Walz says abolish the Electoral College


By Zach Jewell Oct 9, 2024 DailyWire.com

Democratic Vice Presidential candidate Tim Walz said on Tuesday that the “Electoral College needs to go,” forcing the Kamala Harris campaign to release a statement saying it does not support abolishing the Constitutional mechanism for presidential elections.

At two campaign fundraisers on the West Coast, Walz called for abolishing the Electoral College, arguing that it forces candidates to focus too much attention on a handful of battleground states, The New York Times reported.


“I think all of us know, the Electoral College needs to go. We need a national popular vote,” Walz told donors at California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s home in Sacramento. “So we need to win Beaver County, Pennsylvania. We need to be able to go into York, Pennsylvania, and win. We need to be in western Wisconsin and win. We need to be in Reno, Nevada, and win.”

At an event earlier on Tuesday, Walz told supporters that he is “a national popular vote guy, but that’s not the world we live in.”

Following the Minnesota governor’s call for the Electoral College to be abolished, the Harris campaign said in a statement, “Governor Walz believes that every vote matters in the Electoral College and he is honored to be traveling the country and battleground states working to earn support for the Harris-Walz ticket.”

Comment:
The Democrats claim that they are saving our "democracy".
But at the same time, they are attacking the foundations of our country.
The Electoral College strengthens our pluralistic election system.

The electoral college is fit for the 18th century. The US needs to move into the 20th century.

A two party system is NOT democracy, when whatever PA does gets to decide the election is not democratic at all.

He's right. The EC is rubbish and not fit for purpose.

HOWEVER the Republican benefit from it, so they'll argue it's great.
 
1728732242341.png
 
I am slow to change, and do not favor a strictly popular vote, viewing having to win in the electoral college, part of the checks and balances, the found fathers wrote into the system. It has worked well, up to now, and I do not favor changing it, simply because it would favor the Harris/Walz, preferring to figure the system still works, and willing to live with the results.

The Founding Fathers shit in chamber pots and thought slavery was a nifty idea.

No, it has not "Worked Well" up to now. The fact that we put Dubya and Trump in office, despite both of them being total fucking disasters, shows that it doesn't "Work well". The fact that Trump could potentially get in again after the majority rejects him, again, shows the system doesn't work.

It disenfranchised most of the country. Shit, the whole election will probably end up coming down to PA. That's messed up.
 
The Founding Fathers shit in chamber pots and thought slavery was a nifty idea.

No, it has not "Worked Well" up to now. The fact that we put Dubya and Trump in office, despite both of them being total fucking disasters, shows that it doesn't "Work well". The fact that Trump could potentially get in again after the majority rejects him, again, shows the system doesn't work.

It disenfranchised most of the country. Shit, the whole election will probably end up coming down to PA. That's messed up.
So, what else are you wanting to get out of The Constitution, simply because modern toilet, automatic weapons, and the internet were not invented? I am too conservative to embrace your changes.
 
So, what else are you wanting to get out of The Constitution, simply because modern toilet, automatic weapons, and the internet were not invented? I am too conservative to embrace your changes.

What I would get rid of?

The Electoral College.
The Senate (A unicameral legislature would be much better!)
The Second Amendment
 
The electoral college is fit for the 18th century. The US needs to move into the 20th century.

A two party system is NOT democracy, when whatever PA does gets to decide the election is not democratic at all.

He's right. The EC is rubbish and not fit for purpose.

HOWEVER the Republican benefit from it, so they'll argue it's great.
Dems already plotting to subvert the constitution and overturn the election ... guess its starting to sink in that Trump may have a huge electoral college win ..
 
The Founding Fathers shit in chamber pots and thought slavery was a nifty idea.

No, it has not "Worked Well" up to now. The fact that we put Dubya and Trump in office, despite both of them being total fucking disasters, shows that it doesn't "Work well". The fact that Trump could potentially get in again after the majority rejects him, again, shows the system doesn't work.

