Boxer has proposed legislation to eliminate the Electoral College. Here are her words:
"The Electoral College is an outdated, undemocratic system that does not reflect our modern society, and it needs to change immediately. Every American should be guaranteed that their vote counts."
The implication, however thinly veiled, is that Hillary won the election but the Electoral College stole it from her. Hmm. Sour grapes from someone who should know better? Wasn't it just a month ago when Democrats harrumphed at Trump's reply when asked if he would accept the election results on Nov 8? Remember all the hullabaloo when he said let's wait and see? The NY Times called it "a remarkable statement that seemed to cast doubt on American democracy." Apparently Barbara Boxer is not a big fan of The Gray Lady. Or of American democracy. Trump always seems one step ahead of these buffoons.
Problem is, Boxer's legislation would require amending the Constitution, which in turn requires three-fourths of the states to agree. That's the elephant in the room. Listen to the City Journal in regard to the Nov 8 election:
"When the dust clears, Republicans will hold at least 33 governors’ mansions, up from 22 when Obama took office. That’s the most GOP governorships in 95 years. Republicans will also boast control of as many as 33 state legislatures, up from just 14 in 2008. In more than half of all states, Republicans now own a “trifecta,” that is, control of the governorship and both legislatures. Democrats have a mere six trifectas."
Boxer's proposed legislation has about as much chance as a snowball in hell. She knows this, of course. She's calling for what is known as a "show" vote. Show vote legislation is proffered merely to satisfy one's base. It has no chance of passing. But it makes Barbara look righteous to her most ardent supporters, even if the legislation is not something she actually believes in, which she doesn't. But hey, what's truth got to do with it?
Thanks for playing, Barbara. Now take a seat and be quiet.
Speaking of buffoons, Nancy Pelosi comes to mind. I read that Democrats in Congress have delayed the process of selecting their next House Minority Leader. Pelosi wants to continue in that role. But her colleagues aren't sure they want her. I don't blame them for delaying the process. There must be two dozen explanations circulating among Democrats about why they lost the Presidential election and failed to earn a majority in the Senate. The intra-party dissonance is enough to make one's head spin. Should they gee or haw, go right or left? Wall Street financiers want one thing of them, the activists want another. Wet fingers are in the air. Which way is the wind blowing? They still don't know.
Meanwhile, the Ship of State sails past them, its masts unfurled and open to the wind.