Kamala Harris’s running mate urges popular vote system but campaign says issue is not part of Democrats’ agenda

Kamala Harris’s running mate urges popular vote system but campaign says issue is not part of Democrats’ agenda

Tim Walz, the Democratic vice-presidential nominee, has called for the electoral college system of electing US presidents to be abolished and replaced with a popular vote principle, as operates in most democracies.

His comments – to an audience of party fundraisers – chime with the sentiments of a majority of American voters but risk destabilising the campaign of Kamala Harris, the Democratic presidential candidate, who has not adopted a position on the matter, despite having previously voiced similar views.

“I think all of us know, the electoral college needs to go,” Walz told donors at a gathering at the home of the California governor, Gavin Newsom. “We need a national popular vote. 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.”

🗳️ Register to vote: https://vote.gov/

  • Maeve@midwest.social
    3·
    10 hours ago

    So why don’t you want one wage earned to be able to support their entire family or corporations to pay their fair share so we all call have quality health and education? The EC is rubbish, btw.

    • lilsip@lemmy.world
      15·
      9 hours ago

      It’s pretty simple really. Raising the minimum wage will cause inflation to everything else to balance out and we will be right back where we started. People can’t afford anything. But now with even higher and overly inflated prices.

      That’s just how economics works. None of that trickle down bs or any other partisan view.

      Simple cause and effect, and scarcity.

      • Maeve@midwest.social
        1·
        4 minutes ago

        Corporate greed is why no one can afford anything. There’s no scarcity either. It’s a matter of logistics, but that’s going to quickly change if the very well off people and corporations don’t curb their insatiable appetites, and that can be done with the 50s era 93% tax rates on very high individual earners and adding that same rate to megacorporations. No more tax cuts for donating to self-serving, self -directed “philanthropic” causes anymore, either. That tax money can be used to clean up the environment, well - feed, educate, home and health for EVERY individual at the same providers. No campaign donations of any form, fashion or sort. Campaigns are debates and past voting history, only, and every broadcast radio station and television station will be required to air them multiple times. Every print newspaper too, and taxes can fund that. No corporate or wealthy lobbiests.

        Then let’s see how charitable the wealthy really are.

      • foggy@lemmy.world
        3·
        8 hours ago

        Not if you’re also taking care of monopolies and lowering the barrier to entry in a way that creates meaningful competition.

        • lilsip@lemmy.world
          22·
          7 hours ago

          Yeah man I’m all for killing monopolies. Hasn’t happened, won’t happen. Money drives the world, those monopolies are spending a considerable amount of their time and money lobbying the gov to make it so they can make MORE money, not less.

          Now. If we also get rid of lobbying and make it a federal offense or treason to manipulate the legislative branch for monetary incentives, we got something.