Tim Walz at Fundraiser: The ‘Electoral College Needs to Go’
“We need, we need national popular vote, but that’s not the world we live in.”
But I thought former President Donald Trump is the one true threat to our republic!!
Democrat VP candidate Tim Walz is up on that list. From CNN:
Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz said the Electoral College “needs to go,” while acknowledging “that’s not the world we live in,” during a campaign fundraiser in California on Tuesday, according to a pool report.
“I think all of us know the Electoral College needs to go. We need, we need national popular vote, but that’s not the world we live in. So we need to win Beaver County, Pennsylvania. We need to be able to go into York, Pennsylvania, win. We need to be in western Wisconsin and win. We need to be in Reno, Nevada, and win,” the Democratic vice presidential nominee told supporters gathered at Gov. Gavin Newsom’s private residence in Sacramento, according to the pool report.
VP Kamala Harris’s campaign immediately tried to explain Walz’s thoughts:
Walz’s call for eliminating the Electoral College is not an official campaign position, a Harris campaign official told CNN.
“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. He was commenting to a crowd of strong supporters about how the campaign is built to win 270 electoral votes. And, he was thanking them for their support that is helping fund those efforts,” a campaign spokesperson said in a statement.
These people want to ban guns. They want to destroy the First Amendment. They want to pack the court.
They want to end the Electoral College.
Who poses the greater risk to our republic? Gee, I’ll have to get back to you on that.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Is there anything he says that isn’t uninformed and/or ignorant?
Stop thinking this way. He’s not ignorant at all about how our country functions, otherwise he wouldn’t be saying this (among other things.)
These people are F-ing tyrants and want to get rid of all checks against power.
I’m kind of surprised he advocates for something that will make the state he is governor of irrelevant
It’s a good thing we have a Constitutional Republic and not a Democracy or we would all be ruled by the cranks destroying California and New York
He obviously understands the purpose of the Electoral College. Immediately after denigrating it, he explains why it exists – it forces national candidates to campaign in and win in places they otherwise might ignore.
Then amend the Constitution, you fucknugget. Do the difficult work of convincing most of the states to give up their power so that the Democrats can have eternal power. Convince Congress to make the presidency just another popularity contest where only the cities matter. I mean, there is a procedure in place for that if you’re really motivated. Think about it, Timmy, you won’t have to pay any more attention to those rural peasants in Beaver County, Pennsylvania.
Every time I think I can’t possibly have more contempt for Democrats they manage to wring another few drops out of me.
Who needs checks and balances when a blank check is what they want? The Electoral College, two senators per state, The Bill of Rights…. all those hindrances to utopia.
They already neutered the 2 Senators protection by changing their selection to a popular vote. This absolutely destroyed any chance of selecting well respected, local men of gravitas who put their State’s interest first.
All of the teen amendments need review and possible repeal.
A single word to describe 2 senators per state….. equity. How could they NOT want that?????
They want to add new states to acquire new senators. Compare that to the push to make eastern Oregon part of Idaho, which would have little to no effect in the House, and zero effect in the Senate. They’re not interested in fair representation, just in increasing their power.
“Walz’s call for eliminating the Electoral College is not an official campaign position, a Harris campaign official told CNN.” Yet.
I will agree with him providing voting is limited to white males over 21 who pay more in taxes than they collect in benefits.
And paychecks or grants from government funded institutions count as ‘benefits’ for the purposes of that determination.
Talk to me.
Waltz is such a putz! He can’t be allowed anywhere near the Oval Office. We already have a putz in there.
We can only handle one retarded putz at a time.
OK, sure, eliminate the Electoral College. By doing so you will have broken the fundamental compact of the union and any state that wishes to do so will leave at that time. Try to stop them and you’ll learn the hard way what the 2nd Amendment is truly about.
I agree. However, that would probably begin the “Second War of Northern Agression”.
There will not be a civil war. The events that led the secession to go kinetic were unique to the time, and even then fighting would not have occurred except for the Confederacy’s attack on Fr. Sumter. Prior to that, there was no will for war in the North.
When States again start removing themselves from the Union, there will be no overarching casus belli. Indeed, the removal of conservative States from the Union will give the Left proportionally more power in what remains of the United States, and they will say “good riddance” to those States that secede.
This is example number 4,392 (just this year) for providing criminal charges against politicos who aggressively and egregiously advocate anti-constitutional actions in defiance to their oath of office.
We either hold these tyrants accountable, or it’s all still *clownworld*
In at least one Trump impeachment, the Dems established that violation of an oath of office is an impeachable offense. I agree. I have long believed that an oath of office is useless if it’s not enforceable. The argument that a violation can be remedied at the polls in the next election is weak sauce – obviously a bad performer can be removed from office in the next election, this does not require the necessity of an oath to hold the office. If there’s bad behavior to be found in an elected official or judge, it’s a violation of an oath of office.
