Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (D), Kamala Harris' running mate, argued earlier this week that the Electoral College “needs to be abolished” in favor of a national popular vote, again in the United States. I realized that it violates the constitution.
On Tuesday, Walz spoke at a conference. Fundraising activities At California Governor Gavin Newsom's (Democratic) private residence in Sacramento. There, Waltz lamented the framework established by the Founding Fathers for electing America's president.
“I think we all know that the Electoral College needs to be abolished,” he told the audience. “But that's not the world we live in. So we need to be able to win in Beaver County, Pennsylvania. We need to be able to go to York, Pennsylvania and win. We need to be able to go to Western Wisconsin and win. We need to win in Reno, Nevada.”
Walz is right that the Electoral College forces presidential and vice presidential candidates to appeal to less-populated areas of the country to ensure victory. In fact, without the Electoral College, the state of Minnesota he represents would barely have an electoral system. 3.7 million registered voterswould have little impact on the outcome of a national election involving 120 million to 150 million votes.
Anyway, Waltz told supporters In California, he argued that he was a “national popular vote guy” and “we need a national popular vote.”
“Is Tampon Tim laying the groundwork to claim President Trump's victory was illegitimate?”
The Harris-Waltz campaign then scrambled to clean up Walz's recent supposedly unconstitutional blunders.
“Governor Walz believes that every vote counts in the Electoral College and is honored to be traveling the country and battleground states to drum up support for Candidate Harris Walz.” a spokesperson said in a statement. new york times.
“He was commenting to a large group of powerful supporters about how the campaign was structured to get 270 electoral votes. I was grateful for the support.”
Walz last week cited his many verbal gaffes and, in some cases, bold lies he has told since being nominated by Harris as the 2024 Democratic nominee, saying, “Me and everyone else…'' “We need to be more clear, and that's what I'm going to do.” Please say that. ”
In response to Walz's comments about the electoral system, the Trump campaign suggested the Minnesota governor was hostile to the U.S. Constitution in general.
A tweet from “Why does Tampon Tim hate the Constitution so much?” said trump war roomuses the humorous nickname given to Walz, who implemented a policy allowing Minnesota public schools to offer feminine hygiene products in boys' restrooms.
“He hates the First Amendment. He hates the Supreme Court. He hates the Electoral College. But he definitely loves Communist China.”
Tweet from Trump campaign spokesperson caroline leavitt He added: “Is Tampon Tim laying the groundwork to claim that President Trump's victory was illegitimate?”
Harris' team has reiterated that Walz's opinions on the Electoral College do not reflect the campaign's official position, but Harris herself has previously spoken, particularly to recent Democratic presidential nominee Al Gore in 2000. Trump and Hillary Clinton in 2000 have questioned the continued relevance of the Electoral College. In 2016, it was difficult to compete in that environment.
“There's no question that the popular vote is diminishing when it comes to determining who becomes president of the United States, and we need to address that,” Harris said. in 2019when she launched her first presidential campaign.
“So I'm open to discussion.”
As Trump's war room has suggested, Walz's latest pursuit of the Electoral College is not his first public criticism or misinterpretation of the U.S. Constitution. In apparent defiance of the First Amendment, he once said in a speech: MSNBC interview “There is no guarantee of free speech when it comes to misinformation and hate speech.”
Drawing on his authority as a former member of the Minnesota National Guard, Walz also advocates for restricting gun rights, which are protected by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and only allows U.S. military personnel to carry weapons such as those “carried in war.” They suggested that it should be available for use and not for everyday use. civilian.
By the way, Waltz has never been to a “war” in a combat zone.
Do you like Blaze News? Avoid censorship and sign up for our newsletter to get articles like this delivered straight to your inbox. Please register here!
