Red state Senate president joins field of Republicans hoping to wrest governorship from Democratic control
Masterson describes himself as "a results-oriented conservative laborer and businessman."
While Kansas has gone red in every presidential election for more than 50 years, the state currently has a Democratic governor.
Gov. Laura Kelly has held the post since early 2019, but is not eligible to run again in 2026 because she's currently serving her second consecutive term.
"No person may be elected to more than two successive terms as governor …" the state constitution stipulates.
Masterson's move to jump into the running adds another candidate to the Kansas GOP gubernatorial field that also includes former Kansas Gov. Jeff Colyer, Kansas Secretary of State Scott Schwab and Kansas Insurance Commissioner Vicki Schmidt.
Colyer, a former Kansas lieutenant governor, ascended to the governorship in 2018 because then-Gov. Sam Brownback, a Republican, departed the role to serve as U.S. ambassador at large for international religious freedom.
While serving in the governorship in 2018, Colyer ran for governor, but was just barely edged out in the GOP primary by then-Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, who went on to lose the general election later that year to Kelly.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Vino Symbol Reinstated: Gaucho Holdings Marks New Chapter Post-Reorganization
Company resumes trading under "VINO" amid Argentina's economic stabilization and U.S. partnership momentum MIAMI, FL / / July 31, 2025 / Gaucho Group Holdings, Inc. (OTC:VINO), a company that includes a growing collection of e-commerce platforms with a concentration on fine wines, luxury real estate, and leather goods and accessories (the "Company" or "Gaucho Holdings"), announced today that the "Q" designation has been officially removed from its trading symbol. Effective immediately, the Company's shares will resume trading under the symbol VINO on the OTC Markets. The "Q" suffix was initially added to the VINO trading symbol in November 2024 following Gaucho Holdings' voluntary Chapter 11 filing. On June 16, 2025, the Company successfully emerged from Chapter 11 under court approval. In the weeks since, Gaucho Holdings has undertaken and completed the necessary steps to reinstate its trading symbol to VINO. In parallel with this development, the Company has engaged an independent public accounting firm, CBIZ, Inc., to audit its financial statements. This includes the preparation and filing of its Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2024, as well as its 10-Q filings for 2025. Gaucho Holdings is working to regain full reporting compliance within approximately 90 days, which is expected to facilitate broader investor engagement and enhance trading opportunities on the OTC marketplace. This milestone occurs as Argentina experiences significant macroeconomic changes under the administration of President Javier Milei. Over the past 18 months, inflation has declined by more than 95%, with additional improvement anticipated into 2026. Gaucho Holdings continues to monitor these economic developments, which coincide with increased U.S.-Argentina economic cooperation and interest in key sectors where the Company is active, including wine, tourism, and luxury goods. "The removal of the 'Q' symbol is an important achievement for Gaucho Holdings and a clear signal that we have emerged from the Chapter 11 reorganization," said Scott Mathis, CEO and Founder of Gaucho Group Holdings, Inc. "We remain focused on rebuilding stockholder confidence through operational transparency and financial integrity. At the same time, we are operating in a moment of significant change and optimism in Argentina, where our businesses are rooted. We look forward to continuing to align our strategy with the country's evolving economic landscape." For more information, visit About Gaucho Group Holdings, Inc. For more than ten years, Gaucho Group Holdings, Inc.'s ( mission has been to source and develop opportunities in Argentina's undervalued luxury real estate and consumer marketplace. Our company has positioned itself to take advantage of the continued and fast growth of global e-commerce across multiple market sectors, with the goal of becoming a leader in diversified luxury goods and experiences in sought after lifestyle industries and retail landscapes. With a concentration on fine wines ( & hospitality ( and luxury real estate ( associated with our proprietary Algodon brand, as well as the leather goods, ready-to-wear and accessories of the fashion brand Gaucho - Buenos Aires® ( these are the luxury brands in which Argentina finds its contemporary expression. Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements The information discussed in this press release includes "forward looking statements" within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. All statements, other than statements of historical facts, included herein concerning, among other things, changes to exchange rates and their impact on the Company, planned capital expenditures, future cash flows and borrowings, pursuit of potential acquisition opportunities, our financial position, business strategy and other plans and objectives for future operations, are forward-looking statements. Although we believe that the expectations reflected in these forward-looking statements are reasonable, they do involve certain assumptions, risks and uncertainties and are not (and should not be considered to be) guarantees of future performance. Refer to our risk factors set forth in our reports filed on Edgar. The Company disclaims any obligation to update any forward-looking statement made here. Media Relations: Gaucho Group Holdings, StearDirector of Marketing212.739.7669rstear@ SOURCE: Gaucho Group Holdings, Inc. View the original press release on ACCESS Newswire Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Safe Spaces Are Coming Back to Brown University—All Thanks to Trump