Why is it that the party that supposedly champions minority rights is the same group that is trying the hardest to eliminate the measures in The Constitution that were specifically enacted to protect the representation rights of the minority.
Different minority.
Good luck getting three-quarters of the states to ratify that, Timmy.
No need for a constitutional amendment when the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact is marching toward approval:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact
Watch the Dim progs crap their pants when the ‘flyover states’ begin to secede. You cannot fundamentally alter the structure of the compact without consequences. But then again, Dim progs are always too blazingly stupid to understand the concept of unintended consequences.
Consider an oblique swath of states from Idaho to Florida encircling the Muslim Midwest, and separating the coasts (East and West Wokestan) with no-fly and no transiting privileges. Add Alberta and Yukon Territory.
Why these aggressions? Just leave. The benefits of separation will accrue to both those conservative States that secede and those liberal States that remain in the Union. Both sides will be glad to be rid of the other. Lincoln fomented the Civil War by his refusal to negotiate with the Confederacy over insular possessions of the United States within the newly-formed CSA. The direct result of this passive-aggressive posture was the CSA’s attack on Ft. Sumter, an act of war. Why repeat history?
Ther NPV is interesting because of what they want.
They don’t want to abolish the electoral college
They want the electors assigned in a different way.
They want them assigned based on whoever wins the popular vote count.
So let’s say California goes full on for Kamala/Walz, k?
But Trump manages to eke out a PV win.
Under the compact, all California’s electors would go to Trump.
Even if the state went to Kamala/Walz.
They want the electoral college–they just want to use it as a weapon.
what makes you think
THAT RULE WONT BE “OVERLOOKED”
It only took one conversation with a public high school teenager to see the sorry state of civics education in this country. She was barely able to communicate without her smart phone, but I digress. Her argument consisted of, “Like, I don’t see why ‘they’ just don’t pass a law banning the Electoral College and make the popular vote thing real!” When I told her about the constitutional requirement of amending the provisions of election, she looked at me and said she didn’t know anything about “all that”. Her teacher must be a moron.
In a couple of years, she’ll negate your vote. Think about that.
And her parents.
Unless my information is incorrect, this Walz fellow was a HS teacher; a proud graduate of some “teachers college”. This should explain this young lady’s lack of useful knowledge.
When she told you the NPVIC would take care of the EC, what did you say to her?
After looking NPVIC up on your smartphone, of course:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact
That will ‘take care’ of sparking a wave of secessions and perhaps a second civil war. Do the Dim progs think they can just enforce their delusional, Marxist-utopian will upon a well armed populace? If they do, they’re even dumber than I think they are, and that is really fu*king dumb.
How about a counter offer? We can have a National Popular vote on a County by County basis to decide this question. The Counties that reject the EC and thus the basic Constitutional framework go their own way while those that vote to keep the EC and thus the Constitution remain as part of the USA.
I suspect the leftists would reject that offer b/c it frustrates their ultimate goal of forcing everyone else to obey their wokiesta demands just like the neighborhood HOA Karen. They won’t be content at running their own lives, nope they want to run ours as well.
exactly
thats their whole purpose
they are miserable people and they only feel good/better when they force others to be ( more) miserable then they
Timmy, the reason the Founders put the Electoral College in the constitution is to protect us from people like you.
There’s one ultimate reason for their desire to eliminate the electoral college: Making the USA into one giant country where the states are mere satrapies or administrative divisions of said country.
Why is this so important to them? Aside from centralizing power, it also preps the people for the USA to become merely a satrapy of the world government.
It aligns with the open border in that. Because globalism is one of the pillars of Progressivism. Only if you control everyone can you make your Brave New World come to be.
I’ve often thought that we are moving toward a combination of Brave New World and 1984.
.
I’ve never understood the appeal t so many conservatives of the notion that “states are bulwarks against tyranny.”
You think California isn’t just as malevolent to ward citizen rights as the feds are? How about MN and “Let the Somalis burn down your stores.”? Or New York and “We’re going to ban your gas stoves or water heaters.”? etc.
Next you’ll give a convincing explanation about why the Electoral College is a surefire way to prevent majority tyranny than popular vote counting would be—and then explain why not a single state elects its statewide officials by an EC style vote, but uses popular vote counting.
a consolidated federal tyranny
you are correct as each state can and does form its own ways
BUTTTT cannot violate the federal constitution w/o redress
so thats the basis of the thought that you have “never understood”
“I’ve never understood the appeal t so many conservatives of the notion that “states are bulwarks against tyranny.”
You think California isn’t just as malevolent to ward citizen rights as the feds are?”
