Walz Holds Event With Newsom
Democratic vice-presidential nominee Tim Walz recently reignited a long-standing debate within the party by declaring that the Electoral College “needs to go” during a fundraiser event. His remarks, which were reported by Politico, add fuel to the ongoing discussion among Democrats about whether the Electoral College remains a viable way to elect the president in modern America.
Walz’s statement comes at a time when dissatisfaction with the Electoral College is not just theoretical but grounded in recent electoral history. Many Democrats are still frustrated by the 2016 presidential election, where Hillary Clinton won the national popular vote but lost the presidency to Donald Trump due to the distribution of electoral votes. This frustration isn’t isolated; it’s echoed in calls for a system that more directly reflects the will of the majority.
Addressing the crowd, Walz said, “I think all of us know the Electoral College needs to go. We need a national popular vote that is something. But that’s not the world we live in.” This acknowledgment of political reality points to the systemic barriers in place that make abolishing the Electoral College a challenging proposition, even for those who see its flaws.
Walz’s stance on the issue isn’t entirely new or surprising. His running mate, Vice President Kamala Harris, has also shown openness to the idea of eliminating the Electoral College. During a 2019 appearance on “Jimmy Kimmel Live,” Harris expressed that she was “open to the discussion” of doing away with the Electoral College, signaling a willingness to entertain reforms that could lead to a national popular vote system.
However, the Harris-Walz campaign has not officially adopted abolishing the Electoral College as a core platform issue. A campaign spokesperson clarified to Politico that Walz’s remarks were more about rallying the support of the party faithful than announcing a concrete policy shift. “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,” the spokesperson explained, emphasizing that their focus remains on securing the 270 electoral votes needed to win.
This careful positioning by the campaign highlights a common dilemma for Democrats: while many in the party favor a popular vote system, achieving it would require significant constitutional changes that are not easily accomplished. The Electoral College, originally designed as a compromise to balance the influence of smaller states against larger ones, still has staunch defenders who argue it protects against majoritarian dominance or “mob rule.”
The broader debate about the Electoral College touches on fundamental questions of fairness and representation in the American political system. Supporters of the Electoral College argue that it forces presidential candidates to campaign in a diverse array of states rather than focusing solely on densely populated urban centers. Critics, however, argue that the system disproportionately amplifies the influence of swing states, while sidelining the votes of millions in states that are considered solidly red or blue.
Historically, aside from Trump, only two other presidents since 1900 have ascended to the office after losing the popular vote but winning the Electoral College: George W. Bush in 2000 and Rutherford B. Hayes in the contested 1876 election. This relatively rare occurrence has become a flashpoint for arguments that the system does not always reflect the will of the people.
As the Harris-Walz ticket continues to build its campaign narrative, their stance on the Electoral College may remain more nuanced, focusing on winning under the current rules rather than promising a fundamental overhaul. However, Walz’s remarks suggest that the conversation about reforming or abolishing the Electoral College remains alive and well within the Democratic Party, even if it hasn’t yet found a definitive place in the campaign’s official platform.