Dieser Bereich kann Inhalte enthalten, die nicht für alle Nutzer geeignet sind. Dazu können unter anderem Texte, Medien oder Diskussionen gehören, die als beleidigend, extremistisch, gewaltbezogen oder anderweitig belastend empfunden werden. Wenn du solche Inhalte nicht sehen möchtest, nutze bitte die jeweiligen Filter- und Meldeoptionen der Plattform oder meide entsprechende Threads/Communities.
The special election isnt what worries them, it’s the opposite. Unless McConnell “stays alive” until the first week of August, the Kentucky Governor (D) can appoint a replacement. If he dies “after” that date, a special election can be triggered, which the Republicans are a lot more confident they can rig.
Actually, Kentucky is a special case, as the heavily Republican legislature passed a law (over the Democratic Governor’s veto) specifically removing the right of the Governor to pick a replacement. Now, in the case of any vacancy, the Governor’s only role is to schedule the special election.
But, if it’s too close to the General Election, then the governor is obligated to fold the special election in with the General. The current theory on the Internet is that Republicans are stringing this out so that happens, because they are afraid if there is a special election then Thomas Massie would win it.
After some thought, that seems unlikely to me. Even if a special election is held, it would only be for the remainder of McConnell’s term, which is up at the end of the year. So, that would mean that Republicans are more comfortable leaving the seat vacant (and reducing their majority) for a few more months rather than risk Massie getting the job for a few months. (And although Massie is an anti-Trumper, he is still a Republican, and will likely be a reliable vote on all sorts of evil shit for them)
It’s even more complicated than that. You’re right that the legislature passed that law but the original one (that the governor named a replacement) is still in the state constitution. They’re two literally irreconcilable laws and either scenario would have to be litigated
I think it’s law first until it’s challenged. So they’ll do the state election and then the challenge can play out, likely for next time because removing an elected official is a minefield.