KS-Sen: Taylor drops out

[KCDem]

Kobach's move will amount to nothing. The fact that it will be challenged in court just increases the likelihood that Taylor's share of the vote approaches zero. Roberts is toast.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

But even if Taylor manages to get his vote share down to say, 5-6% or so, that's votes that Orman can't get. Roberts can breathe a little easier with Taylor's name on the ballot than he can without it being there.

[ProudModerate2]

But even if Taylor manages to get his vote share down to say, 5-6% or so, that's votes that Orman can't get. Roberts can breathe a little easier with Taylor's name on the ballot than he can without it being there.

If Taylor's name stays on the ballot, it will capture some votes. But I don't think it will be 5-6%.
My guess is approx half of that (2-3%).

I'm looking forward to seeing the very first poll with just Orman and Roberts.

[7,052,770]

If the judge lets Taylor off the ballot but requires Democrats to replace him, could they "nominate" Orman?  Or would that be counter-productive?

Could they "nominate" Milton Wolf to draw votes away from Brownback?

[KCDem]

If the judge lets Taylor off the ballot but requires Democrats to replace him, could they "nominate" Orman?  Or would that be counter-productive?

Could they "nominate" Milton Wolf to draw votes away from Brownback?

They should nominate a Democrat named Pat Roberts.

[RogueBeaver]

WaPo on Orman's campaign.

[Mister Mets]

But even if Taylor manages to get his vote share down to say, 5-6% or so, that's votes that Orman can't get. Roberts can breathe a little easier with Taylor's name on the ballot than he can without it being there.

If Taylor's name stays on the ballot, it will capture some votes. But I don't think it will be 5-6%.
My guess is approx half of that (2-3%).

I'm looking forward to seeing the very first poll with just Orman and Roberts.

Major parties tend to get votes even if the real election is between the other party and an independent.

In the 2006 Connecticut election, Lieberman got 49.71% as an Independent, Ned Lamont got 39.73% as the Democratic party's nominee and the Republican got 9.62%.

In Colorado's last gubernatorial election, the Democrat got 51%, and former Republican congressman Tom Tancredo got 36.43% as the Constitution Party's candidate. The Republican candidate, a businessman who paid a five figure fine for campaign finance violations and was accused of lying about working for the CIA, still got 11%.

Those situations are a bit different in that the irrelevant candidate remained in the race. It's a bit different with the Democrat telling people to support someone else, but 7% support wouldn't surprise me.

[ProudModerate2]

PPP surveyed 903 likely voters from August 14th to 17th. The margin of error for the survey is +/- 3.3%.
80% of interviews for the poll were conducted over the phone with 20% interviewed over the internet to reach respondents who don’t have landline telephones.

Q11.  If the candidates for Senate this fall were just
Republican Pat Roberts and independent Greg
Orman, who would you vote for?

Pat Roberts..................................................... 33%
Greg Orman.................................................... 43%
Not sure ............................................ ............ 24%

[Lief 🗽]

But even if Taylor manages to get his vote share down to say, 5-6% or so, that's votes that Orman can't get. Roberts can breathe a little easier with Taylor's name on the ballot than he can without it being there.

If Taylor's name stays on the ballot, it will capture some votes. But I don't think it will be 5-6%.
My guess is approx half of that (2-3%).

I'm looking forward to seeing the very first poll with just Orman and Roberts.

Again, most of that 2-3% would have never voted for Orman in the first place. This is not a big loss at all.

[IceSpear]

The Democrat's name being on the ballot won't affect anything. He'll win maybe 2-3%. Voters aren't complete idiots and at the very least are aware which candidates are actually running for election. Anyone who votes for Taylor in November is either 1) so out of the loop that they wouldn't know they were supposed to vote for Orman anyway or 2) so blindly partisan that they wouldn't have voted for an independent anyway.

Dan Maes got 11% in 2010. Granted, he didn't drop out, but nobody took him seriously either. Dede Scozzafava got 6% after dropping out and endorsing the Democrat.

[KCDem]

The Democrat's name being on the ballot won't affect anything. He'll win maybe 2-3%. Voters aren't complete idiots and at the very least are aware which candidates are actually running for election. Anyone who votes for Taylor in November is either 1) so out of the loop that they wouldn't know they were supposed to vote for Orman anyway or 2) so blindly partisan that they wouldn't have voted for an independent anyway.

Dan Maes got 11% in 2010. Granted, he didn't drop out, but nobody took him seriously either. Dede Scozzafava got 6% after dropping out and endorsing the Democrat.

Scozzafava dropped out 48 hours before the polls closed. Give me a break.

[solarstorm]

Is there anything known about Scott Barnhart (I) and Randall Batson (L)?

[Lief 🗽]

The Democrat's name being on the ballot won't affect anything. He'll win maybe 2-3%. Voters aren't complete idiots and at the very least are aware which candidates are actually running for election. Anyone who votes for Taylor in November is either 1) so out of the loop that they wouldn't know they were supposed to vote for Orman anyway or 2) so blindly partisan that they wouldn't have voted for an independent anyway.

Dan Maes got 11% in 2010. Granted, he didn't drop out, but nobody took him seriously either. Dede Scozzafava got 6% after dropping out and endorsing the Democrat.

Scozzafava dropped out 48 hours before the polls closed. Give me a break.

Exactly. There was also a good reason for people to vote for her as a protest vote (moderate republicans against the tea party).