But that’s exactly the point. California can be as malevolent to their citizens as the voters there will tolerate, but can’t dictate those behaviors to Texas, Tennessee or Mississippi.
And if you live in California and don’t like the way the place is being run, you can move to one of those other places.
The individual States are Sovereign. They posses ‘police power’ and thus ‘compelling interests’ that the Federal govt lacks.
Federalism also functions as a release valve. If a number of folks want X policy they can vote for that and X will become the policy in State A… others who couldn’t muster the votes in another State(s) can then move to State A to enjoy that policy just as folks who in State A who don’t support that policy can move somewhere it doesn’t exist.
oh look! a ‘new’ troll.
“…then explain why not a single state elects its statewide officials by an EC style vote, but uses popular vote counting.”
Wow. You need several books’ worth of learning before you’d even be able to comprehend a response to that challenge.
But the short answer is that the “United States” is a confederacy of nominally-sovereign states. Each union-member State is an equal of every other union-member State as a geopolitical entity. Because purely democratic (i.e., popular) voting would allow more populous States to control the less populous States, a system of “checks and balances” had to be built into the rules for the election of candidates to national offices. Therefore the House is popularly elected, Senators were appointed by the States, and the election of the Union’s chief executive (aka the president) is a hybrid system (the Electoral College) that accounts for both population and each State’s status as a nominally-sovereign geopolitical entity.
You could start with “Math Against Tyranny”:
https://spot.colorado.edu/~mcguire/hively.html
Abolish electoral college. Abolish the filibuster. Stack the court. Single party rule under dem super majority forever.
Conservatives will become controlled opposition, allowed to exist to maintain the appearance of democracy, but never allowed to win.
“Will become”?
It’s what the GOP elites prefer. You can trash your Democrat “opponents,” and then go to cocktail parties with them. Life’s easier when you never have to actually do anything.
Walz and Harris are cretins. But they are dangerous cretins.
the lefty has never ever loved the capitalist checks and balances system
they are a direct threat to freedom
Abolish the electoral college and everybody but the coasts secedes.
the left is obsessed with “popularity”
b/c of their inner fears of life itself they try and make up the life should be as long as it conforms to their being in charge
and that is why the agenda is now and has alwaysssss been ( forget the lies the schools have taught) government over the people
the left by their very nature has
daddy issues
so they install the welfare state to be the step dad
we risk the loss of this whole idea/country with our docile/tacit approval of their ways
trump has shown and proven that being called a racist/misogynist doesnt make it so
capitulation to the left is not an option
“We need, we need national popular vote, but that’s not the world we live in. So we need to win Beaver County, Pennsylvania. We need to be able to go into York, Pennsylvania, win. We need to be in western Wisconsin and win. We need to be in Reno, Nevada, and win,”
Wow…that’s one of the most eloquent defenses of the Electoral College I’ve ever seen.
He’s defined exactly why it exists…because without it, they wouldn’t have to “be in” all those places and win, they’d only have to “be in” and win a few large population centers and to hell with what all those rubes in flyover country think is important.
There is a reason that Tampon Tim is not known for his intellect.
The Lefts biggest weapon in all of this???
THEY WILL ATTACH THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE TO SLAVERY
so while the real intent was to not allow a “too strong” federal government ( my words)
THATS NOT how lefty will frame this and it will become another slavery vs america issue
lefty will settle for nothing less than uncivil war
this electoral college rampage is probably the biggest issue we are going to face and that includes reparations
the dems altered the filibuster ( this critical “thinking” from cnn no less)
Reid, in short, opened Pandora’s box when it came to the filibuster. In an interview with CNN’s Dana Bash two years ago, Reid expressed no remorse for the impact of his 2013 decision.
“The rule had to be changed,” he told Bash. “We had many Cabinet officers and sub-Cabinet officers simply we couldn’t get a vote on. And the judges, more than 100 vacancies there, waiting to be filled, that we’d already had the names. So I have no doubt that I did the right thing.”
Right or wrong is a worthy debate when it comes to Reid’s move. But what can’t be debated is that his move ushered in an era in which the filibuster appears to be teetering on the edge of irrelevance.
even many on the left WHILE LIKING the results it gave the dems KNEW the gop would have their way with it too
and as many states and dc “Do away” with the electoral college with their own remedies :
“award all their electoral votes to whichever presidential ticket wins the overall popular vote in the 50 states and the District of Columbia. The compact is designed to ensure that the candidate who receives the most votes nationwide is elected president, and it would come into effect only when it would guarantee that outcome.[2][3][4]”
to
rank choice voting ( no more one person one vote…ALREADY IN PLAY!)
this is a huge issue
it is a /the singular biggest attack on voter disenfranchisement
that lefty wont admit to
Leave a Comment