Kentucky Lawmakers Could Decide Governor's Race

[RandySF]

Kentucky Senate President Robert Stivers (R) told reporters that a joint session of the Kentucky General Assembly — which is controlled by Republicans — may eventually decide the winner of last night’s close gubernatorial race, “citing a provision in the state constitution that hasn’t been used in 120 years,” the Louisville Courier Journal reports.

The state Constitution says “contested elections for governor and lieutenant governor shall be determined by both houses of the General Assembly, according to such regulations as may be established by law.”

Stivers said his staff believes that might apply in this case.



https://politicalwire.com/2019/11/06/kentucky-lawmakers-could-decide-governors-race/

[onecaliberal]

1. The Republican LOST.

[spanone]

2. In plain & simple terms, they are going to steal it.

[Rorey]

3. Wow, and WTF NT

[AkFemDem]

4. "Contested elections"

Since KY law allows any candidate to file and request a recount what they’re basically saying is anytime a Democrat wins, they’ll just contest it and overturn it.

[berni_mccoy]

5. They do this at their own risk...

Imagine you live in KY and you're a republican who voted for the Democrat. Are you going to want lawmakers to do this? How will that impact your vote for the next legislative election?

[Johnny2X2X]

6. Contested is the key word

This will head to the courts, and what makes a contested election? Heck, all elections could be "contested" by some definition. This was a 5000 vote win, not a 300 vote or a 50 vote win. It's over.

[Bettie]

7. SO, any time a Republican loses

they can just say "Well, I contest this result" and get the legislature to declare them the winner...sounds like corruption to me.

[ChoppinBroccoli]

8. Aren't ALL Elections "Contested"?

There's gotta be more to the language of this law, or there has to be a definition of what "contested" means, because if there isn't, it essentially just means that the people of Kentucky have no right to vote. If a candidate who gets 1% of the vote can say, "I contest," and then it goes to the State Legislature who can then undo the will of the people, then Kentucky residents have lost the right to vote. That's a Supreme Court case waiting to happen if ever I've heard one.

[Golden Raisin]

9. Republicans regularly scorn, ignore and flip off laws, norms

and the Constitution. Until they need something. Then they start scurrying around like sewer rats to find a loophole law that will help them retain power.

[Roland99]

10. Very unlikely an ad hoc decision be made by the house and senate

A recanvass will likely occur first.

Assuming little to no change in results, Bevin will probably concede then. Any change of maybe 1000votes we’ll see a recount effort put forth

As for these claims of “corroborated “ “irregularities “, 100% bs and a judge will see right thru thst shit

[Happy Hoosier]

11. Contested my ass!

Bevin lost by over 5,000 votes.

This would be devastating for Democracy. I hope Kentuckians would take to the streets.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

12. Voters can choose their representatives, unless they choose someone from the wrong party.

Kevin M. Kruse Retweeted

This is a democracy! The voters can choose their representatives. Unless they choose someone from the wrong party, then the Republican Party will correct their mistake.

Link to tweet

[moondust]

13. Sounds a bit like Mississippi.

Where:

~
First, a candidate must win a majority of the statewide popular vote. Second, they must also win a plurality of the vote in a majority of Mississippi House of Representatives districts. If a candidate does both, they win. If they don’t, the Mississippi House chooses the winner. As with the Electoral College, the popular vote in Mississippi only matters until it doesn’t.
~
“Mississippi’s constitutional convention of 1890 was held for no other purpose than to eliminate the n____r from politics.”

http://newrepublic.com/article/154496/mississippi-quotes-john-roberts-defend-racist-election-law