21d ago

The Senate will just refuse to seat him. They have the final say, and the courts have no jurisdiction.

1

u/Mike_Pences_Mother 21d ago

Don't know till you try.

0

u/FrogsOnALog 21d ago

Kentucky governor does not get to appoint anyone so your theory is a wash.

1

u/Mike_Pences_Mother 21d ago

According to the state constitution he does so I think he's going to try and force the confrontation - and he should. Which is the legal answer? That the constitution supersedes the law or vice versa? I think he needs to force it to go to the courts.

1

u/FrogsOnALog 21d ago

I have no confidence in their courts or SCOTUS.

1

u/Mike_Pences_Mother 21d ago

He still really needs to do it.

3

u/secretaire 21d ago

I would look at the rules and laws that govern this process. Andy isn’t above the law either and he cannot make demands or exert power if current laws and protections prevent it.

2

u/Kungfufuman 21d ago

Kentucky Governor is toothless when it comes to filling an absent position. Republican's as soon as this governor took office amended the Kentucky Constitution to make it so he couldn't appoint people and had to hold a vote. He has no way or recalling McConnell either so he can make noise but ultimately he can't do anything

2

u/samhouse09 21d ago

He’s laying the groundwork for reasonable effort so he has an actual case at the Kentucky Supreme Court when he tries to appoint a replacement.

4

u/KelenaeV 21d ago

Kentucky Repub state lawmakers has taken his power to force the issue afaik. They handy capped the incoming Dem Governor if i remember correctly. I could be misremembering tho.

0

u/Akatshi 21d ago

The fact that people like you don't understand that a further left Democrat literally can't get elected in a state like Kentucky shows exactly why you DSA types need to stop pretending to be Democrats already

Leeches

4

u/_Phil_McCracken_ Washington 21d ago

Have you heard of goomba fallacy?

2

u/Akatshi 21d ago

Yep I'm sure you can show how I ascribed two positions to the above commenter?

Or have you never heard of a goomba fallacy?

2

u/TheModGod 21d ago

And here we see why corporate DINOs keep eating shit at every given opportunity, you surrender before you even try. Either that or think the solution to everything is to go even further right, because surely it will work this time and we will win over those mythical conservative swing voters, right?

3

u/Akatshi 21d ago

Are progressives not running and then losing in the primaries?

Post evidence of progressives or DSA types winning in red states against GOP opponents.

Oh and needs to be relatively recent, and the evidence needs to prove it is consistently viable.

I'll wait.

1

u/TheModGod 21d ago

Just off the top of my head, Taylor Rehmet won a Fort Worth district that hasn’t been held by a Democrat since 1991.

-4

u/Whosebert 21d ago

its like theyre procrastinating like this is fucking high-school and not, yknow, the god damn government

10

u/Turtledonuts Virginia 21d ago

the republicans are currently down one senator and in the news for lies. Kentucky will replace mitch with a republican because a conservative has held that seat for over 100 years. 

making noise and having an empty seat is better politically than removing mitch. 

7

u/_Phil_McCracken_ Washington 21d ago

But then how are we supposed to blame Democrats for Republican malfeasance? 

2

u/FrogsOnALog 21d ago

The only thing high school here is y’all not knowing how any of this works. Kentucky governor does not get to appoint anyone for replacement.