It disenfranchised most of the country. Shit, the whole election will probably end up coming down to PA. That's messed up.
if the trend doesn't change it wont come down to PA .. Trump will easily win the electoral college and be declared the winner election night ! just like in 2016 .. but with a larger margin of victory ..
 
If that's what you need to believe. Do you have facts to back that up?


In VA< 54% of early ballots have been cast By Democrats, but only 38% by Republicans

PA that number is 72-20.
wow ! nearly 40 % of republicans have already voted in VA ! WOW ! republicans normally like to vote on election day ! its considered a patriotic tradition ! that's not good news for Dems !
 
We've already eliminated the electoral college from our founder's time, by states changing how their electors are now Winner Take All Electors.......this instead of individual electors casting their vote on how their citizens voted.... As example, if 20% voted for a Ralph Nator in their state then Nator would get 20% of the state's electors...

My state, one of two states that does not do the winner takes all on electors,

the electors.... one given for each congressional voting district according to the constitution, then votes how their district voted for president when they cast their vote at the electoral college.

We have only two congressional districts....two congressmen, so we get two electors....

Then we have two US Senators, and we get two more electors for our two senators.

So in total we have 4 electors.

in 2016, Trump won district 2, Hillary won district 1.

Trump got 1 elector, Hillary got 1 elector

Maine gives the two extra electors they get for their two US Senators to the candidate that won the total state popular vote.

Hillary also won the total popular vote in the state.... So she got those two electors also....

In the end, Trump was able to get an elector vote from Maine, and Hillary got only 3 electors instead of the 4 if Maine had winner take all....
 
So, what else are you wanting to get out of The Constitution, simply because modern toilet, automatic weapons, and the internet were not invented? I am too conservative to embrace your changes.

Things have changed. The internet is a game changer for life in general. The Constitution was literally designed to be changed because the Founding Fathers knew they couldn't predict the future.

But they also couldn't predict that modern Americans would be so manipulated and controlled.
 
We've already eliminated the electoral college from our founder's time, by states changing how their electors are now Winner Take All Electors.......this instead of individual electors casting their vote on how their citizens voted.... As example, if 20% voted for a Ralph Nator in their state then Nator would get 20% of the state's electors...

My state, one of two states that does not do the winner takes all on electors,

the electors.... one given for each congressional voting district according to the constitution, then votes how their district voted for president when they cast their vote at the electoral college.

We have only two congressional districts....two congressmen, so we get two electors....

Then we have two US Senators, and we get two more electors for our two senators.

So in total we have 4 electors.

in 2016, Trump won district 2, Hillary won district 1.

Trump got 1 elector, Hillary got 1 elector

Maine gives the two extra electors they get for their two US Senators to the candidate that won the total state popular vote.

Hillary also won the total popular vote in the state.... So she got those two electors also....

In the end, Trump was able to get an elector vote from Maine, and Hillary got only 3 electors instead of the 4 if Maine had winner take all....

Which isn't really what the people want... it's better... but still bad.
 
Dems already plotting to subvert the constitution and overturn the election ... guess its starting to sink in that Trump may have a huge electoral college win ..
Fairly unlikely.

If anything, it would be an even thinner margin than he had in 2016. The seven Swing States (Six of which Biden won) are all within 1 point, which is not good, but hardly favors Trump.

if the trend doesn't change it wont come down to PA .. Trump will easily win the electoral college and be declared the winner election night ! just like in 2016 .. but with a larger margin of victory ..

Actually, the Trends favor Harris, not Trump.

wow ! nearly 40 % of republicans have already voted in VA ! WOW ! republicans normally like to vote on election day ! its considered a patriotic tradition ! that's not good news for Dems !

You clearly don't get what that means... but that's okay.... you are stupid.
 
Fairly unlikely.

If anything, it would be an even thinner margin than he had in 2016. The seven Swing States (Six of which Biden won) are all within 1 point, which is not good, but hardly favors Trump.



Actually, the Trends favor Harris, not Trump.



You clearly don't get what that means... but that's okay.... you are stupid.
lol ! Clinton was way up in the national polls and most of the swing states in 2016 !
 