[Never]

Is there anything known about Scott Barnhart (I) and Randall Batson (L)?

Here's a Question & Answer voter guide the Topeka Capital-Journal carried out with Batson. It seems to be a useful resource for familiarizing oneself with him as a candidate. Batson appears to be a textbook libertarian, in that he supports very limited government and limited involvement with foreign policy matters. His libertarian ideology definitely shows up in his views on same-sex marriage:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

He voices opposition to military involvement in the Middle East while calling ISIS a "big issue", and he supports pulling all of our nation's troops out of Japan and views war in the Korea as imminent. Based on what I see, I expect that Batson should at least manage to garner the typical level of support that Libertarians earn in Kansas.

As for Barnhart, he was a candidate for the Kansas legislature registered with the Democratic party, and after further examination of his past as a Democrat, I must say I'm surprised that he is in this race.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Kansas doesn't seem like the kind of state that has a sizable contingent of "reflexively Democratic" voters. They tend to have a fairly high level of voter participation, which likely means they're relatively informed voters relative to the country as a whole.

If Texas Democrats nominated a dead man, he'd predictably lose but he'd still win the Rio Grande Valley in a landslide. If Alabama Democrats did the same, the voters in the Black Belt would pick the corpse over the Republican. Kansas doesn't really have any Democratic voters like that.

Or sometimes the dead man wins statewide

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_Missouri,_2000

Well, it was made clear who the replacement would be. Voters knew they were technically voting for Carnahan's Wife and not the late Carnahan himself, so it wasn't exactly 'voting for a dead man'.

In any case, Taylor will be challenging the decision: http://www.kansas.com/news/politics-government/election/article1504835.html

Representative Patsy Mink (D-HI) won despite a vote for her just meaning you'd get another two elections.

[nolesfan2011]

If the judge lets Taylor off the ballot but requires Democrats to replace him, could they "nominate" Orman?  Or would that be counter-productive?

Could they "nominate" Milton Wolf to draw votes away from Brownback?

They should nominate a Democrat named Pat Roberts.

truly brilliant idea

[solarstorm]

As for Barnhart, he was a candidate for the Kansas legislature registered with the Democratic party, and after further examination of his past as a Democrat, I must say I'm surprised that he is in this race.

Wow! Barnhart seems to chance his luck on every legislative level.

Unfortunately, he might pull away some crucial Democratic votes destined for Orman.

[Never]

As for Barnhart, he was a candidate for the Kansas legislature registered with the Democratic party, and after further examination of his past as a Democrat, I must say I'm surprised that he is in this race.

Wow! Barnhart seems to chance his luck on every legislative level.

Unfortunately, he might pull away some crucial Democratic votes destined for Orman.

Barnhart does seem more like one of those perennial candidates who fails to find electoral success.

[solarstorm]

Barnhart does seem more like one of those perennial candidates who fails to find electoral success.

I agree. However, Orman could miss being elected by those 1.5% Barnhart will have received.

[Tender Branson]

I think blaming the Kansas SoS here is wrong. If the KS election law explicitely says that you can only step down as candidate by notifying the SoS that you are unable to serve if elected, then Krobach is only acting according to the law. It's his job.

You should rather expect the Taylor campaign to be smart enough to know the election law and they should have put the "unable to serve" thing into his letter.

[Keystone Phil]

I think blaming the Kansas SoS here is wrong. If the KS election law explicitely says that you can only step down as candidate by notifying the SoS that you are unable to serve if elected, then Krobach is only acting according to the law. It's his job.

You should rather expect the Taylor campaign to be smart enough to know the election law and they should have put the "unable to serve" thing into his letter.

Tender, don't try to reason with them.

[KCDem]

I think blaming the Kansas SoS here is wrong. If the KS election law explicitely says that you can only step down as candidate by notifying the SoS that you are unable to serve if elected, then Krobach is only acting according to the law. It's his job.

You should rather expect the Taylor campaign to be smart enough to know the election law and they should have put the "unable to serve" thing into his letter.

Except the letter Taylor wrote was written with the assistance of the Secretary of State's office, implying the Secretary of State knowingly deceived the Taylor campaign.

[NHLiberal]

I think blaming the Kansas SoS here is wrong. If the KS election law explicitely says that you can only step down as candidate by notifying the SoS that you are unable to serve if elected, then Krobach is only acting according to the law. It's his job.

You should rather expect the Taylor campaign to be smart enough to know the election law and they should have put the "unable to serve" thing into his letter.

Except the letter Taylor wrote was written with the assistance of the Secretary of State's office, implying the Secretary of State knowingly deceived the Taylor campaign.

This, and also just try to imagine how Kobach would be acting if the situation was reversed and it was to benefit Republicans.

[Senator Cris]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/05/kansas-senate-race_n_5771286.html?1409919194&ncid=tweetlnkushpmg00000067
Interesting...

[Badger]

Oh no! The Dems new favorite last hope just flew out the window. But don't worry: HILLARY WILL STILL WIN THE STATE BY 12 IN 2016!!!!!

Are you all right Phil? You seem a bit tense these last days.

I'd ask how you're feeling but you keep on chugging with your usual troll ways so all is normal on that front.

Well, that post certainly disproves allegation of tenseness.

Seriously Phil, be safe. Most of your recent posts conjure the image of flecks of spittle as you speak, a rapid eye twitch, and a throbbing forehead vein forcasting an aneurysm.