Brown University has settled with the Trump administration, which is currently waging war on elite institutions of higher education. Under the guise of combating antisemitism on campuses—an important problem, though not one the federal government is well-suited to address—President Donald Trump's Education Department has gone after Columbia University, Harvard University, and also Brown. Brown's deal with the federal government has been described as more favorable to the university than Columbia's; Harvard has yet to reach an agreement at all, but is reportedly willing to spend up to $500 million to settle the matter. Large sums of money are at stake for all three universities, as the federal government is responsible for doling out billions of dollars in research grants. Brown is the recipient of $510 million in public funding. So it's not surprising that Brown wanted to make a deal. It's unfortunate, of course, that the Trump administration is using the threat of a funding reduction to dictate terms to what is ultimately a private institution. This is obviously a version of jawboning, in which political figures use non-legislative means to achieve some sort of policy end. When the Biden administration threatened social media companies and browbeat them into making different moderation decisions, it was swiftly recognized as a free speech issue by many conservatives, libertarians, and even some on the left. It's similarly vexing when the Trump administration—which has pledged to restore free speech and end federally driven censorship—does this. It's true that institutions of higher education are not entitled to federal funding, which, after all, is paid by taxpayers. The Trump administration, or any administration, could decide, in a moment of unusual frugality, that the U.S. is too indebted to continue sending billions of dollars to wealthy private organizations that have their own massive endowments. But the government shouldn't use the threat of a funding cut as a form of coercion. That's no different from how the Obama administration handled Title IX enforcement: Obama's Education Department instructed campuses to adopt policies that were hostile to free speech and due process, and they implied that federal research dollars would evaporate in the event of noncompliance. Indeed, the extent to which the Obama higher ed coercion blueprint has been adopted by Trump is under-acknowledged. All that said, the details of the Brown settlement are disturbing in their own right. It's true that Brown avoided some of the harsher penalties that Columbia got stuck with, and it's good that the settlement recognizes that the government has no "authority to dictate Brown's curriculum or the content of academic speech." Veena Dubal, a law professor at the University of California at Irvine, complains that the settlement includes "no barrier to government interference in faculty hiring," but the only thing it really says about hiring is that it must be race neutral. The Supreme Court has already held that race-based hiring and admissions policies are almost always impermissible, so this is hardly some unreasonable, out-of-nowhere demand. But Dubal is also concerned about a provision of the settlement that permits the feds to collect and read Brown faculty course evaluations, and that's legitimately concerning. In fact, it speaks to the most troubling aspect of the settlement: It lends itself toward the creation of a campus antisemitism police that will be laser-focused on identifying, cataloguing, and eliminating uncomfortable and offensive speech that is nevertheless clearly protected by the First Amendment. In other words, the Trump administration is directly encouraging the formation of campus safe spaces. The settlement instructs Brown to survey students on their feelings of emotional safety. The survey questions are really something, and include: "whether they feel welcome at Brown; whether they feel safe reporting anti-Semitism at Brown; whether they have experienced harassment on social media." These are vague questions that will prompt subjective answers. Social media harassment is a particularly fraught topic; what constitutes harassment? If one student is being unkind to another student on Instagram or TikTok, is it really the university's job to intervene? Brown should act to counter identity-based harassment in cases where it's egregious, criminal, or abjectly violates the code of conduct. If students are drawing swastikas on Jewish people's doors, the university should certainly intervene. But the language in the settlement is too non-specific, and almost requires university administrators to overreach. No one should be naive about this, because it's obvious what's going to happen: An anti-Israel student will go after a pro-Israel student on social media, the pro-Israel student will say they are being harassed, and Brown will feel obligated to respond. No student should be made actually unsafe—i.e., be a victim of violence—because they are Jewish, or for any other reason. But it should be self-apparent to everyone who criticized the liberal safe space trend of the 2010s that re-orienting the campus speech police around the protection of Jewish students' subjective feelings of discomfort is not a positive development. This will produce the same sort of histrionics that existed when campus authorities were dedicated to policing speech that was perceived to be anti-black, anti-woman, anti-gay, anti-trans, etc. There will be an uptick in bias incident reports as students discover that they can weaponize the process against perceived enemies, as students absorb the idea that the administration is responsible for making them feel emotionally well at all times. I really thought the idea was to undermine the ideological foundations of the safe space mentality, not expand its identity-based reach. The Trump administration is erecting an edifice that would have been much to the liking of all those Play-Doh-loving, coloring-book-needing, puppy-hugging, safe-space liberals circa 2015. I'm joined by Amber Duke to discuss South Park's jokes about Trump, the latest Epstein Files news, Sydney Sweeney, Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D–Texas), and more. It has begun: My Nintendo Switch 2 arrived last night. I bought the system, one extra set of Joy-Cons, the Pro Controller, and three games: Donkey Kong Bananza, Mario Kart World, and Super Mario Party Jamboree. (The grand total was in the $800 range.) I spent most of the night transferring my data from the old Switch to the new one, and I've only had time to play about 20 minutes of Donkey Kong, so the full report will have to wait until next week. The post Safe Spaces Are Coming Back to Brown University—All Thanks to Trump appeared first on
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Activist Carronade pushes Viasat breakup, says valuation could jump 500%, FT reports
(Reuters) -Activist investor Carronade Capital Management is urging Viasat to split its broadband and defense units, the Financial Times reported on Thursday, citing people familiar with the matter. Carronade, which holds a 2.3% stake in the satellite communications firm, plans to issue an open letter to the shareholders calling for defense unit to be spun off — a move it says could unlock as much as $11 billion in value for both businesses, the report said. The investment firm estimates Viasat's total valuation could rise more than 500% if the defense unit is separated, according to the report. Carronade continues to build its stake in Viasat and also holds $30 million of the company's debt, FT said. Both Carronade and Viasat did not immediately respond to Reuters requests for comment. Sign in to access your portfolio