Last edited:

By Zach Jewell Oct 9, 2024 DailyWire.com

Democratic Vice Presidential candidate Tim Walz said on Tuesday that the “Electoral College needs to go,” forcing the Kamala Harris campaign to release a statement saying it does not support abolishing the Constitutional mechanism for presidential elections.

At two campaign fundraisers on the West Coast, Walz called for abolishing the Electoral College, arguing that it forces candidates to focus too much attention on a handful of battleground states, The New York Times reported.


“I think all of us know, the Electoral College needs to go. We need a national popular vote,” Walz told donors at California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s home in Sacramento. “So we need to win Beaver County, Pennsylvania. We need to be able to go into York, Pennsylvania, and win. We need to be in western Wisconsin and win. We need to be in Reno, Nevada, and win.”

At an event earlier on Tuesday, Walz told supporters that he is “a national popular vote guy, but that’s not the world we live in.”

Following the Minnesota governor’s call for the Electoral College to be abolished, the Harris campaign said in a statement, “Governor Walz believes that every vote matters in the Electoral College and he is honored to be traveling the country and battleground states working to earn support for the Harris-Walz ticket.”

Comment:
The Democrats claim that they are saving our "democracy".
But at the same time, they are attacking the foundations of our country.
The Electoral College strengthens our pluralistic election system.
I understand the democrats wanting to get rid of this impediment to their winning the Oval office but it’s a terrible idea.

First because there is the macro argument. No presidential candidate will ever travel to Butler PA again for example. Not because of the assassination attempt but because ther would be no need to. The campaign would be just in the major cities going forward.

Secondly there is the “micro” I guess. Democrats are not running away with the popular vote. They win it every contest but if the Republicans stopped campaigning in Butler..what do you think they’ll do? Start campaigning in Philly, Pittsburgh, etc..

What should happen is that we should strengthen the electoral college to where not only does the President Elect have to win the EC--the 270+--but also get more popular votes than anyone else running. If not, the House decides. Pass it now to have it implemented in 2048 so we can’t know who the change would favor. We also need to get rid of the even number of available electors. Perhaps give the popular vote winner one additional electoral vote if there is a tie??? Something like that .
 
lol ! Clinton was way up in the national polls and most of the swing states in 2020 !

Clinton didn't run in 2020.

No, everyone said the swing states were too close to call.

The problem with wistfully remembering the 2016 disaster is that Hillary herself was personally unpopular. Blacks didn't like her for challenging Obama. Feminists didn't like her for enabling Bill's bad behavior. The Hippy Peacenik wing of the party didn't like her for all the wars she supported. So everyone figured, "The polls say she's going to win, I can vote third party or stay home."

Everyone today realizes what a bad idea that was.
 
Clinton didn't run in 2020.

No, everyone said the swing states were too close to call.

The problem with wistfully remembering the 2016 disaster is that Hillary herself was personally unpopular. Blacks didn't like her for challenging Obama. Feminists didn't like her for enabling Bill's bad behavior. The Hippy Peacenik wing of the party didn't like her for all the wars she supported. So everyone figured, "The polls say she's going to win, I can vote third party or stay home."

Everyone today realizes what a bad idea that was.
and yet she was up 6 points nationally in oct 2016 .. and Briben was up 10.8 nationally in oct 2020 .. Clinton lost the electoral college and Briben eked out an electoral college win by about 40 thousand votes .. is it starting to sink in for you yet ??
 
and yet she was up 6 points nationally in oct 2016 .. and Briben was up 10.8 nationally in oct 2020 .. Clinton lost the electoral college and Briben eked out an electoral college win by about 40 thousand votes .. is it starting to sink in for you yet ??

Which- again- was a function of "Well, she has this in the bag, I don't need to vote".

Not really the case this time.

And at the rate Trump is melting down (His advisors had to pull him out of a podcast yesterday because he was getting weird) this just won't be an issue.
 

Forum List

Back
Top